My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1999-02-10
Centerville
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1996-2022
>
1999
>
1999-02-10
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/21/2009 10:31:26 AM
Creation date
12/21/2009 10:30:17 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
170
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
issues pertaining to traffic access from 20th Avenue into the development, since traffic flows at 55 <br /> mph. <br /> Ms. Gail Nadon (1984 73rd Avenue) noted concern that there is no designated park area and with <br /> the growth of the area there is no other access to play ground areas except via 20th Avenue. <br /> Ms. Jennifer Steward (1995 73rd Avenue) suggested a berm or trees be incorporated to buffer the <br /> R2 development from the town home development. <br /> Mr. Patterson questioned what trees would be saved or planted and what would happen to the <br /> drainage. Mr. Rehbein didn't plan to remove the trees on the property line and ultimately would <br /> not hinder the drainage. <br /> Ms. Steward felt that Mr. Rehbein's development should comply with the same 35' rear year <br /> setback requirement as the R2 district. <br /> Mr. Palzer explained with a PUD the developer works with the City on special issues including <br /> the setback requirements and wetlands. Mr. Dale Runkle (Bright Keys) explained that the <br /> proposed twin homes are single level units, that range 1220 sq. ft. to 1300 sq. ft. without the <br /> garage. The Bright Key development plans to price each unit around $130,000. <br /> Ms. Denise Saxton (1949 73rd Street) voiced a concern about mitigating the drainage from the <br /> existing development. <br /> Mr. Patterson questioned Staff if there is a street light maximum. Mr. Palzer replied that street <br /> lights are spaced every three houses. However, the City pays for street lights and is considering <br /> eliminating some street lights. <br /> Mr. Buckbee questioned why is the width of the proposed streets are thinner than normal and why <br /> are there fewer setback requirements than in the R2 district. Mr. Rehbein commented that the <br /> • streets are the same width as in the Willow Glen development and the setbacks are negotiable <br /> within a PUD. The PUD preserves the natural setting within a development. Thus, some of the <br /> setbacks are less than the R2 requirements. <br /> Chair Welk replied that the City reserves the right to request park dedication funds or park land. <br /> Also, the PUD is designed to embrace the natural settings of the parcel. Chair Welk read aloud <br /> Ordinance #4 51.01 PURPOSE. <br /> To encourage a more creative and efficient development of land and its improvements <br /> through the preservation of more restrictive application of zoning requirements such as lot <br /> sizes heioht and building setbacks while at the same time meetings the standards and <br /> purposes of the comprehensive plan and preserving _the health_ safety and welfare of the <br /> citizens of the City. <br /> 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.