My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Agenda and Packet 2019 01 08
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
AGENDAS & PACKETS (45.010)
>
2010-2019 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
2019 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
City Council Agenda and Packet 2019 01 08
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:12:30 PM
Creation date
1/16/2019 2:50:44 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Packet
Original Hardcopy Storage
8D6
Supplemental fields
Test
CCAGPKT 2019 01 08
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
717
PDF
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />December 18, 2018 <br />Page 11 of 14 <br />asked for is reasonable and the church's redesign was an improvement over the original <br />design. He said he would support it. <br />Mayor Pro Tem Lipton stated struggling with aspects of this. He thought the impacts will <br />be minor, but felt the concern in not being able to fully understand the impacts. He <br />stated he was not sure this is what was contemplated in the Comp Plan and didn't know <br />if it would be an appropriate use in other neighborhoods. The expectation of neighbors <br />is that this is an RE zone and the creeping use change concerns him. Not -withstanding <br />the fact that as a government we have to support our institutions and need to support <br />their ability to thrive in our community. He was concerned about a lack of information on <br />economic stability; no evidence provided by staff on what impacts this might have on <br />property values and people who have already invested in these neighborhoods. He <br />suspects it won't have much impact but would have liked more information on that. In <br />the absence of that information he felt the burden of proof was on the applicant. We <br />have to objectively apply the criteria but there is some subjectivity. <br />Public Comments <br />Gina Fox, 566 Spruce Circle, this is a change in the structure of the neighborhood to <br />add a cemetery and nothing stops them from asking again for more. Notice of this <br />meeting was not reasonable. She wanted to see the list of who got notified. Let's find <br />out the impact on housing values and traffic before it is built. She asked if 1) She can <br />get list of who was notified, it seems arbitrary, 2) How everyone on Council is related to <br />the church, 3) Why the notice sign was so small, 4) What is financial benefit to the <br />community and 5) How many letters in opposition were received. <br />Lu Wu, 720 Pine Needle Lane, stated the crucial criteria is financial impact. He provided <br />professional opinion this will reduce property values. He felt there is no positive impact <br />from this and the Council should not rush the decision. <br />Maureen Kanwischer, 2335 Andrew Dr., Superior, CO, agreed using the term cemetery <br />brings tombstones to mind, this is not what the church is doing. That is what will reduce <br />property values, not something like this. She looked for evidence that this affects <br />property values; cemeteries yes, funeral homes yes, columbaria no. This is invisible to <br />those driving by and will not affect property values. CTS is a non-profit institution and <br />this will not be a money making endeavor it will only cover the cost. She noted <br />neighborhood kids use the playground and neighbors use the area, CTS welcomes the <br />neighbors. <br />Alyssa Burger, Westminster, CO and a member of CTS stated she can't quantify the <br />financial benefit of CTS to the community, but they support meals on wheels, habitat for <br />humanity, Sister Carmen and others. A large amount of money from the church is going <br />back into the community. Members volunteer to take care of the community. She <br />appreciated the worry about property values, but thought Council should consider what <br />CTS has done for the community already. <br />24 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.