My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1984 03 06
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1984 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1984 03 06
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:22 PM
Creation date
10/16/2008 2:24:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
3/6/1984
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E2
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1984 03 06
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
80
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
3/6/84 Page -10- <br />Councilman Leary suggested the 15 year <br />plan be another concern to be added to the <br />memorandum - peferred 25 years going to the <br />year 2010. <br />City Administrator Directed Councilman Leary moved, Councilman Cussen <br />to Proceed seconded that the City .Administrator be dir-e~ted to <br />proceed on the elements of his memorandum <br />and adding looking into a 25 year plan <br />ho:riz on . <br />Councilman Woodson Inquired if the land is purchased as open <br />space, why is there a time period of 25 <br />years when that is reviewed again? Administrator <br />Wu:r1 stated if the land were acquired <br />it would forever be open space. Felt that <br />they were dealing with the planning component <br />in terms of when you would agree to leave <br />things in the agricultural zone, or the <br />planning zone versus the urban services area. <br />The 15 year plan seemed to be the one used <br />by Boulder County in all their discussions. <br />Vote on the Motion Question called for. All in favor. Motion <br />carried unanimously 7-0. <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS <br />Ivan Urnovitz, 1016 Main St. Mr. Urnovitz stated that at the last council <br />Museum - Historical Commission meeting when the lease for the Museum was <br />being discussed, he heard some comments <br />that left him somewhat disturbed and he <br />fe:Lt that there was a lack of communication <br />by the Historical Commission. They had worked <br />with the city staff and felt that council <br />wars aware of what they were doing and what <br />they were planning. In the future they will <br />be making presentations periodically so that <br />council will be aware of their plans, goals, <br />and how they intend to achieve those goals. <br />Would make a full presentation at the March <br />20-th meeting; wished to comment on a few <br />conerns that Councilmen Luce and Leary ex- <br />pressed. The changes that were made to <br />Lease lease were acceptable to the Historical <br />Commission. When the length of the lease <br />wars being discussed in the Commission and <br />discussing it with the City Attorney a period <br />of time was not specified. But the 99 year <br />figure came up as something that seemed to <br />show that the City was making a good commit- <br />ment to the Museum. They felt this was im- <br />portant because they think they are going <br />to have a creditability problem. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.