My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1982 10 19
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1982 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1982 10 19
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:20 PM
Creation date
7/8/2009 3:18:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
10/19/1982
Original Hardcopy Storage
7C3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1982 10 19
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
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
<br />Councilman Fauson <br /> <br />Councilman Leary <br /> <br />ACCEPTANCE OF THE CITY <br />ATTORNEY'S REPORT <br /> <br />CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT <br />FEDERAL AID URBAN SYSTEMS <br />MAP UPDATE APPROVAL <br /> <br />Councilman Ferrera <br /> <br />Councilman Ferrera <br /> <br />Councilman Fauson <br /> <br />APPROVAL <br /> <br />10/19/82 <br /> <br />Page -14- <br /> <br />Inquired what criteria is used in the review <br />of the non-conforming use. <br />Rautenstraus advised i. e., percentages of <br />business, percentages of traffic, whether <br />the entertainment is there for long periods <br />of time without the establishment being operated <br />as a restaurant, etc. <br /> <br />Suggested that one of the councilmembers in <br />that Ward go to the establishment several <br />nights a week to view the situation. <br /> <br />Councilman Fauson moved, Councilwoman Morris <br />seconded that the City Attorney's report be <br />accepted and placed on file. Question called <br />for. All in favor. Motion carried. <br /> <br />Mayor and councilmembers had a copy of a memo <br />from the City Engineer addressing this item. <br /> <br />Inquired of Engineer Blanchard what the re- <br />visions of the map were. Blanchard advised <br />the primary one was the street classification, <br />i.e. Lafayette has 287 thru their City, while <br />Louisville has only a small portion of 42 <br />which did not balance out percentage wise on <br />classification. It does not effect the City <br />on funding, but does effect the level they <br />wanted for a collector or arterial street. <br />Also there were a few systems where the Federal <br />people felt the City had duplicated that they <br />didn't feel were necessary. <br />Noted on the map that Bella Vista Drive stopped <br />at 96th St. rather than going to Hiway 42, he <br />inquired if the map was published would the <br />City be frozen into that type of road? <br />Blanchard replied - no. It was a boundary line <br />rather than a street line. <br />his <br />Commented it was/impression the line was an <br />easement that was dedicated to the City by <br />the railroad and is not within the City limits. <br /> <br />Councilman Ferrera moved, Councilman Cussen <br />seconded that the Federal Aid Urban Systems <br />Map revision be approved. Question called for. <br />All in favor. Motion carried unanimously. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.