My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Agenda and Packet 1998 05 05
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
AGENDAS & PACKETS (45.010)
>
1990-1999 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
1998 City Council Agendas and Packets
>
City Council Agenda and Packet 1998 05 05
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:01:57 PM
Creation date
10/22/2009 4:30:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Packet
Signed Date
5/5/1998
Original Hardcopy Storage
5A2
Supplemental fields
Test
CCAGPKT 1998 05 05
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
95
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 />Lee stated that the issue between dedication and the easement was simply perception. He wanted art" <br />agreement that the .6 acres of the CTC is going to come out of the trail and what is left will come out <br />of the northwest comer of the property against the other open space. He stated for the record that <br />that is now the policy. Every other owner coming in to CTC has a 54% land dedication and a 46% <br />open space cash-in-lieu. On the setback on top of the ridge, it is 50' of dedication with a 20' setback. <br />He stated that that is the standard, irregardless of what the Commercial Guidelines say. <br /> <br />Howard did not want to see a whole bunch of cars. He wanted berming and landscaping to guarantee <br />not having a "sea of asphalt" on Hwy. 42 or 104th. <br /> <br />Sisk agreed with Howard's comments on the fee simple and item No.4. He wanted a perpetual <br />easement that the developer and his successors were responsible for. <br /> <br />Keany suggested that the restriction on internal signage be extended to Lots 5 -15 on Block 1, that <br />they all signage be internal facing only and not shine in neighbors back yards. <br /> <br />Mayer agreed with Howard's comments. <br /> <br />Lathrop wanted to see the landscaping, grading of the 110' easement. <br /> <br />Lee stated that when they submit a PUD for the first building out there, they will set a concept for <br />the entire length and a specific plan for the first building. Each building would have a speci.fic plan <br />within the concept for Lots 16, 17, 18, and 19 and Lot 1, Block 3 <br /> <br />Davidson moved that Council place Ordinance No. 1277, Series 1998, out for publication and a <br />public hearing set for February 17, 1998, seconded by Howard. <br /> <br />RESOLUTION NO.4, SERIES 1998 - FINAL SUBDIVISION REPLAT, FINAL <br />SUBDIVISION PLAT, AND FINAL PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN, TABLED BY <br />CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY 20, 1998 <br /> <br />Howard moved that Council approve Resolution No.4, Series 1998, Final Subdivision Replat, Final <br />Subdivision Plat, and Final PUD Development Plan for the Business Center at CTC with the <br />following amendments: <br />1.) The conveyance ofOutlots B, C, and D shall be by special Warranty Deed, the form <br />acceptable by the City and Title policy for the subject parcel shall be provided by the <br />subdivider. <br />2.) The PUD landscape plan shall be modified to correct sidewalk alignment shown on <br />the typical entry plan. The note and typical details shall be modified to be consistent <br />with the Final Plat and PUD. The final landscape plan shall be modified to increase <br />the calipers of deciduous trees from 2" to 2.5" and ornamental trees to be increased <br />to 2" calipers. <br /> <br />7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.