City Council Minutes 2008 06 17 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes June 17, 2008 Page 13 of 14 Mayor Sisk closed the public hearing. COUNCIL COMMENT Mayor Sisk supported using the Board of Adjustment for variances. Mayor Pro Tem Marsella and Councilor Yarnell requested sidewalk setbacks. MOTION: Mayor Sisk moved to continue Ordinance No. 1537, Series 2008, to July 1, 2008, seconded by Councilor Muckle. All in favor. Absent: Councilor Dalton. DISCUSSION/DIRECTION -PROPOSED HISTORIC PRESERVATION SALES TAX BALLOT QUESTION Councilor Muckle explained members of the City Council, the Revitalization Commission, the Historic Preservation Commission, and the public met and drafted language for a preservation sales tax ballot question for the November 2008 election. The ballot question would ask the voters to approve an additional sales tax of one-eighth of one percent (0.125%). The tax is proposed to provide the following: • Be an incentive to preserve historic buildings within the City • Provide grants to preserve historic buildings or their facades • Grants to subsidize or rebate in lieu of parking payments for eligible buildings • Acquisition and rehabilitation of historic properties • Grants or low interest loans to preserve and rehabilitate eligible properties • Funding for property tax rebates for eligible properties PUBLIC COMMENT John Leary, 1116 LaFarge Avenue, Louisville, CO voiced his concern with the 3rd provision, which provided incentives for new buildings to meet criteria that enhance the historic character of Downtown. Mike Koertje, 887 Welsh Court, Loulisville, CO stated the Historic Preservation Commission supports the ballot language. They suggested discussing the national and local criteria for landmarking and noted the local criterion is much broader. He addressed the 3rd provision, and explained new buildings cannot be landmarked. He felt the ballot language was too long. Heather Lewis, 712 McKinley Avenue, Louisville, CO agreed with Mr. Koertje and felt the emphasis should be made on the local criteria. She thought provisions 2 and 3 regarding landmarking were problematic and the ballot language was too long. She felt its passage will require broad support.