City Council Minutes 1986 07 01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

this is looking out for our long-term benefit and it only makes sense that we go ahead and do it. Scarpella agreed that this is a long-term benefit for the City of Louisville. "Whether we do anything with it at this time, lets include it in the Comp Plan. Then if we have the opportunity to do something with it, its there." Vote on Amendment #1 - Councilman Mohr moved that Amendment #1 be adopted. Councilman Scarpella seconded. By Roll Call Vote, Amendment #1 to the Louisville Comprehensive Plan was passed unanimously. Amendment #2 (Prior to discussion on Amendment #2, Sackett asked to be excused as a matter of possible conflict of interest.) Anderson stated that all entries to the City of Louisville should maintain visual integrity. The fact is the City is adding more definitive restrictions than just maintaining a 1500' buffer. More specific control is being added to the Comp Plan. Anderson commends the Planning Commission for coming up with the concepts of these restrictions as i~t will protect the City of Louisville. Carnival feels that this proposed amendment still addresses the intent of the 1500' buffer and allows the City to "have our cake and eat it too." Mohr concurred with both Anderson and Carnival. This seems to be a more comprehensive way of dealing with the issue of the 1500' setback. The PUD process is what setsthe more practical stage for specific considerations at this time. Mayor Fauson feels that the 1500' buffer is no longer valid and this concept has a much better way of dealing with the issue. Vote on Amendment #2 - Mayor Fauson moved that Amendment #2 be adopted. Councilman Carnival seconded. By Roll Call Vote, Amendment #2 to the Louisville Comprehensive Plan was passed 6 yeses; 0 nos. (Councilman Sackett was excused and abstained from voting on this amendment.) (Prior to voting on Amendment #3, Sackett reentered the meeting.) 9