Agenda - Parks and Recreation Commission - 08/11/1994

Home

I I I I I I I ! I I ! I I I I I I I CASE #: REQUEST FOR SKETCH PLAN REVIEW OF FOX KNOLL; C~SE OF MARK KLECKNER, FOX DEVELOPMENT CO. By: Zoning Administrator Sylvia Frolik Background: Mark Kleckner of Fox Development Company is requesting sketch plan review of Fox Knoll, a plat consisting of two 1 O-acre lots that will require construction of a street. Because of the required street construction, the plat must be processed as a full subdivision with a public hearing and preliminary plat', rather than as a minor subdivision. The following items are enclosed for your review and infor[nation: a) b) c) Site location map Proposed sketch plan City Staff review letter dated August 2, 1994 Observations: The subject property is in the Urban Reserve District for which there is a minimum lot size of 10 acres. The lots as proposed meet the minimum lot size requirement. It is anticipated that the property will be brought into the Metropolitan Urban Service Area (MUSA) boundary by the[end of 1994 and the property immediately south of this property will be sewered during 1995. Orice the property is brought into the MUSA, the development of the property must be at urban standards with City sewer and water. The developer is apprehensive that the cost to extend those services to this peninsula of high ground will be too great and prohibit economically sound development of the property. As in insurance measure, the developer desires to plat two 10 acre lots while he~ still can under the Urban Reserve District standards to ensure some return on his investment in the property if developing it at urban standards is not feasible. City Staff is of the opinion that the costs to extend sewer and water to this property for the creation of 20 to 30 lots will not be unreasonable. Therefore, the developer should apply for a prelim/nary plat approval to subdivide the property at urban standards. Following that, he could final plat two urban size lots and the remainder of the property could be platted as outlots for final plat approval and development when city sewer and water is available. If in the future it is determined that the cost to serve the area with city sewer and water is unreasonable, th,en the developer is not obligated to final plat the outlots, tn this scenario, the outlots would continue to provide the necessary area density for the two lots that are final platted to be developed under 4 in 40 density zoning with on-site septic systems. If in the future it is determined that the cost to serve the area with city sewer and water is reasonable, the developer simply has to apply for final plat approval of the outlots based on the approved prelimin~ ary plat.