My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1982 07 06
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1982 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1982 07 06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:19 PM
Creation date
7/8/2009 4:07:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
7/6/1982
Original Hardcopy Storage
7C3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1982 07 06
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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
<br />7 / 6/ 82 <br /> <br />Page -5- <br /> <br />lishment is within 600' of any playground, <br />our City is in current violation by having <br />one at the Swimming Pool. <br />Director Hioco to have it removed. <br />Personally Cowlcilwoman Morris did not see <br />anything wrong with having one at the Swimming <br />Pool; therefore was uncertain what specifi- <br />cations needed to be incorporated in the <br />ordinance, i.e. what are the problems <br />Council would foresee with video games? <br /> <br />Attorney Rautenstraus <br /> <br />Councilman Cussen <br /> <br />Advised the ordinance as presented was a <br />model ordinance which came from the National <br />League of Citiles ordinances. The $25.00 <br />fee was determined by taking a rough sur- <br />vey of some of the surrounding municipalities; <br />this amount was an average. He further ex- <br />plained the 600' limitation was incorporated <br />because of the incidence of the proximity <br />of the school on a recent special review <br />use application. Advised he would be happy <br />to include or delete anything that Council <br />wished and would pursue model ordinances <br />from the Colorado Municipal League. <br /> <br />Commented he f,elt the $25.00 fee seemed <br />very minimal to him; perhaps $100.00 would <br />be more realistic; but felt Council needed <br />a basis for this amount. It was his opinion <br />the P.U.D. should be addressed on the issue <br />of parking. He used Village Square as an <br />example stating there were 12 bicycles parked <br />there in front of the door - no bike racks, <br />and felt that provisions should be made in <br />the ordinance to enforce this issue. <br /> <br />Councilman Leary <br /> <br />Commented that since the City of Lakewood <br />had had problems and they required Security <br />Guards to be present - but the Court~hrew <br />that out, and inquired if this would apply <br />to supervision and what the ruling would be. <br />Attorney Rautenstraus to give Councilman <br />Leary a complete report on his concerns. <br /> <br />Question called for on the motion to delay <br />the ordinance for further information. <br />All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. <br /> <br />EXECUTIVE SESSION <br /> <br />Attorney Rautenstraus requested a short <br />Executive Session if possible on an Attorney/ <br />client matter after the meeting. <br />The reporter from the Longmont Times Call <br />inquired what the Session would be. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.