My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1984 02 07
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1984 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1984 02 07
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:22 PM
Creation date
10/16/2008 2:29:14 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
2/7/1984
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E2
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1984 02 07
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
48
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
2/7/84 Page -4- <br />in future studies. <br />Services Mr. Ackerman advised that the services re- <br />port was given on February 2nd and again <br />this was an Educational report. Services <br />in the City of Louisville were found to <br />be at an appropriate level; although the <br />Youth Program lack of a Youth Program was an expressed <br />concern by some of the Task Force members. <br />Although the services are at an appropriate <br />level, some of the city personnel seem to <br />be working at levels and at tasks not best <br />utilizing their efforts. Because of this <br />the ability of the City to maintain the <br />present quality will be examined during <br />the assimulation process. The forthcoming <br />finance report should give some very valuable <br />information concerning this ability. <br />Councilman Leary Commented that there seemed to be a slightly <br />different conclusion in the two reports. He <br />felt that one was implying that planning in its <br />current state of the art is a process of <br />more explicity setting out goals and means <br />for attaining them. In their other report <br />there seemed to be more of an emphasis on <br />planning that would go back to more of <br />a zoning map and so you would predetermine <br />what your City was going to look like in <br />that format. Inquired of Mr. Ackerman and <br />Mr. Topf if there was a conflict or were <br />th.e reports :both saying the same thing? <br />Mr. Topf replied that after sepaking with <br />Mr. Hoffman he felt that the state of the <br />ar•t planning combines the zoning approach. <br />It: combines that with a lot of citizenery <br />ir.~put to establish the goals. Mr. Topf <br />felt that what they prescribed was traditional <br />planning and normative planning, which <br />basically established the goals. Now there <br />seems to be a new philosophy of policies <br />planning whereby guidelines are set for <br />construction, materials and methods - for <br />dE~nsities and recreational areas, etc. It <br />was his understanding that the physical pic- <br />ture of what the development would look like <br />would not be part of the planning process. <br />TYie physical picture is more a part of the <br />zoning process. He further stated that many <br />cities actively find developers to develop <br />tYiings in this specific manner. In our City <br />b<~sically the landowners do that, because <br />the developers basically own all the land <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.