Laserfiche WebLink
final plat request that is inconsistent with the approved preliminary plat, and would <br />make final plat review a much simpler process. The City would riot be debating <br />unresolved design issues during a final plat review. This clause could include a <br />statement that says that a final plat that is inconsistent with the approved preliminary <br />plat would be grounds for denial of the final plat. <br />The first item is designed to reiterate the fact that the City may reject a proposed plat <br />where the applicant has not complied with ordinance or design standards, whether <br />these items are listed in the Ordinance explicitly, or are design recommendations of the <br />staff. One of the issues challenged by the Preserve developers is that the Engineer's <br />recommendations were technically met since they had designed (through the use of <br />extensive retaining wall systems) a way to resolve grading issues. <br />The second item is a clause that is already present in the Zoning Ordinance, and would <br />be added to the Subdivision Ordinance. Under this clause, a proposed design feature <br />just be explicitly permitted by the Ordinance, otherwise it is presumed to be prohibited. <br />The issue raised in the Preserve case relates to design features that the City is unwilling <br />to permit, but because they are not specifically disallowed by the Ordinance, the <br />applicants claimed that they could be used. <br />The third item is enforced by some communities in the Twin Cities area. One of the <br />issues that can be raised by projects that go through a series of revised plans and <br />conditional approvals is the existence of a plan that represents the actual approval of <br />the City. By requiring that such a plan is submitted prior to Final Plat application, the <br />final review process is streamlined significantly, and the City can positively identify the <br />approved preliminary plat. Because the preliminary plat grants legal rights, some <br />communities have refused to allow final plat submissions without a revised preliminary <br />plat drawing. <br />Planning staff will have examples of ordinance language available for Planning <br />Commission review. <br />pc: Kathy Glanzer <br />Steve Westerhaus <br />Lee Elfering <br />Greg Schroeder <br />