Laserfiche WebLink
City of Centerville <br />Council Meeting Minutes <br />March 14, 2007 <br /> Council Member Lakso questioned the proposed completion date of the park. <br /> <br />Mr. Amundsen stated that it is the Committee’s desire to have the park open sometime in <br />July of 2007. <br /> <br />Mayor Capra questioned the dollar amount requirement for bids/proposals. Attorney <br />Glaser replied, $50,000. <br /> <br /> Mr. Amundsen stated that the only bid at this time is for the construction/materials for the <br /> pavilion. <br /> <br />VII. OLD BUSINESS <br /> <br /> <br />1.Planning & Zoning Commission’s Recommendation: Hanzal Subdivision <br /> <br /> <br />a. <br />Resolution #07-008, Approving Comprehensive Plan Amendment <br /> <br />b. <br />Proposed Ordinance #18, Second Series, Rezone from P-1 (Public/Semi- <br />Public) and From R-5 (Single Family Residential Estate) to R-2 (Single <br />Family Residential) <br /> <br />c. <br />Preliminary Plat Approval <br /> <br />d. <br />Request for Variance (Lot 6) <br /> <br />Mayor Capra stated additional information and comments on this issue would not be <br />addressed as several public hearings had been held over the past three months. She stated <br />that all residents had been notified in writing within 350‘ of the proposed development of <br />the public hearings per State Statute. She stated, based on the recommendation of the <br />City Attorney, she would not accept further statements or documentation on the subject. <br />She mentioned individuals could submit additional information for inclusion in the file, <br />but that those items will not be considered in the Council decision. <br /> <br />Mayor Capra moved to the checklist on how the Planning and Zoning Commission and <br />City Council worked on all issues. <br /> <br />City Attorney Glaser stated that fact finding was completed by the Planning and Zoning <br />Commission through a series of meetings constituting public hearings. He stated the <br />Hanzals requested a modification (10 foot variance) to the original submission. He <br />pointed out additional comments were taken at that time. <br /> <br />City Attorney Glaser explained that the Planning and Zoning Commission debated on the <br />variance and made factual findings and recommendations. Attorney Glaser stated that <br />the recommendations were then forwarded to Council for consideration. He stated the <br />next step would be for Council to approve the variance requested, approve the associated <br />comprehensive plan amendment and preliminary plat or deny same.. <br /> <br />City Attorney Glaser defined the issues discussed concerning the variance. He stated the <br />Planning and Zoning Commission struggled with the fact there is no right or wrong <br />Page 5 of 13 <br />