My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1992 11 17
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1992 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1992 11 17
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:35 PM
Creation date
8/3/2005 8:56:08 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
11/17/1992
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1992 11 17
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
30
PDF
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
might go into something like that. <br /> <br />Maj-Lis Kemper, City Clerk, stated that she had two phone calls <br />today asking when the City would get rid of those cars on the <br />corner of Kennedy and South Boulder Road. <br /> <br />Davidson stated that they aren't on City property, so there is <br />nothing they can do. <br /> <br />Sisk moved that Council take no action and that this proposal not <br />be referred to the Planning Commission. Seconded by Hornbostel. <br />Roll call was taken. Motion passed by a 6 - 0 vote with Lathrop <br />being absent. <br /> <br />ORDINANCE NO.1082, SERIES 1992 -AMENDING WATER FEES AND DEDICATION <br />REQUIREMENTS TO ASSIST IN MEETING CAPITAL NEEDS OF THE CITY OF <br />LOUISVILLE - 2ND READING - PUBLIC HEARING (PUBL. LSVL. TIMES <br />11/07/92) <br /> <br />Griffiths read by title only Ordinance No. 1082, Series 1992, "An <br />ordinance amending certain fees and dedication requirements to <br />assist in meeting various growth related needs, including water <br />and. sewer, parks, trails and open space needs, of the City of <br />Louisville, Colorado." <br /> <br />Davidson opened the Public Hearing and asked if there was anyone in <br />the: audience who wished to speak in favor or against Ordinance No. <br />1082. <br /> <br />Chuck Bellock, 525 Highland Avenue, Boulder, CO, representing the <br />Bou.lder/Louisville Homebuilder's Association, stated, in <br />frustration, that there hasn't been any formal accounting. He has <br />been in several rate study discussions representing both the <br />private and public sector, so he's seen how rate studies work. <br />When he deals with a rate study, it's a very different format than <br />what he has seen to date in the City of Louisville. He felt it put <br />Tom Phare in a very difficult position, being asked to defend <br />something that the Council wishes to do, but it's not a complete <br />and. full study. Bellock stated that the kind of studies he is <br />speaking about is a horse of a different color. The fees being <br />talked about are not even real good guesses. He stated that it's <br />a science. It's not about approximations. He told Council that <br />they had an obligation to bring more than good guesses to the <br />table. Council had an obligation to do the kind of rate study that <br />would prove, once and for all, the value of these kinds of fees and <br />whether these are justified and supportable under analysis. He <br />asked Council to tell him the methodology, justification, to give <br />him something he could hang his hat on that really explains why <br />they've done this. Bellock has done present value studies and <br />right now the present value of the assessment for a 20 year <br />resident in Louisville is $1,865.00, which is a hugh number to be <br />dismissed as saying, "Well, it's included." He has never seen a <br /> <br />13 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).