My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2010 03 16
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2010 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2010 03 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:44:29 PM
Creation date
4/30/2010 10:29:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
3/16/2010
Original Hardcopy Storage
7D4
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2010 03 16
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
<br />City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />March 16,2010 <br />Page 7 of 13 <br /> <br />the Council has sole discretion on the agreement after receiving recommendation from <br />the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />Councilor Yarnell did not agree with the assessment of a vested rights agreement <br />providing fluidity to a development. She felt the amount of detail required in the initial <br />stages would take away the fluidity of the development. She did not support changing <br />the code for one developer. She voiced her concern over having a vested rights tool, <br />which may not be used often enough to have a full grasp of what it can do. She favored <br />looking at a less drastic alternative. <br /> <br />Councilor Clabots shared some of the Councilor Yarnell's concern and stated he could <br />not support the ordinance. <br /> <br />Mayor Pro Tern Marsella stated although she did not favor passing the ordinance based <br />on a single request, she supported a detailed vested agreement reviewed by the <br />Planning Commission to protect the City. She supported the passage of the ordinance. <br /> <br />Mayor Sisk would have prefe!rred the ordinance came before ConocoPhillips <br />development, but supported the ordinance and the Planning Commission review. <br /> <br />Councilor Muckle proposed Ordinance No. 1567 be postponed until the ConocoPhillips <br />Preliminary Plan is reviewed by Council. <br /> <br />Mayor Sisk requested public comment and hearing none, closed the public hearing. <br /> <br />MOTION: Councilor Dalton moved to approve Ordinance No. 1567, Series 2010 on final <br />reading as amended to allow for Planning Commission review and recommendation, <br />seconded by Mayor Pro Tern Marsella. Roll call vote was taken. The motion carried by <br />a vote of 4-3. Councilors Yarnelll, Muckle and Clabots voted no. <br /> <br />PUBLIC HEARING - CONOCOPHILLlPS CAMPUS ANNEXATION & INITIAL <br />ZONING, REZONING, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAT & PRELIMINARY PUD <br />DEVEILOPMENT PLAN REQUESTS <br /> <br />Annexation Documents: <br /> <br />1. RESOLUTION No.9, SERIES 2010 - A RESOLUTION CONCERNING A <br />PETITION FOR THE ANNEXATION OF THE PROPERTY TO THE CITY OF <br />LOUISVILLE, COLORADO KNOWN AS THE CONOCOPHILLlPS ANNEXATION TO <br />THE CITY OF LOUISVILLE, AND FIND THE AREA PROPOSED TO BE ANNEXED <br />ELIGIBLE FOR ANNEXATION <br /> <br />2. RESOLUTION No 10, SERIES 2010 - A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN <br />ANNEXATION AGREEMENT FOR THE CONOCOPHILLlPS ANNEXATION <br /> <br />24 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.