My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2013 11 18
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
>
2005-2019 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
2013 Historic Preservation Commission Agendas and Packets
>
Historic Preservation Commission Agenda and Packet 2013 11 18
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/10/2021 3:08:17 PM
Creation date
11/20/2013 8:56:54 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
HPCPKT 2013 11 18
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
Historic Preservation Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />October 21, 2013 <br />Page 2 of 9 <br /> <br />Stewart asked if there were any plans for the City Shops property on Empire Road. <br />McCartney stated there were no submittals for the redevelopment of the City Shops. <br />Public Hearing - none <br />Presentation City Attorney, Ethics Training <br />Sam Light, City Attorney, presented Ethics and Training. He stated this is a quasi-judicial <br />board and it is important to learn how to deal with issues involving private property. <br />Stewart asked if this counts as training. <br />Light stated no. <br />Watson asked why we have to do both. <br />Light stated this is ethics training specifically for the HPC. He added open government training <br />is more general. <br />La Grave asked how you look at noticing for certain projects. <br />Light stated the Louisville Municipal Code already states what action needs public notification <br />neighbors. <br />La Grave asked if Light could comment on what fair notice is and who should get noticed. <br />Stewart stated the premise is all interested parties should be notified. <br />Light stated all ordinances have a standard publication of posting, publishing and notification. <br />He added case by case notices are dangerous because you are making decisions off the <br />books. <br />La Grave stated his inquiry is to determine if our notification process is fair. <br />Light stated legal notice in the Sunday newspaper is not effective but it is required. He added <br />notice on the internet and through email is what most communities are doing now, but it should <br />still the most effective. <br />Stewart asked if the demarcation of ex parte contact is once an application has been <br />submitted. <br />Light stated you should consider both sides of the discussion when considering ex parte. Any <br />pre-discussions are not recommended. <br />Watson stated the clear line is an application. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.