Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />City of Centerville <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />April 23, 2003 <br /> <br />Mr. Runkle indicated that he has builders who are waiting for building. permits to begin <br />the homes in order to have new residents closed and in their homes by the time school <br />starts in the fall. <br /> <br />Mr. Runkle indicated that if the City would be willing to allow building permits they <br />would ensure that no CO's would be applied for until all the documents are recorded. <br /> <br />City Attorney Hoeft indicated he had spoken to Ground Development' sattomey and said <br />that Mr. Runkle is here to ask the City for a favor. He then said he has issues with that <br />because the documents are at the County for recording but there is a small chance that <br />there could .be an issue with the documents that would require amending them. He <br />further commented that the City's Ordinance requires that the documents be recorded <br />before issuing the building permits and he would not recommend Council circumvent the <br />ordinance to allow building permits in this instance. <br /> <br />City Attorney Hoeft indicated that the attorney for Ground Development asked if this had <br />been done for any other developers. He then indicated that it has not been done during <br />his tenure with the City and, if it was done previously, it was done by mistake and <br />mistakes do not set a precedent. <br /> <br />City Attorney Hoeft indicated the safe and conservative answer would be to require that <br />Ground Development wait until the documents have been recorded with the County. He <br />then said that he appreciates the position of Mr. Runkle but commented that the <br />development contract was approved by the City Council in August of last year and it <br />seems a little odd that this is being discussed in the middl~ of April to accommodate <br />builders by two weeks. <br /> <br />Council Member Capra asked why the documents were not filed with the County until <br />March. <br /> <br />Mr. Runkle indicated there were issues with the development contract approved by <br />Council that needed clarification. He then said that his attorney wanted to look at the <br />document for further clarification. City Attorney Hoeft commented that, with all due <br />respect, the review and back and forth correspondence could have taken place within 30 <br />days and did not need to take six months. <br /> <br />Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated that Council does not have the ability to <br />waive the requirements of an Ordinance. <br /> <br />City Attorney Hoeft indicated the only time the City has worked outside of its Ordinance <br />is when the sign ordinance was being reviewed for change and there was a sign coming to <br />town that would meet the new ordinance requirements. He then said he is not aware of <br />any impending ordinance changes that would accommodate this situation. <br /> <br />Mayor Sweeney indicated he felt the City needed to abide by the ordinance so as not to <br />set a precedent for future situations. <br /> <br />Page 3 of 11 <br />