Laserfiche WebLink
Wood: As a conceptual Master Plan and not a PUD. <br /> <br />Griffiths: <br /> <br />To the best of your knowledge, have all of the <br />developments within the Master Plan area, prior to <br />Centennial II, been approved as PUD's? <br /> <br />Wood: <br /> <br />Yes, by separate subdivision action and PUD action. <br /> <br />Griffiths: <br /> <br />Each individual development would have come before <br />the City Council for PUD approval. Is that your <br />understanding? <br /> <br />Wood: <br /> <br />Yes. <br /> <br />Griffiths: <br /> <br />The applicant in each case would have been McStain <br />or the owner of the property. Is that correct? <br /> <br />Wood: <br /> <br />Yes. <br /> <br />Griffiths: <br /> <br />To the best of your knowledge, has Centennial II ever <br />been included within any other PUD, subdivision, or <br />Special Review Use approved by the City Council? <br /> <br />Wood: No. <br /> <br />Griffiths asked if the conceptual Master Plan was a document that would have been prepared by the <br />city or by someone else. <br /> <br />Wood stated that it had a McStain title block. Normally, these documents are prepared by the <br />applicants of the requested action. <br /> <br />Griffiths asked, concerning the Planning Commission certificate, if it was considered to be a plat. <br /> <br />Wood: <br /> <br />I don't think the certificates define the document. <br />Generically, a plat could be a conceptual plan. I don't <br />associate the word "plat" with any specific type of land <br />use request. I would look to the title block (to see <br />what the document was). <br /> <br />Griffiths asked, if Wood looked at the Clerk & Recorder's certificate, which states that she certifies <br />that this PUD was filed in her office at 3:53 p.m. on February 28, 1986, and was duly recorded and <br />signed by Charlotte Houston, Recorder and Deputy Deborah Sisson, would that mean that the <br />document was a PUD? <br /> <br />19 <br /> <br /> <br />