City Council Minutes 1974 05 14 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Mr. Hollenbeck stated Sproul feels that without question the legal procedure in the annexation agreement where the land can be brought within the jurisdiction of Louisville, but under the circumstances where Louisville really has no committments to the land unless the land owner satisfies the requirements that are contained in the annexation agreement. Mr. Hollenbeck stated that in other words nothing can be done on the land until the requirements in the agreement have been complied with and the obligations do not arise until the land owner has com- plied with his agreement. He stated that the land could be annexed and then broken into phases and before another phase could be started all the requirements would have to be ful- filled before the certain phase could be started. Mr. Wurl questioned the ownership of the land at the time applying for annexation. Mr. Hollenbeck stated that Sproul had provided to Mr. Morris a week prior to the meeting, material indicating that as of December 14, 1973, the date on which the petition was signed by Fred C. Sproul, Inc. and on December 18, 1973, the date it was filed with the City of Louisville, the owner of the property was Fred C. Sproul, Inc. The suggestion that the owner was not the corporation at the time of signing and petitioning was not valid. Mr. Hollenbeck stated that the letter from the title company should be sufficient proof, however, if there is a wish for more proof he stated that it could be provided. Mr. Morris stated that the ownership was shown to him by the title company and is indicated on the deeds. The copies of the deeds that were shown to Mr. Morris afterwards at a meeting were not from Fred C. Sproul, Inc., but from Fred C. Sproul Land Development which would not pass title. Mr. Hollenbeck stated that he would agree that on the date the petition was signed and submitted the ownership should have been Fred C. Sproul, Inc., and it obviously was. He stated that they thought it still was, but if it was not they felt that it did not have any legal consequences except the fact that the City would want the parties owning the land to sign the annexation agreement. Mr. Wurl stated that it was important that Council understand what was being stated as there was an attorney representing some environmental group that outlined somewhat to the opposite. Councilman DiCarlo asked if during the course of the work session and the eventual possibility that the annexation is approved and the City comes upon a situation that there is more than one land owner and signatures must be acquired, can the City also revoke the intentions that have been made. Mr. Morris stated that once an annexation is made it must be accepted, then another ordinance can be made to withdraw the annexation. He stated that it would be his suggestion that prior to the final passage, that the City have a firm annex= ation agreement with Sproul.