Laserfiche WebLink
5.3. <br /> <br />Planning Commission Minute~ <br />j'uiy 24, 2001 <br />Page 4 <br /> <br /> that they have not spoken wk~ t~e school district. Ne felt that it makes sense to service this <br /> area and that it will have a positive impact. <br /> <br /> There being no further public comment, Chair Pederson closed the public hearing. <br /> <br /> Comm/ssioner Schuster asked Mr. Maurer t~is opinion on the issue. Mr. Maurer stated that <br /> he was in agreement that it would be more cost-efSective to combine areas to be serviced, <br /> rather that to "piece-meal" services to only 11 lots. Ne stated that the system would have to <br /> be looped to service a small area. <br /> <br />Chair Pederson, Commissioners Franz, Schuster and Baker expressed their concurrence that <br />it makes more sense to consider this whole area. Commissioner Schuster stated that he <br />would like to know how the other propers? owners feel about the issue. Mr. Maurer stated <br />that approximately 200 acres of the area designated for services in 2007 has already been <br />approved or approval is requested for services at this time. Mr. Harlicker stated that there is <br />the same situation on 181x Avenue, where there are smaller parcels and ser~,ices are belng <br />extended to larger parcels for development. <br /> <br />Discussion £ollowed regarding various options for acting on the request by the applicant. <br />Mr. Nm-licker stated that the Commission could either approve or deny the request, or table <br />the request until such time as the area can be looked at as a whole. <br /> <br />City Attorne7 Peter Beck stated that the Council would need to determ/ne whether or not <br />this property should have been included in the urban service district in the first place, and, if <br />the 2007 date should continue to be used as a g-aideline for development. He stated that it is <br />the City Council's policy to equest the aeveloper/properry owners oear the entire cost of <br />extending utilities. He stated that the City Council has ~e discretion to deny a request for <br />extension of utilities prior to 2007, if they choose He felt that when the 2007 date was <br />established, the issue was staging the city's ability to build the infraxtructure and also to allow <br />the prope:-~y owners time to make decisions. <br /> <br />City Attorney Peter Beck asked ff the applicant was willing to waive the required 120 day time period <br /> ~or action on his application by the City Council. Mr. Brown, representLng the app~ca~nt, <br /> <br /> to sta~. - ...............r .................. = <br /> <br />COM2V~SSIONER BAKER MOVED TO TABLE INDEF~iTELY TI-t-E <br />REQUEST BY CASCADE LAND COMPANY, LLC FOR A LAND USE M.A_P <br />AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE CERTAIN' PROPERTY IN THE <br />SERVICE DISTRICT. COMMISSION-ER SCHUSTER SECONDED THE <br />MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. <br /> <br />CHAIR PEDERSON MOVED TO RECOM2~zEND THAT THE CITY COUNCIL <br />CONSIDER TI-ih ENTIRE 80 ACRE SITE FOR 17qCLUSION IN THE UT_BAN <br />SERVICE AREA, AS OUTLINED BY STAFF. COM2VLrSSIONER FRANZ <br />SECONDED THE MOTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0. <br /> <br />Request by Dynamics Desizn and Land Company [or Pre/inn ;nary P/ar A=proval (I-lillto o <br />Woods Estates 2~d Additlor[) Public I-iearin~- Case No. P 01-1~ <br /> <br />Starq: report by Scott Harlicker. Dynamics Design and Land Co. requests preliminary, plat <br />approval for a 20.16 acre clustered single family development. The applicant is atlowed 8 <br /> <br /> <br />