My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1976 06 01
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1976 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1976 06 01
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:10 PM
Creation date
8/26/2009 12:07:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
6/1/1976
Original Hardcopy Storage
7C3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1976 06 01
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
47
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 />COLO. TECH. CENTER <br />CONT'D <br /> <br />reasons for going a little different route <br />on different things. So, as a general rule <br />on almost all the issues raised by the LUC <br />designation, I think we are in agreement as <br />far as the LUC staff is concerned and your <br />staff in what they have proposed tonight <br />meets the intent of the LUC designation re- <br />quests. There is some question left in geo- <br />logic hazard area designation that we will <br />get into in a little while. We do have Pat <br />Rogers and Dave Shelton with the Colorado <br />Geologic Survey here and at the appropriate <br />time they will respond to any further in- <br />formation which is brought to the attention <br />of Council. I would like to make one short <br />point and that is throughout the last several <br />months, the LUC staff has been working closely <br />with Denny Drumm, Leon Wurl and Paul Morris. <br />But in the final analysis the staff of the <br />LUC and I as assistant Attorney General can <br />not make the decision for the LUC; so I want <br />to make it clear that our agreement to the <br />proposed changes or ordinances and resol- <br />utions in no way indicate that the LUC it- <br />self is going to react favorable to that. <br />I think it is the same situation where your <br />staff makes recommendations to you and City <br />Council has the last say. We are in the same <br />position with the LUC, that we as the staff <br />at the time the Commission considers your <br />action taken in response to their designation <br />request, the staff will make a recommendation <br />to them; and, in all likelihood, will recom- <br />mend that they accept what action you have <br />taken. At this point I see no reason that <br />we won't recommend that they accept the <br />proposed changes that Denny Drumm and Leon <br />Wurl have come up with. Again, I say on the <br />Geologic Hazard area designation there may <br />be some question. But, in the final analysis, <br />they do have the right to make a contrary de- <br />cision, so I don't want you to be shocked if <br />that happens - I'm not saying that it is <br />or anything - but it is that they are in the <br />same position as you are in relationship to <br />your staff. <br />Can I answer any questions at this point at <br />all? <br /> <br />MAYOR WASCHAK <br /> <br />Does Council have any questions at this time? <br /> <br />Are there any other members of the LUC that <br />wish to speak at this time? <br /> <br />Are there any persons in the audience that <br />wish to speak at this time? <br /> <br />-3- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.