My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1984 06 05
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1984 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1984 06 05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:23 PM
Creation date
10/16/2008 11:56:31 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
6/5/1984
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E2
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1984 06 05
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
6/5/84 Page -13- <br />Biut he assumed that perhaps that would happen <br />in the future, and if Council accepts this <br />request they could be looking at another <br />8•-10 such requests west of 80th St. - south <br />o:E South Boulder Road. <br />Kenneth J. Pliska, Sr. In reply to Councilman Luce's inquiry of <br />1867-B Regal Court why just a water tap was requested and not <br />a sewer tap, Mr. Pliska stated the reason <br />hE~ chose at this time not to request the <br />sE~wer connect is that the sewer line does <br />not run in front or adjacent to the lot, <br />so it would require a 166' of construction <br />on the road at $25.00 per foot plus the <br />addition of a sewer main manhole at $1,200, <br />and because of the additional expense chose <br />to put in a ceptic system. <br />Councilman Luce Inquired if we had any indication whether <br />at: any point and time these general group <br />of` lots intend to be annexed to the City, <br />or• has that ever been a question? <br />Administrator Wurl advised that at one time <br />the City solicited them for annexation, as <br />wee did other enclaves. He advised that we <br />have one application pending which will be <br />brought up at the next Planning Commission <br />meeting; and we had another application <br />which has been temporarily removed, that <br />is within the same area. <br />Annexation In reply to Councilman Luce's question if <br />he planned to apply for annexation in the <br />near future, Mr. Pliska stated he would be <br />very proud to be a part of Louisville proper. <br />The reason that he chose not to request <br />annexation at this time was that he was ad- <br />vised that there would be a 2-3 month delay. <br />If that were not a problem and he could <br />commence building at this time so that he <br />could move his family into a permanent dwelling <br />he would be glad to request annexation. <br />Councilman Leary Stated that Council did set a policy dealing <br />with undeveloped lots in Paradise Acres <br />where we stated that we wouldn't provide <br />services to unbuilt on lots as it was not <br />Council's intent to encourage growth outside <br />ou:r City limits. One of the issues there <br />was that it was not in our service area. <br />His question was - is this lot in our service <br />area? <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.