Minutes - Planning Commission - 04/09/2015

Home

point to Nowthen Boulevard was not up to code and was not engineered to manage the increase in traffic. It was his opinion that the developer's solution was ideal and should be pursued. Commissioner Bauer commented the school and church had much higher traffic counts than the new neighborhood would. Commissioner Nosan did not understand why it was better to force traffic to Highway 47. She was thoroughly against the proposed traffic flow and believed the access point on Nowthen Boulevard should remain open. Community Development Director Gladhill reported that this was the last opportunity for the Planning Commission to review the request. He noted that the Council would consider the final plats for the two phases separately. Commissioner Bauer misunderstood how the parcel was being platted. He explained that his motion would be to approve Phase I of the Harvest Estates Plat. Community Development Director Gladhill explained that this would entitle the developer to 32 lots within the development at this time. It would then be the hope that the remaining 12 lots would be developed at some point in the future, but there was a risk to the developer. Assistant City Administrator/Economic Development Manager Brama reported that Phase I of the development coincides with the Purchase Agreement and the remaining lots would remain outlots for development in the future. He questioned what the risk to the developer would be on the remaining 12 lots. Community Development Director Gladhill indicated there would be added risk to the developer, but reiterated that the Planning Commission was a recommending body to the City Council. Chairperson Levine questioned if the motion on the floor would breach the current Purchase Agreement. Community Development Director Gladhill stated there was a potential that the motion would conflict with the Purchase Agreement. Assistant City Administrator/Economic Development Manager Brama reviewed the approval process for the Preliminary and Final Plats of Phase I and II. He noted that this evening the applicant was requesting Preliminary Plat approval for both Phases I and II, while the Commission was suggesting approval of only Phase I. He commented that the Final Plat of Phase II could not be approved until after the property for Phase II was closed. He did not believe the intent of the Purchase Agreement would be broken by approving only Phase I of the Preliminary Plat. The only change would be the entitlement assumed by the developer. He indicated that the Commission was not proposing to change the lot sizes or design of Phase II. He questioned if the developer supported moving forward in this manner. Planning Commission/April 9, 2015 Page 8 of 16