My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2001 01 02
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2001 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2001 01 02
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:36:46 PM
Creation date
11/26/2003 10:49:34 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
1/2/2001
Original Hardcopy Storage
7B6
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2001 01 02
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
11
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 />January 2, 2001 <br />Page 9. <br /> <br />public access easement and prior to recording the final PUD, the amount of money to be <br />set for purchase, for use of the public easement. <br /> <br />Davidson asked the City Attorney to draft the language to modify condition 3 of <br />Resolution No. 2, Series 2001. <br /> <br />City Attorney Light stated the language to modify the existing condition 3: "the 8' access <br />be reserved for potential additional public use but if not, the existing property owner <br />would agree to accept compensation as necessary from the adjoining property and the <br />City would collect that from the developer at the time when the property develops and <br />turn the money over to the owner or a successor." <br /> <br />Sisk stated that the access must have public accessibility for fire and emergency vehicles. <br /> <br />Light stated that the principle of subdivision is that if property is subdivided, there is a <br />requirement to set aside the cost of that original driveway that may be necessary for <br />public purposes. <br /> <br />Davidson suggested some language that preserves public access and provides some fixed <br />compensation when the land finally develops. <br /> <br />Sisk stated that a private driveway would have access from Highway 42. <br /> <br />Davidson stated that the property owner has a legal right to access. He asked that Staff <br />and the developer negotiate the issue. <br /> <br />Mayer voiced his concern and requested that whatever language is derived, that it enforce <br />that the private property owner will be responsible. <br /> <br />Sisk stated that there might be a possibility that the City may have to buy the property. <br /> <br />Mayer stated that he was concerned with the direction Council seems to be taking. <br /> <br />West stated that they share the same concern and prefer to call the easement a tract or a <br />parcel. He suggested the developer could take this parcel and be given an open space <br />dedication credit on another parcel. He noted that the Howard's would have to sell the <br />parcel to the developer. <br /> <br />Mayer stated that he is concerned that open space would be traded for a driveway. He <br />asked City Attorney Light if the City could require the property owner to purchase the <br />access. <br /> <br />9 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.