My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1989-12-05 Minutes
Centerville
>
Planning & Zoning
>
Minutes
>
1980-1989
>
1989
>
1989-12-05 Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/5/2010 10:27:49 AM
Creation date
1/5/2010 10:27:47 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Page Two <br /> P &Z Meeting Minutes <br /> December 5, 1989 <br /> Chairman Tourville stated that he did not think the City could <br /> legally place covenants on size, but that the City could rezone a <br /> property as to size of lots allowed. Chairman Tourville also <br /> explained the R2A and R2 zoning districts. R2A being the <br /> smallest (80' fronts - 10,000 square feet), R2 being medium <br /> density (100' fronts - 15,000 square feet) and that the next <br /> zoning district is R1 (10 acre parcels). He also referenced <br /> pages 80 and 81 of the Centerville Comprehensive plan as to the <br /> definition of R2A High Density. <br /> Cliff Thatcher stated that there would be a gradually phasing in <br /> of the development and did not know how may lots would be in each <br /> zoning district. He also stated that in respect to the Northern <br /> 2/3 of the development the lots would be greater than, but not <br /> much more than 1/2 - 2 units per acre, with 15,000 square foot <br /> lots being the smallest. He also felt that 2.3 units per acre was <br /> more economically feasible, and anything less than that would be <br /> to costly to them and the home owner. <br /> Liaison Pelton asked as to what his park plans would be with <br /> development. If the City requests Park land dedication would <br /> this still be feasible? The Park and Recreation Committee may <br /> request 10% or 3.7 acres of the land be donated to them for a <br /> future park. <br /> Cliff Thatcher stated that this would seem logical and that there <br /> would be no ponding in the park area. <br /> Liaison Pelton also stated that the traffic on Mill Road is a big <br /> problem. To avoid the erosion of lifestyle to the property <br /> owners there should be a buffer zone. She suggested that the <br /> lots to the North be deeper, and berming and landscaping could be <br /> included in the design of the development to act as a buffer <br /> zone. <br /> Chairman Tourville stated that berming and landscaping would be <br /> for aesthetics, but still does not keep children, ect. out of <br /> other persons property. It is difficult for the two lifestyles <br /> to coincide with each other. <br /> Cliff Thatcher expressed that the development could be done in <br /> two phases with the south part first and the north part being two <br /> or three years down the line. <br /> Liaison Pelton stated that the City may want to have Industrial <br /> and Commercial property expanded into the MUSA. <br /> Chairman Tourville expressed that the City should be able to <br /> expanded the MUSA if development in the City warrants it. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.