Laserfiche WebLink
Wood agreed. <br /> <br />Light explained that Councilman Lathrop's motion identified twelve conditions, <br />however, the resolution only contains eleven. <br /> <br />Lathrop clarified that the twelfth condition of approval would be condition number nine <br />from the Planning Commission resolution, which Light previously read. <br /> <br />Schneider asked for assistance in clarifying the 1041 process. He suggested that he would <br />be better off to start from scratch rather than expending money on this project only to <br />discover that he is required to apply for a 1041 permit. He questioned what would occur <br />if the 1041 application were denied. <br /> <br />Sisk reminded Schneider that the letter dated September 2, 1999 from his architect states <br />that the applicant is in agreement with this condition. Sisk asked for clarification that <br />Schneider has changed his mind. <br /> <br />Schneider replied, yes. He explained that this decision is based upon what he has learned <br />tonight. <br /> <br />Roll call was taken. Motion denied by a 2-2 vote, with Sisk and Keany voting against. <br /> <br />Keany moved that Council approve Resolution No. 49, Series 1999 with all the <br />conditions as previously discussed, except condition number one which states That, if <br />determined necessary by the City, the applicant shall apply for a 1041 permit for this <br />proposed development, and that no building permits shall be issued prior to approval of <br />said permit by City Council.' <br /> <br />Sisk asked Keany for clarification that his motion was a motion to reconsider Resolution <br />No. 49, Series 1999. <br /> <br />Keany replied, yes. <br /> <br />Lathrop seconded the motion. <br /> <br />Keany stated that since the alignment of Highway 42 & 96th Street has not been <br />identified, he questioned how the 1041 permit process would affect any future alignment <br />of the road. He requested clarification from Light that the 1041 permit is intended to <br />provide the City with some control of where interchanges would be located on highways <br />around Louisville. He stated that Council appears to be using it to 'hamstring' themselves <br />on a project that would be beneficial to the community for a road that hasn't been <br />designed, proposed, or built. He explained that Council does not know whether the road <br />is considered an interchange or not. <br /> <br />25 <br /> <br /> <br />