My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1988 02 16
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1988 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1988 02 16
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:28 PM
Creation date
7/14/2008 10:48:09 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
2/16/1988
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E2
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1988 02 16
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
10
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
Mayor Pro Tem Mohr opened the public hearing and <br />asked for any public comments either in favor of or <br />in opposition to Ordinance #950. <br />Tina Tincher, applicant, asked that Council consider <br />adoption of the Ordinance. Ms. Tincher stated that, <br />based on a survey of the residents in her <br />neighborhood who all responded favorably to this <br />type of home occupation, she felt one chair <br />beauty/barber service in one's home would not in any <br />way be a negative influence on residential <br />neighborhoods. Ms. Tincher also stated that there is <br />evidence this is already going on in private homes. <br />This would be a wary to properly regulate it. <br />Tim Griffin, 1373 Caledonia, stated that in <br />reviewing this issue when it came before Planning <br />Commission, he tallked to several beauty/barber <br />operators in Louisville. Many operators felt that <br />this type of business should be contained to the <br />business districts stating that among other reasons, <br />these businesses a:re paying a price for maintaining <br />their business in ithe City's business districts. <br />Mr. Griffin noted tthat although he does not <br />disqualify this concern, he suggests that there is a <br />change in times where there are often single parent <br />households. A one chair operation may be utilized <br />by those people who wish to be with their young <br />children and still have an income. This type of <br />situation would noi~ be competing with shops <br />throughout the City. <br />Szymanski stated that he would be unable to support <br />this Ordinance. Szymanski stated that the arrival <br />and departure of customers could take place every 20 <br />to 30 minutes. "I bought a house in a residential <br />area for the residential character of the <br />neighborhood, not f'or the business character of a <br />business. If I could not approve this next door to <br />me, then I couldn't: approve it to be next door to <br />anybody else." "I firmly believe that residences <br />are for residents and businesses are for business <br />and there should bey a distinction between the two of <br />them. Even though some have minimal impact on a <br />residential area, they do have some impact. If we <br />take this step this; time, what's the next step we're <br />going to take the next time?" Szymanski stated that <br />he realizes the economics involved in having people <br />work out of their homes, however, feels that in a <br />broader issue, there are greater economics involved <br />in purchasing homes in residential neighborhoods. <br />"I think they thing we have to look at is not only <br />what's best for the individual petitioning the <br />Council, but what's best for all of the citizens of <br />the City." Szymanski stated that although this <br />5 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.