City Council Study Session Summary 2005 05 10

Home Browse Search

City Council Study Session Summary May 10, 2005 Page 4 of 7 Public Comments Gail Dunning, 745 W Fir Court, explained that she is a 24-year resident of Louisville. She expressed concern for the proposed ordinance. She stated that the ordinance is crossing the line by restricting what you can do on your private property. She questioned whether the next ordinance would restrict the color of your house, or the type of trees & bushes you can plant. She asked for the specific number of complaints the City receives and the nature of the complaints. She reminded Council to respect the personal takings clause of the Constitution. She questioned the requirement of installing a concrete parking pad for parking your trailer/RV. Johnny Adams, 745 W Fir Court, agreed that he would like to have a concrete pad on which to park his recreation vehicles; however, he cannot afford to install one on his property. Laurie Deiter, 809 West Willow, asked Council to address the question about the number of complaints the City has received. Bill Kingston replied that the City receives a couple of complaints each week about trailers that are blocking driveways, sidewalks, etc, making it difficult for residents to back safely out of their driveways. He categorized the number of complaints as a 'steady stream'. He explained that the complaints are received by a number of individuals, not just a few residents continuously complaining. Arlene Donn, 806 W Oak Court, asked whether the safety issues are covered in the 2002 ordinance. Bill Kingston replied that the Police Department has carefully reviewed the 2002 ordinance and found the language to be confusing. Councilmember Levihn replied that the residents who are not respectful of their neighbors are the ones that are the chronic violators. Their neighbors cannot talk to them about these issues, because they do not care what their neighbors think. Councilmember Van Pelt expressed concern that this ordinance is 'muddying the waters'. She felt that the ordinance should address safety issues, but not functionality, inoperable vehicles or licensing requirements. Mayor Sisk disagreed. He felt that all recreational vehicles should be licensed, operable, and parked safely. He expressed support for an ordinance with 'teeth in it'. Council member Brown agreed, he stated that Council needs to give the Police Department some discretion to enforce the ordinance.