My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
08-27-2003 Council Minutes
>
City Council Meeting Minutes
>
2000-2009
>
2003
>
08-27-2003 Council Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/14/2009 1:28:34 PM
Creation date
7/18/2008 3:36:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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).
View images
View plain text
MINUTES <br />CITY COUNCIL <br />AUGUST 27, 2003 <br />Conclusion: The proposed Final Plat differs substantively from the approved Preliminary <br />Plat that was reviewed extensively by the City and the public at the public hearings. The <br />changes go far beyond the requirements and conditions attached to the Preliminary Plat <br />approval. The differences result in a need to hold a new public hearing on the revisions to <br />the Preliminary Plat prior to action on the Final Plat. <br />Von Riedel indicated that there are a number of items in the Findings of <br />Fact that they disagree with on points of law, that is, the courts have <br />interpreted some issues one way and staff has interpreted the issues <br />another way. There are also a number of deficiencies listed that they have <br />not seen before, therefore, are not prepared to respond. Von Riedel <br />disagreed with the position that the Final Plat is significantly different <br />from the Preliminary Plat. <br />Fahey stated that he understands the issue with the court's interpretation of <br />the road right-of--way and the Williams Pipeline easement. Fahey pointed <br />out, however, that the City has an ordinance that the court was not aware <br />of in its consideration that may impact that decision. Fahey stated that <br />there a~~e significant differences between the Preliminary Plat as approved <br />by the Council and the proposed Final Plat. Fahey also noted that the <br />many conditions of Preliminary Plat approval have not been complied <br />with in the Final Plat. Fahey stated that, for whatever reason, the <br />developer has felt justified in not complying based on either his own <br />interpretation of the conditions or based on a feeling that a court may be <br />sympathetic. <br />Anderson asked if staff was obligated to notify a developer of the City's <br />ordinance, or was the developer obligated to review and apply the City's <br />ordinances. The City Attorney reported that the developer is obligated to <br />review and apply City ordinances in preparing development proposals. <br />Fahey stated that it was his feeling that the developer has not taken to <br />heart what staff and the Council has been telling him with regard to this <br />development proposal. Fahey felt that the time had come to act on the <br />proposed Final Plat, and he was accepting of the recommendations of the <br />City's consultants and staff. <br />Fahey asked if there was anyone from the general public present wishing <br />to comment on this matter. <br />Barbara Allen, McMenemy Road, stated that the Final Plat is a significant <br />change from the Preliminary Plat that was approved by the Council. Allen <br />questioned comments made by the developer relative to the changes being <br />minor when it was clear to her that the changes were significant. Allen <br />10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.