Planning Commission Minutes 2005 04 14

Home Browse Search

Planning Commission Meeting Minutes April 14, 2005 Page 3 of 14 proposal, additional language will be added to the Subdivision Agreement stating that additional easements and public improvements may be required at the time of an actual development proposal.  The Annexation Agreement also states that no further development will be allowed to the west of the existing building on the property. That condition has been specifically noted on the final plat document.  As a requirement of the preliminary plat, an additional 10 feet of right of way along Empire Road has been dedicated. The applicant’s engineer has provided conceptual design sections illustrating that it will be adequate to install the necessary public improvements.  The applicant has also dedicated various utility and drainage easements as have been requested by the City’s Engineering Staff.  An issue of discussion during the final plat processing has been to resolve surveying issues and potential conflicts between legal descriptions of the property and the property directly to the north, which is owned and used by the City.  The respective deeds for the two properties have a potential overlap along the northern property boundary. There are also several underground utilities and an irrigation ditch lateral in that area, which need to be adequately accommodated in appropriate easements.  After numerous discussions between all affected parties, including the City Attorney’s office, the proposal presented on the final plat represents a compromise acceptable to all parties. It concedes a portion of the City’s property to these owners, in return for their dedication of a total of 25 feet of exclusive utility and irrigation easements that are needed for the maintenance and operation of City sanitary sewer lines and the irrigation lateral.  The property is also located within the 100-year floodplain and has been noted in the final plat notes. For additional disclosure, staff is requesting that the note be expanded to advise prospective purchasers that no specific development rights should be inferred by the approval of the subdivision plat – any development is subject to approval of a floodplain development permit. Commission Questions: Dalton asked for clarification of the Annexation Agreement wording related to “no additional development west of the existing building”. Johnstone restated the wording. Lipton suggested that the condition be included until someone specifically asked to have it removed. Johnstone conferred that the Annexation Agreements contains valuable information specific to this property. Applicant Presentation: Jamie Hess, 5757 Arapahoe, Boulder, CO had no additional comments. Members of the Public: