My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Study Session Summary 2008 04 22
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
STUDY SESSIONS (45.010)
>
2001-2009 City Council Study Sessions
>
2008 City Council Study Sessions
>
City Council Study Session Summary 2008 04 22
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2019 11:36:17 AM
Creation date
5/12/2008 11:13:28 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CITYWIDE
Original Hardcopy Storage
5F6
Supplemental fields
Test
SSSUM 2008 04 22
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
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
<br />City Council <br />Study Session Summary <br />April 22, 2008 <br />Page 4 of 5 <br /> <br />Councilor Muckle thought that this was not the time to ask this question. <br /> <br />Assistant City Manager Balser suggested that the question be made more <br />general to say alternative energy, such as solar, wind turbine, etc. Council <br />agreed that this might be a better approach to the question. <br /> <br />Council Muckle indicated that he was not clear about question 17. He didn't <br />understand the question in regards to residential neighborhoods, ability to work <br />and live in Louisville, and convenience/close to retail/shopping and how they <br />related to funding and staff time. <br /> <br />Ms. Urban said that it would give the City an indication of relative importance <br />compared to the other listings and could be used to give Council guidance on <br />what citizens thought was important. Ms. Urban also suggested that another <br />approach would be to change the introduction to the question and leave off the <br />funding and staff time. <br /> <br />Councilor Muckle said that along with question 21 he would like to see a <br />historical preservation tax question added to the survey. <br /> <br />City Manager Fleming noted that we could change questions but if we add any <br />questions we would also need to eliminate others in order to stay within the 5 <br />page limit. <br /> <br />Several Council members thought that the timing for a historical preservation tax <br />question was more appropriate than the use tax question. <br /> <br />Mayor Sisk and Mayor Pro Tem Marsella voiced opposition to the household <br />income question. <br /> <br />Based on the discussion staff said they would bring back a revised survey to the <br />Council's May 6th regular meeting and would adjust the timeline for completing <br />the survey accordingly. <br /> <br />4. UpdatelDiscussion - RVI Trailer Draft Ordinance <br />Mayor Sisk stated that this item would be for an update not for discussion in part <br />because the Planning Commission had continued this to their next meeting. <br /> <br />Planning Director Paul Wood gave a brief history of the ordinance. Director Wood <br />said that there were basically four sections added as outlined in the Council <br />Communication. He said that first section addressed motor vehicles; the second <br />section addressed recreational vehicles which could include RVs, trailers, boats, <br />etc.; the third section addressed parking recreational vehicles on city owned <br />right-of-ways for the purpose of living, sleeping, etc. for up to 5 nights and the <br />last section addresses temporary uses, such as dumpsters, storage PODS, etc. <br /> <br />Director Wood said that part of the consideration was to make the ordinance <br />enforceable by the police. At the recommendation of the Police Department the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.