City Council Minutes 1991 10 15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

--" potentially more active areas. Griffiths: I thought I understood you so say, Mr. Shonkwiler, that you did not agree with the current wording of condition no. 1, is that true or not true? Shonkwiler: In candor, I have not seen the specific wording for that condition, but I believe that it aludes to Mr. Storck developing that property, in which case I would agree with the wording. Griffiths: The language that I have says that "If Storck or the then owner/subdivider of Cherrywood II acquIres land adjoining Cherrywood II for development of single family homes..." Shonkwiler: I do not object to condition no. 1. Griffiths: Would there be a sale of a portion of that property ever, so that a portion of it would adjoin Cherrywood II, but not an area further north or some other location, and if so what would happen in that circumstance? Franklin: If condition one were implemented and in effect the only concern would be if someone other than Storck proposed single family detached residential adjoining Cherrywood II. The City and Homart couldn't afford to let that happen, especially if Phase III of Cherrywood II were built. The condition really says that if Storck purchases that piece adjoining Cherrywood II then they agree prior to Phase III construction of Cherrywood II to come back in and replat and hook that area into the street system. Griffiths: If Storck sells the property to someone else does that other person become the owner/subdivider of Cherrywood II? Franklin: The condition still remains the same, that is why Storck or then owner/subdivider, regardless of who's building Cherrywood II, when the time comes for Phase III whoever owns Cherrywood II and is proposing to build single family homes on that vacant ground must stop and replat that area for integration with Phase III. 23