My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 2018 09 04
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
2018 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 2018 09 04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/19/2022 3:14:35 PM
Creation date
9/19/2018 12:42:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Original Hardcopy Storage
9C1
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 2018 09 04
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
14
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
City Council <br />Meeting Minutes <br />September 4, 2018 <br />Page 4 of 14 <br />request their dedications be deferred. If agreed by Council, those fees would need to be <br />paid when developed and be paid based on appraised values at that time. Ascent would <br />owe $173,079 now. Dean noted without this plat the Outlots would not be dedicated to <br />the City for future trail use. Staff also feels this development of the property may serve <br />to catalyze additional development. <br />Staff views the request as a subdivision modification request. Staff finds the application <br />meets the modification request requirements: it does not alter the essential character of <br />the neighborhood, it still meets the purposes set forth in the zoning code; there are no <br />other design alternatives, and there is no additional land we would like dedicated <br />through this process. Dean noted the options now are to require the full dedication fee, <br />accept the deferment request, or require an alternate means to satisfy the requirement. <br />Dean reviewed the options for trail design. Planning Commission and Open Space <br />Advisory Board prefer option B which elevates the trail. <br />Staff finds the PUD meets all requirements of the CDDSG and landscape design <br />standards. Dean reviewed the architecture. She noted the fiscal model shows there is a <br />$910,000 negative fiscal impact annually, but when the high and low scenarios are <br />factored in with possible commercial development on the property we could see positive <br />fiscal impacts with the development of the three properties. <br />Staff recommends approval. <br />Mayor Pro Tem Lipton asked about the private roads, he is concerned about allowing <br />private roads given previous issues with maintenance on private roads. He asked what <br />tools we have to enforce maintenance. Attorney Light stated we typically put in <br />subdivision requirements that the owner or successor is required to maintain the roads. <br />It makes sure there is a funding mechanism in place to pay for maintenance. <br />Mayor Pro Tem Lipton asked if those same mechanisms are in place in other areas. <br />Attorney Light stated no they were not included at that time. Mayor Pro Tem Lipton <br />wants to make sure we have a mechanism where the City can require maintenance. <br />Attorney Light stated additional language can be attached establishing the performance <br />standards for maintenance. Mayor Pro Tem Lipton stated he likes an option so the City <br />has the ability to enforce the maintenance. Dean stated the applicant is aware we are <br />looking to include an elevated level in the maintenance agreement and it will be <br />enforceable. <br />Councilmember Maloney asked if there is a landscaping requirement for phase 1 Dean, <br />stated yes there is a plan to implement landscaping with the church and any later <br />commercial development will alsobe required to meet landscaping requirements and <br />with the first development of either commercial property the sidewalk along 96th Street <br />will be installed. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.