[bouldercouncilhotline] Hotline: Consent Item 3J and Item 3Q 1st Reading Questions

[cmosupport at bouldercolorado.gov]

Sender: Young, Mary

Item 3J:

Please clarify why the lease amount of $1/yr in the body of the memo differs from the $302.10/yr amount in the lease.

Item 3Q:

1. I would like to understand how having Left Hand Water District (LHWD) serve the property on Peach Court would be in conflict with Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) Sec. 1.20 (maintaining the option of future expansion in Area III-Planning Reserve).

2. The property on Peach Tree is surrounded almost entirely by a conservation easement. Given this, would the property meet the state contiguity requirements for annexation?

3. Planning Board asked that precedent setting be addressed. This is not directly addressed in the "Select Components of Ordinance and Agreement" section. How does identification of a process to follow in a case such as this not set a precedent?

Thank you.

Mary Dolores Young
Boulder City Council Member
303-501-2439

"All ethics . . . rest upon a single premise: that the individual is a member of a community of interdependent parts . . ." - Aldo Leopold