Laserfiche WebLink
Planning & Zoning Board <br />August 14, 2002 <br />Page 33 <br />Premature Subdivision Standards and MUSA Allocation Criteria: These are included in <br />the General Provisions, Sec. 1002. A proposed plat will be compared to these standards <br />to ensure there is adequate infrastructure to support the plat. <br />Note that several items refer to the City's growth management policy. This policy, which <br />will set out specific methods to monitor growth and keep it at the desired level, will be <br />finalized by the City Council in the next few months. <br />Sketch Plan Review: An informal sketch plan step has been added. It is not mandatory <br />but is strongly recommended. Making it mandatory would start the clock on the review <br />deadline. This would not fit into our review process. Therefore, we will emphasize the <br />value of an informal sketch plan review process. Waexpect most developers will <br />participate. <br />Preliminary Plat: Requirements include a tre and .a phasing plan. <br />Tree Plan: The tree plan requirements do not m;e <br />percentage of trees. Rather, they require a completefi <br />affected by the development. City staff and the develo <br />saving trees, and the plan will then clearl rhte_h trees <br />saved. If trees are lost that were designat± <br />ratio. We will add text on page 1004.3f- <br />described in Section 1009, is mand <br />to preser : specified <br />Cory of all trees that will be <br />discuss the potential for <br />be lost and which will be <br />they must be replaced at a 2:1 <br />Free preservation plan, as <br />Phasing Plan: The required p <br />final platting of portions of the <br />might allow fifty loi <br />way, we can tra <br />future. <br />lan for e= dat will specify a schedule for the <br />ent. For example, the phasing of a 150 -lot plat <br />year, fifty next year, and fifty the next. This <br />1 be created in each of several years in the <br />One point fo <br />implements a pro <br />submitted as phase o <br />that a certain percentage <br />can be submitted? <br />page 1004.11, paragraph 16. As the developer <br />a final plat application for phase two will likely be <br />completion. The question is, should the City require <br />se one is built out before the fmal plat for the next phase <br />This requirement would ensure that the project is proceeding according to the schedule <br />rather than having a large number of lots platted but not selling. It is important that the <br />lots that are approved do get built on in order to meet the growth goals. On the other <br />hand, the demand for housing is so great that this probably will not be a problem, and <br />such a requirement may be more trouble than it's worth. If, developer A isn't on <br />schedule, do we give his MUSA to another developer? How do we track these once we <br />have a schedule of approved lots established for the next three years? <br />Two clarifications should be added to the text. On page 1004.4, requirements for the <br />preliminary plat sheet should include showing the delineated wetland boundaries and the <br />ordinary high water level of any protected waters. This will be added as paragraph 16. on <br />DRAFT MINUTES <br />