04/07/2008 Council Minutes (3) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

• CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION APRIL 7, 2008 APPROVED 135 addressed the council. Their development called Main Street Village is planned for the 136 area of 35E and Otter Lake Road (site plan shown). The issue at hand involves relocation 137 of an existing driveway to an existing bank facility. A relocation agreement is a condition 138 of their conditional use permit and final plat. The driveway was put in on their land 139 without their permission and now the rest of the land is being held hostage from a grading 140 permit based on this condition and that could lead to tenant and project trouble. The 141 response of the bank has been the developer can relocate the driveway but at no cost to 142 the bank. The developers feel it is an unfair situation since they must bargain with the 143 bank but the condition leaves them unarmed. They would prefer to deal with it as a 144 private matter. The city should let them make their case by removing the condition. The 145 allowance for a grading permit is of vital importance to the development and should be 146 their focus instead of dealing with the other problems. 147 148 The council confirmed that the driveway was allowed on the land without the agreement 149 of Azure but now they are being required to get an agreement to get it moved. 150 151 The developers confirmed that they want to be able to resolve the matter but to be able to 152 move forward with their project while that is negotiated (allow issuance of grading 153 permit). 154 155 Director Grochala announced that the developer can receive a grading only permit 156 (without a final plat approval) without having this done. They currently have a draft 157 agreement that represents a grading only allowance. 158 159 The developers argued that the agreement includes or seems to imply many requirements 160 of the final plat and they'd like to get a better understanding of the real requirements for 161 just grading. 162 163 There was discussion about the city's responsibility for the development of the bank and 164 who allowed the driveway where it is. The developer claimed that they never gave 165 permission for the driveway or easement or anything. 166 167 City Planner Jeff Smyser noted that the City received only one application for the original 168 bank development. At that time, it was the City's understanding that the property would 169 be subdivided and the bank built. The City didn't have any awareness of agreements past 170 that. It was found later that the subdivision was never recorded. 171 172 The council concurred that the matter is legal and without legal input, they wouldn't feel 173 comfortable amending past agreements or conditions. 174 175 The developer stated that their goal is to have the condition removed from the final plat 176 approval. They do understand that they can move forward with a request for a grading 177 only permit and do want to "move dirt" this season. 178