City Council Agenda and Packet 1973 02 20

Home Browse Search

-Z-? p•7* v � 't- �• y, wn•.77r.J nc ire• 1 i `•'=s-yr- .wr•�r 7"4 „'_'`T• . h Res Leoe Rage TA • mumAities closer to the Dover cote area become satwreted with p>ulation, the people will begin living further from their work places. The .at. 1970's and during the 1910 decade is when the City of Louisville will probably be exper- iencing this effect which will cause the growth rate of the City to increase. The Louisville Comprehensive Development Plan projected the population of the City to be 6,500 in 1960 and 13.000 in 1990. The projected population figure is extremely high when compared to other population projections completed by different government agencies and may need to be reevaluated. Also, the growth projections that were stated In the plan may not result in the orderly develop- ment service Op accommodate the high growth rate and may treats undue hardship on the financial capabilities of the City. The succeeding table states tee growth as projected by the three eetho+ds: POPULATION AVERAGE POPULATION INCREASE PER YEAR near near •~ Year Regression Decade Comprehensive Regression Decade Comprehensive Pro ion T nd Plan Projection Trend Plan _•1,1 1970 2,409* 2,409* 2,409* «_ 1980 2,534 2,800 6,500 12.5 39 409 • - * Actual -copulation Population Trend immpllcation on Pm•oposed DtwlopmmmRnt — There would be 642 dwelling units developed on the land in question. According to the 1970 Census of Population there was an average of three (3) people per housing unfT In the nfy and i was assumed for this analysis that the figure would remain constant. Then, utilizing this standard. It was determined that the proposed development would result in an additional 1.926 people to the population of the City. The increase in population caused by the development would create an increase demand of municipal services which will be discussed later. A quick glance at the information contained in the preceding table would indicate that this development would result in a supply of housing far above the projected population increase. Also, it indicates that if this annexation was approved it would provide land for growth of the City fob a much longer period of time than ten (10) years. Generally, experience suggests, that: (1) the high cost of land caused by speculation and excessive land improvements tend to price land 'out of the market" for immediate improvements; (2) a general prevalence of overpriced land fnflLtes sales prices and rants, thus tending to reduce demand; (3) an oversupply of subdivided land ultimately depresses prices and causes finan- cial difficulties for developers; and (4) lot prices are more representative of free market action and more sensitive to demand f1m►':tuatloas than other housing production costs. --- --.�... - _ 1 �..,ti_...a - _..,