Laserfiche WebLink
could be made to the Preliminary Plat in the future. He stated that it would be likely that AKM <br /> would object to that. He referenced the Capstone development which was mentioned, <br /> Brookfield, and stated that a new Preliminary Plat was submitted throughout the process. <br /> City Administrator Ulrich stated that if the motion was silent on the utility extension at this <br /> point, a future phase could include that condition. <br /> Community Development Director Gladhill noted that the Council could add that condition <br /> through a future Preliminary Plat approval or Final Plat approval. He noted that could be <br /> independent of construction or included in construction of a future phase. <br /> Councilmember Shryock stated that the Council needs to decide whether it wants to require the <br /> utility extension or whether that extension could succeed or fail based on the negotiation of the <br /> developers. She believed that the Council should decide whether the connection should be <br /> required. She asked if there is further benefit to the community by providing that utility <br /> extension. She stated that the services would not be pulled into Northfork and would only serve <br /> Outlot C. She asked if it would then be worth it for the City to require the extension to go <br /> through the development with the sole purpose of serving Outlot C. <br /> Councilmember Kuzma stated that the City has already given approval for the plat in existence <br /> and did not believe that the City could require the extension at this time. <br /> Councilmember Shryock stated that because it is of limited value of the community, she would <br /> not require the connection and therefore the issue should be left to the developers. <br /> Acting Mayor LeTourneau stated that in regard to benefit, extending utilities could equate to a <br /> high value development not but for the utility connection. He stated that not everyone would <br /> agree with that comment. He stated that the other side would put that burden back on the <br /> property owner and the benefit to their organization to develop with or without that utility <br /> extension. He asked if Mr. Bona would prefer for the Council not to pass the Preliminary Plat. <br /> Mr. Bona stated that in normal circumstance he would not be worried about his Preliminary Plat <br /> expiring. He stated that at this time he is now worried about a loss of lots. He stated that he has <br /> never been in the position where an approved Preliminary Plat is at risk of expiring and the City <br /> is requiring changes to be made. He stated that the neighboring lot has been planned for wells <br /> and septic property and the story has now changed. He stated that in a normal circumstance he <br /> would not need the Preliminary Plat approved and would just move forward with Final Plat. He <br /> stated that if the easement for utility extension is going to be required, the property owner to the <br /> west would need to compensate for the loss of property. <br /> Acting Mayor LeTourneau asked the risk of the Preliminary Plat expiring. <br /> Community Development Director Gladhill stated that Preliminary Plat is good for one year <br /> from the date of approval before Final Plat is applied for. He stated that State Statute allows for <br /> a City and developer to negotiate for an additional extension, in the case of a phased <br /> development. He confirmed that the City Council could extend the Preliminary Plat approval for <br /> City Council/June 26,2018 <br /> Page 8 of 13 <br />