Laserfiche WebLink
dedicated street or from property which is not zoned agricultural <br />or used for agricultural purposes. <br /> <br />Howard wondered why this ordinance was being changed from its <br />original intent of exempting agricultural users from the need to <br />maintain their yard or their property to the same standards as the <br />City. <br /> <br />Wood stated that he was not initially involved with the preliminary <br />direction on this ordinance. He felt the attempt was to look at <br />those districts where a use-by-right would be able to have crop <br />production or as an historic use of the property, have some type of <br />activity or agricultural maintenance. <br /> <br />Howard wanted the ordinance to state that if the lot were of a <br />certain size, perhaps the coverage of the maintenance would more <br />reflect what the size of the lot is. If it is beyond that size, <br />then this ordinance would fall into place. <br /> <br />Davidson suggested it say in 8.08.020 B, "the cutting of the weeds <br />only for a distance of 100' from any dedicated street." <br /> <br />Lathrop did not understand the need for this ordinance. <br /> <br />Annette Brand, City Administrator, explained that what triggered <br />this Ordinance was that the City will probably be buying property <br />from the Warembourgs. They will maintain about 42 acres of the <br />land they now own, which they will use for agricultural purposes. <br />They plan to annex it to the City of Louisville, so they can <br />control their weeds. <br /> <br />Tami Tanoue, acting City Attorney, stated that words could be added <br />in 8.08.020 B, between "street" and "from property which is not <br />zoned agricultural," so that it could be clarified that the 6" <br />requirement also apply to the distance of 100' from property which <br />is not zoned agricultural. <br /> <br />Mayer moved that Council table Ordinance No. 1149, Series 1994, to <br />the May 17, 1994, Council meeting. Seconded by Howard. All in <br />favor. <br /> <br />CABLE TELEVISION RATE REGULATIONS PUBLIC HEARING <br /> <br />Tami Tanoue, acting City Attorney, stated that the study by Bondi <br />& Co. shows that Scripps Howard's current rate for basic service at <br />$9.00 is in excess of the maximum permitted rate for basic service, <br />which is $8.47. There is also over charging with installation and <br />equipment rates. She explained that this rate order would order <br />refunds for charges over the FCC permitted rate back to September <br />1, 1993. <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br /> <br />