My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2006-12-27 CC Packet
Centerville
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1996-2022
>
2006
>
2006-12-27 CC Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/27/2006 7:59:42 AM
Creation date
12/22/2006 12:54:34 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
147
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
<br />City of Centerville <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />December 13, 2006 <br />the building is extremely modem building and being located in close proximity to <br />commercial townhomes. <br /> <br />Council Member Lakso commented that the site has gone from nine (9) buildings down <br />to (3) and now has this proposed large structure. <br /> <br />Mayor Capra said that she feels that the City needs to make a good choice on how to <br />make this work on the site. <br /> <br />Council Member Lee commented that one of the selling points was that these buildings <br />looked like townhomes and this new building does not blend into the residential area very <br />well and the screening does not help it to blend in. <br /> <br />Mayor Capra said that this building will be there for many years so it is important that it <br />fits and looks appropriate on the site. <br /> <br />Mr. Keleher indicated that from the CUP approval at the Planning Commission there are <br />conditions and the two that are subjective are color and style of the building. He then <br />asked what direction to go with on this building. <br /> <br />Mayor Capra said that she took some pictures of some buildings in the area that will be <br />reviewed later. <br /> <br />City Attorney Glaser explained that the Developer was granted some concessions on <br />parking spaces, the trail easement and waiver of park dedication fees and some screening <br />and drainage issues. So, the opinion is, if this is another commercial structure and the <br />Developer was granted, on the other plan, concessions, the City would like to know if the <br />Developer intends to return the money and add the parking spaces back in that were <br />granted for the other design. <br /> <br />Mr. Keleher indicated he met with Mr. Larson on changing the parking spaces from 22 to <br />14. He then said that when they presented the original plan there was a study on how <br />many spaces were needed per office and that is how they arrived at seven (7) per building <br />for a total of 14. He further said that the number of parking spaces per office is working <br />out well and the need for the three buildings is 142 and they have provided 149 and that <br />meets the requirements. <br /> <br />Council Member Lee indicated that the City has a standard per square foot of building <br />and that is where the 2~ spaces came from and the reason the concessions were made <br />earlier is because Council felt that this design would need only 14 but the standard was <br />22 and that same standard would apply to this new building. <br /> <br />City Attorney Glaser asked if the Developer had done any parking studies to justify the <br />claim that fewer than the Code required parking stalls would be adequate. <br /> <br />Page 7 of 19 <br /> <br />9 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.