My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1986 08 19
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1986 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1986 08 19
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:26 PM
Creation date
7/15/2008 11:19:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
8/19/1986
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E2
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1986 08 19
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
16
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
revenue sharing, however, it would need to be a <br />very limited revenue sharing agreement based upon <br />the actual provision of services with Louisville <br />providing sewer, possibly water and in essence, <br />the interchange. Hundley stated that Louisville <br />recognizes the impacts and indicated a willing- <br />ness to consider this and a 5~ figure was thrown <br />out for discussion. Superior indicated that this <br />was not worth discussing. No further proposal was <br />brought back. <br />Sackett wanted it stressed that although a revenue <br />sharing agreement was not worked out at this time, <br />annexation of this property does not limit this <br />type of agreements in the future. <br />Rautenstraus clarified that in order to have any <br />of the multi-family residential development, which <br />is the only kind allowed in a CB zone by special <br />review, it would come before the Planning Commis- <br />sion fora public hearing and would also have to <br />come before the City Council for a public hearing. <br />Anderson stated that he sympathizes with the <br />concerns of those residents of Superior concerning <br />this property. Anderson is in favor of the <br />annexation and sees it as an opportunity for <br />Louisville as it was for others in the past to <br />take advantage of and Anderson feels it is in <br />Louisville's best interest to deal with it in a <br />positive manner understanding the concerns of <br />those around Louisville. Anderson feels that <br />during the PUD process, Louisville will be able to <br />mitigate the concerns about the problems between <br />the communities some people may be feeling. <br />Mohr asked Mr. McElroy what the designation of <br />this property was in Superior's Comp Plan. <br />McElroy indicated that it was open/agricultural. <br />Mohr stated that this Council has the <br />responsibility to those people who elected the <br />Councilmembers. It is Mohr's feeling that this <br />annexation is in the best interest of the people <br />of the City of Louisville and will continue to be <br />good neighbors to all surrounding communities as <br />this City continues to prepare for the future and <br />take care of its residents. <br />Szymanski agreed with Mohr's statement in being <br />responsible to Louisville's residents. Szymanski <br />recognizes concern about the buffering issue <br />between cities and feels that there are <br />appropriate ways to deal with that and remain <br />good neighbors. "The Comprehensive Plan is only a <br />8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.