|
The owners also own several undeveloped lots along Cherry Street near their building and all of their
<br />properties are directly neighboring the proposed Knollwood Development. They believed that the
<br />approval of the Knollwood Development would be beneficial to the CTC, because it would result in
<br />significantly lower improvement district taxes, which would directly benefit the businesses occupying
<br />the properties in the CTC. If approved, the office park, it's owners, and tenants would benefit to the
<br />improved infrastructure to the park, notably increased water and sewer capacity, improved streets,
<br />and access from 104th and 96th Street alignment to the park.
<br />
<br />Sisk asked to be excused during Mr. Hinsberger's presentation as he knew the speaker.
<br />
<br />Davidson excused Sisk.
<br />
<br />Bob Hinsberger, 1939 Hardscrabble Drive, Boulder, Colorado, spoke in favor of Knollwood Estates
<br />and the positive things that the rapid growth of Louisville had made possible, such as an award
<br />winning recreation center, a revitalized downtown, and vigorous park and open space improvements.
<br />He would appreciate the paving of 104 Street between Dillon and Hwy. 42 providing an alternative
<br />to the Front Street/Pine Street bottleneck at the Post Office. He acknowledged the excellent "track
<br />record" of the Developer.
<br />
<br />Bruce Wolski, 661 St. Andrews Lane, Louisville, Colorado, speaking also for Mary Hinkley, Sarah
<br />McKnight, and Bob Spencer, urged Council to vote in favor of the Knollwood project. They felt this
<br />development would help break the "mental block" that Louisville starts or ends on the west side of
<br />Hwy. 42.
<br />
<br />Lynda Newbold, 9750 Empire Road, unincorporated Boulder County, immediately adjacent to this
<br />proposed project, speaking also on behalf of Ernest Cader, 296 County Road, her immediate neighbor
<br />to the west, stated that she did not feel the applicant had shown any real benefits to the proposed
<br />rezoning. She did not feel the enticements being offered were worth the price. She agreed with the
<br />Planning Commissions findings that this development is not in accordance with the Comp Plan.
<br />
<br />Gail Wetrogan, 930 McKinley, Louisville, Colorado, was opposed to this rezoning because it was
<br />a poor location for residential property and because families will have to get in their cars for every
<br />single errand causing more pollution.
<br />
<br />Christine Blake, 693 Tamarisk Court, Louisville, Colorado, supported Bellock's request for rezoning
<br />from Commercial to Residential, as Louisville needed more quality and diversity.
<br />
<br />Michael Frontczak, 643 Fairfield Lane, Louisville, Colorado, preferred to see new growth in an
<br />outlying area, which adds diversity, such as Knollwood. He supported the open space dedication.
<br />
<br />Greg Ressler, 813 Pinehurst Court, Louisville, Colorado, praised Bellock's top quality developments
<br />in Louisville. He felt Knollwood was a quality project.
<br />
<br />11
<br />
<br />
<br />
|