My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1982 01 19
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1982 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1982 01 19
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:19 PM
Creation date
7/9/2009 3:07:51 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
1/19/1982
Original Hardcopy Storage
7C3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1982 01 19
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
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 />1/19/82 <br /> <br />Page -5- <br /> <br />Biella the annexation request should be <br />sent to a vote of the people. He further <br />remarked that council has recognized that <br />the present comp plan is not viable, it <br />should have be~en amended every 3 to 5 years <br />and this was not done. It was his opinion <br />that Mr. Biella had followed all the pro- <br />cedures of the law and City ordinances. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN LEARY <br /> <br />Thought that council was faced with two <br />issues - first, the issue of following <br />proper procedure. There seemed to be a <br />misconception that the comp plan could not <br />be amended without periodic review. This <br />was not true -. a request for an amendment <br />to the comp plan could be done at any time. <br />Secondly, not to follow proper procedure <br />could be devastating from both legal and <br />policy perspectives. The integrity of <br />the comp plan applies to all types of good <br />planning, i. e ,. commercial, residential and <br />open space. By adhering to the proper pro- <br />cedure of thE~ comp plan the citizes of.. <br />Louisville have the opportunity to comment <br />on any changes. The intent relative to <br />open space is to give the landowner fair <br />value for his property. It was his opinion <br />it would be f&irly irresponsible to take <br />the issue to a vote at this time because <br />the proper procedures had not been followed. <br />The concept of a buffer zone, he thought, was <br />very critical to the City. This buffer <br />would help control strip development around <br />the Centennial Valley Mall establishing a <br />uniqueness. He remarked, -'in hls.:.gpinion, <br />commercial zoning would be a similar use <br />and would not always mean more tax dollars; <br />therefore firmly supported the open space <br />designation. <br /> <br />COUNCILMAN FERRERA <br /> <br />Stated the 150 signatures on the referendum <br />petition did not clearly represent a major- <br />ity of the people, and since only one per- <br />son spoke against the annexation request <br />at the public hearing, it seemed unfair <br />to repeal the ordinance without a vote of <br />the people. :Mr. Biella had spent approxi- <br />mately $10,000 for surveying, preparing <br />annexation papers and legal counsel, and <br />cooperated fully with all requests of the <br />City. When the previous council voted <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.