My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1997 06 17
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1997 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1997 06 17
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:36:42 PM
Creation date
4/6/2004 9:58:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
6/17/1997
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E4
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1997 06 17
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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
Tim Garls, Richmond Homes, stated that the property is owned by Boulder County Land Venture. <br />MDC Holdings, the parent corporation of Richmond is one of the partners in that particular <br />partnership. <br /> <br />Lathrop had not seen a lot of change concerning the property. He did not feel the rezoning was <br />justified. <br /> <br />Levihn had heard nothing that would convince him that the property should be rezoned or that the <br />City would ever, in the public interest, support a housing development way out there where the <br />expense of maintaining it would be to the City's benefit. <br /> <br />Davidson understood that the applicant is applying under Section 2, which said the area for which <br />rezoning is requested is changed or is changing to such a degree that is in the public interest to <br />encourage a redevelopment of the area. Since there is no development at all on the area, the area was <br />never developed, how could this be considered a redevelopment? <br /> <br />Wood stated that the property had not been platted. The only thing that has been is annexed and <br />zoned. Any future development would require final subdivision plat approval, so there is nothing to <br />vest a development right at this time. <br /> <br />Davidson stated that there is basically no redevelopment. He asked if within the City limits of the <br />City, had any zoning within the City changed? <br /> <br />Wood stated no, even the open space areas acquired by Boulder County Open Space are still <br />industrially zoned. <br /> <br />Davidson corrected the applicant's remark that the Comp Plan called for a population of 26,000. <br />Actually, it is 20,000. He pointed out that one of the reasons they asked for rezoning was that fight <br />now there is Residential, which is in the County, against Industrial. As Davidson saw this, if Council <br />rezoned it they would create Residential within the City against Industrial. If Residential against <br />Industrial is a problem, all it would do is make the problem a whole lot worse. If you take 16 houses <br />that are currently against Industrial and change that to 130 or so houses against Industrial, that would <br />seem to make the problem a whole lot worse. Looking at the criteria for allowing rezoning, he did <br />not see how it had been met. <br /> <br />Mayer asked how many acres of the CTC are in the planning process right now. <br /> <br />Wood stated that Filing No. 1 is 228 acres and approximately 30 - 35% of that is developed. At this <br />point there are applications for in excess of 160 acres of area in the southeast quadrant of Hwy. 42 <br />and South 104th. <br /> <br />Mayer did not like the idea of a development on the far side of an industrial park that would be <br />completely cut offfi-om the City. In DRCOG's 20/20 Transportation Plan the Northwest Parkway, <br /> <br />7 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.