My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1983 11 03
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1983 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1983 11 03
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:21 PM
Creation date
7/7/2009 3:02:15 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
11/3/1983
Original Hardcopy Storage
7C3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1983 11 03
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
26
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
<br />11/3/83 <br /> <br />Page -11- <br /> <br />school site, also the area that is proposed <br />for the recreation center. The major road- <br />ways thai: go through the development are <br />Pine St., Via Appia, and would connect with <br />Washington St. It was Director Rupp's under- <br />standing that McStain may be requesting an <br />increase to the council of what they had <br />originally proposed to the Planning Commission. <br />However they were not going to ask for this <br />consideration at this time and they intend to <br />stay with the number of original units that <br />were allocated for the entire Centennial <br />Valley development which was 1,596. Felt <br />that the number of units left to be developed <br />is 1,068. McStain would like to have some <br />flexibility within the plan to allow for <br />some density "transfers from one of the plan- <br />ning areas to another. Staff viewed this <br />as an acceptable proposal; however have also <br />indicated that we should not allow more <br />than a 10% variation. If it would exceed that <br />felt there would be cause for not approving <br />the proposal. On the other hand Director <br />Rupp felt that it was also important to look <br />at the fact that if any planning area shows <br />a decrease that would be 10% or more, this <br />should be reviewed. Felt that the 10% rule <br />would be a good way to apply the review pro- <br />cess. Each plan that comes in will have to <br />come through a subdivision and P.D.D. process. <br />A portion of the plan is for office use, which <br />would be allowed under our P.D.D. ordinance. <br />McStain will demonstrate on this plan what <br />they intend to do in the future and are <br />looking at having a comprehensive approach <br />at this time so that they have some assurance <br />in the future that they can rely on those <br />kind of land uses. Rupp felt that McStain <br />has been very cooperative with the staff <br />in trying to work out the densities that are <br />adjacent to existing parcels and proposed <br />future parcels and staff would recommend ap- <br />proval. <br /> <br />Discussion that any land use transfers would <br />have to have Council's approval. Also <br />Director Hioco depicted on the plan the location <br />of the variuous types of parks, open space <br />buffers, tot-lots, t1?ail systems. Stated <br />that there would also be a major park in <br />Heritage I, consisting of a large playground <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.