My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1991 03 05
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1991 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1991 03 05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:33 PM
Creation date
6/16/2006 11:22:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
3/5/1991
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1991 03 05
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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 />... <br /> <br /> <br /> <br />authority. <br /> <br />Howard: Has there ever been a tolling on a parkway and how <br />did it work out? Also this idea of mediating <br />traffic flow before it comes into place is kind of <br />late in the game. <br /> <br />Hornbostel: This has been talked out from the very beginning. <br />Most of the people are open to having some kind of <br />capacity management plan. The major disagreement <br />with this is when it would go into place. <br /> <br />Mayor Fauson: The Boulder/Denver Turnpike was considered a Class <br />2 and then when it was paid off and turned over to <br />the state, the state turned it into a Class 1 <br />highway. <br /> <br />Hornbostel: If you decide to toll this parkway, the question <br />is how will they decide where the money goes back <br />to. <br /> <br />Howard: Page 2, Page 3, section 1 and Page 6, Section 6A, <br />all deal with the City of Louisville authorizing a <br />Special Improvement District for and including an <br />interchange at 96th Street for Broomfield. Did <br />Louisville make it clear that although we were not <br />opposed to our existing large corporations <br />participating in this, we were not willing to <br />force this agreement on them? Also, should the <br />interchange be part of this agreement or should it <br />be a separate issue? <br /> <br />Griffiths: It was my understanding from the last City Council <br />meeting, it was the general position that we would <br />pursue this if all of the property owners <br />required inclusion within a Special Improvement <br />District and those property owners requested <br />Louisville to approve their participation in the <br />district, then Louisville would be willing to do <br />so and that could be in the agreement. However <br />another property which was not consented to by the <br />owner would not be part of the agreement and would <br />have to be party to separate discussions between <br />the City of Broomfield and the City of Louisville. <br /> <br />Hornbostel: Broomfield still maintains that STC is interested <br />in the Special Improvement District; we have not <br />as yet heard from them. I think as long as it's <br />voluntary I think this will cover it if they <br />decide they want to become involved. The <br />agreements are to be done by the 31st of March. <br /> <br />Howard: A couple of Denver councilmen have requested the <br />City of Denver staff look into how they could get <br />out of the airport deal. How does that effect <br /> <br /> <br />4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.