Laserfiche WebLink
Louisville City Council Meeting <br />May 2, 2000 <br />Page 10 <br /> <br />Sisk stated that given the lack of clarity, he felt a continuance was 'in order. <br /> <br />Keany concurred with Sisk and noted that Staff was in need of some direction from <br />Council. He stated that it his understanding the only issue unresolved is the amount of <br />cash in-lieu dedication. <br /> <br />Brown asked for clarification on what improvements were added that increased the value <br />of the land. <br /> <br />City Attorney Light stated that in 1996 the agreement was amended and called for public <br />improvements consisting of sidewalks, curbs and gutters, and water and sewer lines. <br /> <br />Brown asked, in a normal situation, would the improvements be done prior or subsequent <br />to the process. <br /> <br />Light stated that according to the Ordinance, land is dedicated on the plat and any <br />agreements on improvements would be done through the subdivision process. In the cash <br />in-lieu of land dedication process, there is an agreement of payment of 12% to 15% of the <br />value of the land. The expectation is that with the subdivision approval, an appraisal is <br />forthcoming. The plat would then be in compliance with the conditions and recorded. <br /> <br />Davidson asked about the CTC land dedication. <br /> <br />Light stated that on the old annexation and subdivision agreement, 40% of the dedication <br />was real land and had been parceled out into individual lots. In one of the two <br />agreements, the City did lock into a value. <br /> <br />In response to Brown's questions, Keany raised two points. He stated his first point was <br />from a business point-of view. Keany stated that if he were developing lot or a parcel, <br />and calculating cash in-lieu, it would be based on raw land without any improvements. <br />Keany noted that his second point is the dedication of land, which would be raw land. <br />Keany stated that his personal feeling was that the cash in-lieu should be based on the <br />2000 land value, not including improvements. <br /> <br />MOTION: Mayer moved that Council continue Resolution No. 22, Series 2000, A <br />Resolution Approving an Amended Final PUD Development Plan and Minor <br />Subdivision Replat for the Bella Vista South Subdivision, to May 16, 2000, seconded by <br />Brown. All in favor. <br /> <br />10 <br /> <br /> <br />