Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />City of Centerville <br />February 27, 2002 <br />Council Minutes <br /> <br />Council Member Broussard Vickers noted that change was to be consistent with state <br />law. <br /> <br />Council Member Broussard Vickers on Page 19 pointed out a corrected double negative. <br /> <br />Council Member Broussard Vickers noted the change on Page 20 changed the word <br />minimum to maximum. The Change on Page 20 makes a change to include all buildings <br />in the site review process. The new language allows time for publishing and staff review <br />of the site plan. <br /> <br />Council Member Broussard Vickers on Page 21, it is double worded so the language <br />except during inclement weather approved in the fee structure is struck out. <br /> <br />Ms. Moore-Sykes asked that the second version of the language be left in because it <br />included the escrow language in it. <br /> <br />Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated that Page 26 starts the addition of the <br />commercial and industrial information that Mr. Palzer had asked to have added back into <br />the Ordinance to help with enforcement. <br /> <br />Mayor Swedberg pointed out that the added language refers to Section 36 for off street <br />parking and he does not find a Section 36. He then asked Staff to double check to make <br />sure the sections were properly referenced. <br /> <br />Council Member Broussard Vickers asked if a table of contents was available. Ms. <br />Moore-Sykes indicated there was not a table of contents available at this point. <br /> <br />Council Member Nelson asked why this language needed to be added to dIe Ordinance. <br />Mr. Palzer indicated Council would need to take that up with Planning and Zoning. <br /> <br />Council Member Broussard Vickers indicated this wording was presented by Mr. Palzer <br />and the Planning and Zoning Commission thought it seemed reasonable. <br /> <br />Mr. Palzer indicated the language was in Ordinance #4 but was accidentally eliminated. <br /> <br />Council Member Broussard Vickers said she felt the language was inadvertently left out <br />and noted there was no concern at Planning and Zoning as to whether it needed to be in <br />the Ordinance because it was based on Staff recommendation based on problems with <br />enforcement. <br /> <br />Council Member Capra noted a lot of the language is the same as what is in the <br />residential part of the Ordinance. She then indicated she did not see anything that was <br />confusing even thought it seems duplicative. She further indicated that Mr. Palzer had <br />presented the language to assist with enforcement and she does not have an issue with it. <br /> <br />Page 18 of24 <br />