Laserfiche WebLink
<br />ORDINANCE NO. 623 <br />PUBLIC HEARING <br />CONTINUED <br /> <br />January 16, 1979 <br />Minutes - page 15 <br /> <br />Exhibit #1, I think we can just call that plan that's <br />been prepared on the map, but, <br />Exhibit #2, is a copy of the annexation agreement <br />which the water rights, the well and the portion of <br />the property to be deeded to the City of Louisville <br />was agreed to by the owners. <br />Exhibit #3, would be the petition for annexation <br />which indicated in part that the territory pro- <br />posed to be annexed is urban or will be urbanized in <br />the near future. <br />Exhibit #4, is several pages that are copies of the <br />minutes of the Planning Commission in which this <br />matter was discussed on October 10, 1978. <br />Exhibit #5, is a letter addressed to Mr. Leon Wurl, <br />City Administrator from Mr. Paul Maxwell of the <br />County concerning certain open space desires <br />Exhibit #6, is an excerpt of the minutes of the <br />Aquarius annexation back in 1976, and I would just <br />like to make them part of the record. <br /> <br />Mayor: Fine, no objection. Mr. Porter you have <br />any further presentation to make. <br /> <br />Porter: Yes, I just wanted to complete my summary <br />Mr. Mayor. <br /> <br />Mayor: Okay, sure, thank you sir. <br /> <br />Porter: Generally rezonings are permitted only where <br />it is shown that there was an error in the original <br />zoning, or that conditions have so changed so as to <br />in the neighborhood so as to make a rezoning appro- <br />priate. However, in this case, we start off with the <br />what our position is that agricultural zoning, in the <br />City of Louisville, as applied to this particular <br />property is unreasonable and does not allow the property <br />owner a reasonable use of his property and is therefore <br />invalid. <br />However, if you took even the traditional tests for <br />rezonings we believe those are met in this case. <br />We believe that there was error in the original <br />zoning because the agricultural designation was <br />merely for the purpose of providing an interim zoning <br />category and would be unreasonable on a permanent basis <br />for an urban setting. We believe that because devel- <br />opment plans had not matured enough to really under- <br />stand what was going to take place that agricultural <br />zoning may have made sense at that time, but now <br />there is a proposal to develop the property as <br />residential used property. Furthermore, insofar as <br />changing conditions in the neighborhood and the <br />community, we would indicate right now City of <br />Louisville is anticipating some major land use changes <br />