My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Agenda and Packet 1997 04 15
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
AGENDAS & PACKETS (45.010)
>
1990-1999 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
1997 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
City Council Agenda and Packet 1997 04 15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 1:23:37 PM
Creation date
11/12/2009 11:16:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Packet
Signed Date
4/15/1997
Original Hardcopy Storage
5A1
Supplemental fields
Test
CCAGPKT 1997 04 15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
151
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
Howard wondered if it stated in the document how to balance the look and feel of one set of <br />guidelines that people are ready doing and committed to and then imposing a new set of guidelines. <br />Is that fair? How will there be continuity in the look and feel of the overall product? <br />Wood pointed out that the document stated, in terms of building orientation, site planning and <br />architectural, there are sections that reflect the need to be compatible with adjoining developments. <br />Mayer wanted Council to know which properties in Centennial Valley were vested, soon if possible. <br />Levihn was concerned with the lack of clarity of some of the issues in this ordinance. <br />Lathrop asked the committee to make one more attempt to resolve the specific issues that had been <br />brought up. <br />Davidson stated that in general he agreed with everything in the document. There was no intention <br />to be unfair to the developer. <br />Sisk suggested making this into a guideline, so as not to be "locked in." <br />Howard wanted to know how much pad space is available vs. how much is already used. He wanted <br />staff to mitigate some of the imposition that is being given in areas like Parcel 0 having common <br />setbacks and open areas. How would the City be equitable in applying that to forward going pad <br />sites? He wanted to go through the list in a work session environment. <br />Keany wanted written comments from the Planning Commission and Council submitted prior to the <br />work session. <br />Davidson reopened the public hearing and moved that Council continue Ordinance No. 1242, Series <br />1997, until Tuesday, May 6, 1997, seconded by Sisk. All in favor. <br />Davidson wanted Council to submit their comments to staff, so staff would have a chance to work <br />on them. Also, submit to the City Attorney the specific. questions Council wanted answered by her. <br />Sisk asked the developers to submit written comments also. <br />ORDINANCE NO. 1249, SERIES 1997 APPROVING AN ANNEXATION, KNOWN AS <br />1HE DAUGHENBAUGH ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF LOUISVILLE, COLORADO <br />2ND READING PUBLIC HEARING (PUBL. LSVL. TIMES 2/22/97, 3/1/97, 3/15/97) <br />Griffiths read by title only Ordinance No. 1249, Series 1997, "An Ordinance approving an annexation, <br />known as the Daughenbaugh Annexation to the City of Louisville, Colorado." <br />8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.