2002 CC Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. ) City of Centerville February 13, 2002 Council Minutes City Attorney Hoeft indicated that matters of this type are typically handled by the Planning and Zoning Connnission prior to coming to Council' but said it is not required. He then recommended Council authorize sending out the letter by motion. Council Member Broussard Vickers asked that the proposed schedule be included in the letters that are sent out and said she would like to have the first public hearing at the Planning and Zoning level and the second at Council. Council determined that the first public hearing would be scheduled for March 5,2002 at the Plarmitlg ~ Zoning Commission meeting and the second public hearing would be scheduled for March 13, 2002 at the Council meeting. Motion bv CouDcD Member NeIsoD, secoDded. bv Coo.cD Member Capra to direct Statl to seDd out the letter as proposed bv the task force o. City letterhead aDd mctude the schedule for the public hearia2S. AU in favor. Modo. carried uDaDimously. 2. Mr. Bill Bisek (Powntown Watermain Extension) Ms. Moore-Sykes indicated she bad received a letter from the Church of St. Genevieve along with a memo from the EDC both in support of the watermain extension into downtown. Mr. Bill Bisek of 7098 Centerville Road apologized for not having information in Council packets but noted he bad a hard time getting the materials. He then commented that the EDC has been working on the downtown revitalization project for approximately eight years and will be unable to move forward on the revitalization without first having the infrastructure in place. Council Member Capra asked which of the downtown businesses are members of tbe downtown business owners association. Mr. Bisek listed the businesses for Council. Council Member Nelson asked whether those businesses are the ones in support of the water extension. Mr. Bisek indicated that those businesses are in support of the water extension. Mr. Bisek indicated that a petition was started approximately eight months ago and 35% of the property owners had signed it. He then connnented that be thought 35% is what is necessary to proceed with the project. He further commented that there were some negative comments at the public hearing and the matter came to a standstill. Mr. Bisek asked if the City could come up with some way of deferring the costs to those businesses and residents that do not want water in order for the project to proceed. He then suggested a bond referendum to allow the revitalization of downtown to proceed. Page 5 of25