My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1991 10 15
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1991 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1991 10 15
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:33 PM
Creation date
6/16/2006 2:06:05 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
10/15/1991
Original Hardcopy Storage
2E3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1991 10 15
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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 /> --,' <br />Storck: Cherrywood in the southeast would be 5500 to 6000 <br /> square feet. These lots are actually larger than those <br /> for the most part. <br />Hornbostel: We have an open space dedication, where is? Is it <br /> Outlot A? <br />Shonkwiler: The open space dedication for all of Centennial Valley <br /> was satisfied with the 406 acres out of the 882 that were <br /> dedicated to the City at the time of annexation and <br /> replat. The open space dedication for all of Centennial <br /> Valley had been accommodated with the 45% of the <br /> ground that we gave to the City. <br />Hornbostel expressed her concern that the City is building homes and not providing places <br />for the residents to gather. Hornbostel felt that a regional park should be looked into, but <br />that would be in the future and that would not help the current situation. <br />Davidson: The associated development that was originally planned <br /> to be with this, what is the effect of that not coming in <br /> at this time? <br />Franklin: There is no direct affect in my opinion because the <br /> project was marketed and designed as a completely <br /> introverted and closed kind of project. It was for empty <br /> nesters, folks without children who wanted an <br /> independent lifestyle with low maintenance, walls <br /> around the development and some sense of security. <br /> Almost the antithesis of a wide open single family <br /> project like you have before you tonight. The reason <br /> for the notation in the condition in the resolution is if <br /> the land or a portion did come in for single family, that <br /> it be integrated or time be spent to redesign Phase III <br /> to integrate the future single family area if it was <br /> feasible. <br />Davidson: Is the question then a matter of access to this next piece <br /> of property? <br />Franklin: Yes, fundamentally access... <br />Davidson: The road would have to be redone? <br /> 20 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.