City Council Minutes 2010 04 06 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

City Council Meeting Minutes April 6, 2010 Page 6 of 17 Comparison between the 35' building height plan and the plan of building heights ranging from 35' to 95'. This was presented in a flyover view of the proposed development from eight different areas, which surround the campus. PUBLIC COMMENT John Leary, 1116 Lafarge Avenu,e, Louisville, CO addressed the PUD and the waiver of the height restrictions. He noted when looking at waivers, you must also look at public open space. He voiced his regret the Open Space Advisory Board was not invited to make a presentation. He felt the City Council was denied their input and information. He noted a summary of the Open Space Chairperson's comments appear in a draft of the Planning Commission minutes, which was included in the Council packet. He stated it would be an interesting project for a class at CU to look at the range of heights. COUNCIL COMMENTS Mayor Sisk noted the resolutions and ordinances would be finalized on April 20, 2010. He asked Council if they had questions for Staff or the ConocoPhillips representatives. Mayor Pro Tem Marsella asked Finance Director Watson if the financial numbers submitted by ConocoPhillips were realistic. Finance Director Watson felt the numbers in the fiscal impact analysis are reasonable. He discussed this issue with the County Assessor however there is nothing in Boulder County comparable to this development. Les Carnell, Finance Manager for the ConocoPhillips project, stated they could not release exact numbers, because they are in negotiations with contractors however they are confident with their internal analysis (received from potential general contractors) for the projections of $275.00 per SF. Councilor Muckle asked whether there are details on the assumptions of the assessed valuations. Mr. Carnell stated in the Final Plan, ConocoPhillips will have a better idea of the cost valuations for the research facility, learning centers, and office facilities. Councilor Dalton was satisfied with the ConocoPhillips increased land dedication. Councilor Muckle expressed his desire to see more open space dedication and in particular, in Area G. He supported the Open Space Advisory Board request for additional public land dedication and noted the City's PUD Ordinance requires higher levels of public dedication when waivers are requested. He felt this would be relative when looking at a vested rights a!~reement. He requested ConocoPhillips present an architectural plan at the next meeting, if possible. Councilor Sackett noted the City had to cut back on services due to the budget crisis. He was impressed by the financial analysis and felt they would assist the City in