Laserfiche WebLink
has acted within the provisions of the City Code and can move forward with the Preliminary Plat <br /> as proposed. He summarized the discussion from the worksession tonight where the consensus <br /> of the Council was to require the extension but allow the two parties (AKM Farms and Capstone) <br /> to negotiate the details of the extension and loss of lot(s) to Capstone because of the utility <br /> extension. <br /> Councilmember Riley stated that the Council discussed this item at worksession and part of the <br /> suggested action is to include utility access as that would be a good planning practice. He stated <br /> that element was not required earlier. <br /> Community Development Director Gladhill stated that it comes down to working with the <br /> property owner of Outlot C at the time of the original Preliminary Plat for the Capstone <br /> development. He provided background information on previous requests from Northfork Inc., <br /> the previous property owner of Outlot C, noting that the property owner first lobbied for <br /> including Outlot C in the MUSA but then in 2008 stated that they did not want the property <br /> included in the MUSA. He stated that the City reached out to Northfork Inc. to gather input on <br /> whether they would desire a utility extension and on density transitioning prior to the <br /> Preliminary Plat approval for the Capstone project and there were no objections. He noted that <br /> since that time, ownership of Outlot C has changed, and the desires of the new property owner <br /> are different. <br /> Councilmember Kuzma stated that it would make sense to extend the utilities and Capstone <br /> appears to be willing to work with that, if that is the City's desire. He stated that AKM Farms <br /> would like the extension, but the benefit will be for AKM to have that extension. He stated that <br /> AKM can still develop their property with septic and wells and therefore if the utilities are not <br /> provided, the property can still develop. He stated that he would prefer to have the developers <br /> work together to try to reach an agreement. <br /> Councilmember Shryock stated that there has been questions to having two developers work <br /> together and asked the type of agreement that the City would expect the developers to come to. <br /> She asked whether the City should decide whether or not it wants the utility extension. <br /> Community Development Director Gladhill noted that in order to make space for the utility <br /> extension, there would be a loss of lots from the approved Preliminary Plat for Capstone and <br /> therefore their objection would be compensation for the loss of lots. He noted that Capstone <br /> would be willing to forego the revenue from the home construction that would be lost but would <br /> want compensation for the loss of lots. He stated that the City would pay for the extension of the <br /> utility in terms of infrastructure using the trunk fund, but the discussion between the developers <br /> would need to occur in terms of the loss of value for the land itself. <br /> Acting Mayor LeTourneau stated that it was the consensus of the Council that staff could <br /> facilitate discussion between the two developers but that would be the limited role of the City in <br /> that discussion. He thanked the members from Capstone and AKM Farms that attended the <br /> worksession to further discuss the issue earlier tonight. <br /> City Council/June 26,2018 <br /> Page 6 of 13 <br />