My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2020-03-11 CC Minutes - Approved
Centerville
>
City Council
>
Minutes
>
2010-2023
>
2020
>
2020-03-11 CC Minutes - Approved
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/6/2020 6:37:41 AM
Creation date
6/6/2020 6:37:36 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
18
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).
View images
View plain text
City of Centerville <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />March 11, 2020 <br /> <br />attempting to make Centerville more business friendly and marketing the community to gain <br />business growth. <br /> <br />rd <br />Ms. Pam Kennedy, 1983 - 73 Street, stated that this has been mentioned several times and the <br />apartments would be a great place for the seniors to move to. She stated that she knows no senior <br />citizen that could afford $1,600 for rent. She stated Council stated that the project would bring in <br />$800,000 immediately for fees and revenue, etc. Part of that was $50,000 in building permits fees <br />and of that amount how much will the offset of the Inspector’s wage be of that for this project? <br />She stated that Council has provided that $800,000 would be received in revenue but you are not <br />showing expenditures that would be involved to take on this project. She requested that Council <br />discuss expenditures by the City associated with the project and the proposed revenue gained by <br />the development upon construction. Administrator Statz addressed the building permit revenue <br />and how the City’s two (2) inspectors would handle inspections versus other communities of <br />Centerville’s size contract for services and stated that basically these funds would be a pass <br />through. Ms. Kennedy asked whether additional staff would need to be hired to offset other duties <br />that these positions complete while providing inspection services to this project? Administrator <br />Statz stated that this is very difficult to judge whether with a project of this size is hiring additional <br />staff needed but he did not believe that the answer was yes. Administrator Statz stated that an <br />audience member questioned the capacity of the city’s infrastructure. He stated that the systems <br />are built to their capacity with one (1) water town, two (2) wells and four (4) lift stations. He stated <br />that the City incurred expenditures for all of this previously and would be currently paying itself <br />back. Administrator Statz stated that connection charges repay funds that were previously <br />expended and the City is in a good financial position which these funds. Ms. Kennedy asked how <br />long construction would last and Administrator Statz responded within roughly one construction <br />season. <br /> <br />Ms. Julie Lindsay, 1687 Sorel Street, stated that the apartment building would be directly across <br />the street from her home and that she would desire not to be sitting on her front deck looking at a <br />3-story apartment building with its associated vehicle traffic. She questioned if the proposed <br />development was best for Centerville and its residents? She stated that Council Members and City <br />Staff have received emails from residents and how many of those residents said “I just love the <br />idea of a 3-story apartment building located here”. She stated that she bet zero. Ms. Lindsay asked <br />why not something less invasive like townhomes on the parcel. <br /> <br />Ms. Melanie Nicks, 7029 Centerville Road, stated that she moved into the downtown area and did <br />not realize it was considered the downtown and does not understand why it is called that. She also <br />stated that if there was a 1-story apartment building or a few townhomes she felt that it was a better <br />fit in the area and she was fine with that. She felt that the building was too large for the parcel and <br />it was not a good fit for the area. She stated that she would rather have it remain vacant but knows <br />that that will not happen. She again stated that a smaller development would be easier to digest <br />for residents of the area and retain the small town feel. She felt that the Mayor’s concern for his <br />residency was not a good reason not to vote at this time as the Council Chambers were packed <br />with residents in opposition. Ms. Nicks stated that Council’s goal is to bring businesses to <br />downtown and there is only one retail space within the apartment complex. She questioned where <br />new businesses were going to go in the downtown area without buying owned property. She stated <br />that she believed the Main Street was where downtown should be. She questioned the City’s plan <br />for businesses. Mayor Paar referred back to the Comprehensive Plan and how it laid out the <br />Page 10 of 18 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.