My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2000 06 20
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2000 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2000 06 20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:36:46 PM
Creation date
2/2/2004 10:59:45 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
6/20/2000
Original Hardcopy Storage
7B6
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2000 06 20
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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
Louisville City Council Meeting <br />June 20, 2000 <br />Page 17. <br /> <br />Mayer asked the applicant if she had a problem with the parking signs along the right-of- <br />way. She stated she did not have a problem with parking signs. <br /> <br />Mayer directed a question to the applicant with respect to lighted signs and asked if she <br />had a problem with the regulation that lighted signs are to be shut off at 10:00 p.m. She <br />stated that she would not have a problem with that regulation. <br /> <br />Mayer asked City Attorney Light to address the easement right-of-way uses. <br /> <br />Light stated that on dedicated easements, City Council has the obligation and <br />responsibility to determine what the uses will be in the best interest of the public. Light <br />stated that property abutting a right-of-way is entitled to the public street system. <br /> <br />Keany asked Public Works Director Phare if a street were constructed, who would pay <br />for it. Would it require a Special Improvement District to assess the adjacent properties <br />for the cost of the street construction. <br /> <br />Tom Phare Public Works Director Tom Phare stated that in the past, developers, whose <br />properties have benefited, have constructed streets. Phare voiced one concern as to <br />whether the storm sewer is built deep enough to allow a street section to be placed on top <br />without the pipes sticking out of the ground. He noted a more detailed study of the <br />design would be required to answer that question. <br /> <br />Keany asked if there was enough room for the development of a street. Phare stated that <br />that there was. <br /> <br />Keany asked City Attorney Light if construction of a Street would be paid for by special <br />assessment from the adjacent properties. <br /> <br />Light stated that under the general concept of the special improvement district it would <br />require adjacent property owners to pay their fair share of the cost. Light stated that he <br />was not sure that the City could require payment on two property districts. <br /> <br />Keany wondered if the best way to avoid this situation would be to have the City <br />construct the street and assess the adjacent property owners for the expense. <br /> <br />Keany asked Principal Planner Johnstone if the setbacks for a right-of-way met the <br />setbacks for a roadway. Johnstone stated that the setbacks for the south property line are <br />the same for a local public street. <br /> <br />17 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.