City Council Minutes 1994 10 04 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Wood: No, it doesn't. I think that is probably standard certificate language that maybe had been cut and pasted offa plat or a PUD and, basically, dropped into this document as is typically the practice to drop in certificates of this nature off of other documents. Griffiths: You wouldn't place any planning significance in terms of the use of that word on this particular document? Wood: I would place no planning significance on that. Griffiths asked if there was ever an overall PUD approved for the Centennial area that included Centennial II. Wood: No. Not to my knowledge. Griffiths asked if the map would constitute a PUD under the city's ordinances. Wood stated that it wouldn't have sufficient detail or establish any basis of relationship to adjoining properties, which would have to be done in terms of complying with existing PUD criteria. Griffiths asked Mr. Kottke, except for density and use, in his opinion, was the property is zoned R-E. Kottke: Yes. Griffiths stated that Kottke had suggested that the city had drafted the 1985 agreement. She wondered if he knew that for a fact. Kottke: No, I do not. Hoyt: I know that for a fact. I know that that agreement was drafted by the city from Rautenstraus' office with the other staff members inputting. Griffiths stated that in any of her responses to questions at this meeting, she did not want have her responses to be construed to concede that a valid contract exists between the city and the applicant. Her recommendation to the Council to apply the Special Review Use criteria, the PUD criteria, and the subdivision criteria was based on a series of issues, one of which was whether or not land use can legally be controlled by separate agreement, which she felt still remained a question. She did not want her comments to have conceded any points along those lines. Davidson: If these series of agreements are a binding contract, granting 162 units, does that mean that each thing 20