City Council Minutes 2003 07 15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Louisville City Council Meeting July 15, 2003 Page 6 of 11 Brown asked about County designation markings on the map for Avista Hospital. Simmons voiced his belief the markings were the remnants of the Scriffany property. Keany voiced his understanding of the purpose of the Super IGA, but questioned how Louisville would benefit. Hullingshorst stated the Super IGA would be of value to Louisville by codifying the ten development maps for the next twenty years. She stated the Super IGA is symbolic, and all the communities would agree to abide by it. Keany noted the western portion of Boulder County is unincorporated land. He asked if Louisville would have veto power over any development in the County. Hullingshorst stated they would not have veto power over any other municipal influence area, however, if a municipality annexed property on unincorporated Boulder County land, other communities could respond to the proposed annexation and development. Keany stated the IGAs that Louisville is party to now, and the land annexed to Louisville defines Louisville's boundaries. He stressed the City's IGA are legal and stand on their own. He voiced his disagreement with the Super IGA, noting Louisville should not be a party to decision making in other communities within the County. Sisk voiced his appreciation of Council member Keany's point of voice. He noted the IGA sets forth a document that establishes property rights of the municipalities. Sisk voiced his support of the Super IGA and noted the provision that the participating municipalities may choose to opt out of the agreement in ten years. Hullinghorst referenced the map and explained the white areas shown represent unincorporated land in Boulder County and are not defined as municipal influence. Davidson voiced his support of the IGA and stated it is an innovative method that allows growth in Boulder County, but prevent it from becoming over built. He congratulated the Boulder County Commissioners for taking the lead. Levihn asked City Attorney Light if the City is protected by the agreement. Light responded yes, and noted the agreement is intended to provide that the County will step forward and defend if a party sues on the basis of the designation made upon their land. Davidson called for public comment and hearing none, closed the public hearing. MOTION: Sisk moved that Council approve Resolution No. 20, Series 2003, and authorize the Mayor to sign and any amendment to the IGA Agreement, seconded by Levihn. Roll call vote was taken. The motion passed by a vote of 6-1. Keany voted no. AUTHORIZATION TO EXECUTE A REVISED PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION (PUC) APPLICATION FOR THE HIGHWAY 96TM STREET CROSSING WITH BNSF RAILROAD