My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2000 07 05
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2000 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2000 07 05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:36:46 PM
Creation date
2/2/2004 11:04:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
7/5/2000
Original Hardcopy Storage
7B6
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2000 07 05
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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 />July 5, 2000 <br />Page 23 <br /> <br />City Attorney Light stated that there are distinctions between the downtown parking <br />requirements and the ordinance. He noted that further attention might be required in the <br />parking issue. <br /> <br />Davidson suggested that the City Attorney interpret the parking ordinance and determine <br />the number of parking spaces required. <br /> <br />Keany stated he did not have any concerns with the lighting and expressed his opinion <br />that parking would be a nighttime and weekend use only. Keany concurred with the <br />applicant's interpretation of the ordinance. <br /> <br />Davidson commented that there will be parking issues with every business. <br /> <br />Sisk asked McCarthy if he proposes to have live music in the basement. McCarthy stated <br />that he plans to move the music to the basement. <br /> <br />Hartronft summarized the proposal by stating that the business community of Louisville <br />would like to see all downtown businesses flourish. He noted that there are a lot of <br />challenges that effect the downtown businesses. He stated that the parking ordinance is <br />vague and that the Planning Commission struggled with it. He stated that the Planning <br />Commission compromised on the parking equirement and he requested that Council <br />compromise as well. <br /> <br />MOTION: Keany moved that Council approve Resolution No. 41, Series 2000, with <br />the two conditions, seconded by Mayer. <br /> <br />Sisk offered a friendly amendment that there would be an agreement reached between <br />Mr. Carlisle and Mr. McCarthy prior to any issuance of permits. <br /> <br />Keany and Mayer accepted the amendment. <br /> <br />City Administrator Simmons asked for clarification on the motion with respect to the <br />lighting issue. Planning Director Wood stated that the Planning Commission's approval <br />required that the wattage on the west side be limited to 40-watt incandescent or <br />equivalent and on the eastside of the building, 100-wattt, high-pressure sodium. <br /> <br />Light offered a friendly amendment that a recorded agreement of the boundaries be <br />obtained prior to the issuance of any building permits. <br /> <br />Keany and Mayer accepted the amendment. <br /> <br />23 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.