ITEM NO. 10C:         FINAL PLAT FOR HODGE SUBDIVISION; SOUTHWEST CORNER OF W. SIXTH STREET AND FOLKS ROAD (PGP)

 

PF-07-19-04:  Final Plat for Hodge Subdivision.  This proposed residential subdivision contains approximately 2.0635 acres and is located on the east side of Folks Road, south of W. Sixth Street.  Submitted by the Peridian Group, Inc., for Eric L. and Colleen M. Hodge, property owners of record. This item was deferred from the August 25, 2004, Planning Commission meeting.

 

Items 10B & 10C were discussed simultaneously.

 

STAFF PRESENTATION

Mr. Patterson described the subject area as “ready to move forward” with development, noting the slope of the property and the placement of sewer and water lines.  He said a benefit district was anticipated for improvements to the collector street (Folks Road), and the plat showed the dedication of 30’ of right-of-way, with an additional 10’ with the final plat.

 

Mr. Patterson said the request stemmed from the applicant’s wish to build a new house on the southern lot, and that the new regulations required that all contiguous property held by the same owner be platted simultaneously. 

 

Concurrent submission of the preliminary and final plats was permitted in this case because the property was less than one acre, did not dedicate multiple street rights-of-way and did not involve more than one zoning classification.

 

Staff’s primary concern with the plat(s) was access to Folks Road.  The lot had a concrete drive to the collector, which Staff recommended should be moved to become a shared access to W. 6th Street with the adjacent lot.  Staff was amenable to allowing the property owner to temporarily retain the existing access point until the adjacent lot was developed, at which point the access to Folks Road would be eliminated.

 

It was noted that the benefit district for the Folks Road improvements was being handled by the applicant’s representative.

 

Staff recommend approval of both the preliminary and final plats with conditions as listed in the Staff Reports.  Mr. Patterson clarified that alternate conditions were provided in case the Commission chose to approve the permanent retention of the existing Folks Road access as the applicant requested.

 

APPLICANT PRESENTATION

Mike Kenney, Peridian Group, spoke on behalf of the applicants, addressing Staff’s recommendation for shared access to W. 6th Street when Lot 2 was developed.  He showed the current design for the house, noting that this design would have to change significantly to accommodate the shared access proposed by Staff.  Mr. Keeney compared the existing access pattern of the six lots leading to the subject property, stating that Staff’s recommended shared access did not follow this pattern and would create problems with the configuration of Folks Road (improved).

 

Eric & Colleen Hodge, property owners, said they intended to build the proposed house in the center of the lot and did not plan to develop Lot 2.   They had submitted a site plan with a driveway to the south, and said they would like to keep this design to maximize the front yard area and retain existing mature trees that would have to be removed to create the shared access proposed by Staff.

 

The Hodges felt they had “met the city halfway” by dedicating land for right-of-way and taking part in the benefit district for Folks Road improvements.  They planned to construct their house in the center of the lot, restricting future development on the adjacent lot.

 

Mr. Hodge suggested future access could be protected by conditioning a replat of the property if development of the northern lot were proposed in the future.

 

The Hodges discussed Peridian’s suggestion that shared access be created between the adjacent lot they owned and the lot adjacent to its north, if development were ever proposed.  It was noted that this depended on the redevelopment intent of another property owner.  The applicant would have to dedicate land from their northern lot now, in anticipation of future shared access.  If the next lot to the north was not redeveloped (providing the second half of the joint access) the subject property owner would have adequate driveway space on their own property.

 

CLOSING COMMENTS

There were no closing comments from the applicant or Staff.

 

COMMISSION DISCUSSION

Comm. Jennings noted that this application attempted to create the large-lot development that had been the intent of a previous consideration.  He noted that allowing the shared access toe “slide to the north” did not involve any more curb cuts that the design proposed by Staff.

 

The Commission discussed the design proposed by Mr. Keeney, which involved a cul-de-sac through the applicant’s two lots and the lot adjacent to the north.  It was suggested that it was presumptive to assume the other property owner would agree to this design.  

 

Comm. Lawson said he would like to reciprocate the applicant’s attempts to work with the city regarding the Folks Road improvements.  He said Staff had provided alternate conditions in response to the applicant’s request and he assumed Staff would be able to support approval of those conditions.

 

The Commission discussed potential traffic generation with various access designs.

 

Chairman Haase asked why this decision was not resolved between the applicant and Staff before the meeting.  Staff replied that, in general, their solution was to require redesign of the house to use shared access and the applicant was not amendable to this suggestion.

 

It was suggested that the Commission could not support the applicant’s proposal for shared access with the property to the north because achieving this design was not within their complete control; it assumed the cooperation of the adjacent property owner.

ACTION TAKEN

Item 10B

Motioned by Comm. Krebs, seconded by Comm. Burress to approve the Preliminary Plat for Hodge Subdivision with shared access as proposed by Staff, subject to the following conditions:

 

  1. Provide the following revisions to the Preliminary Plat:
    1. Access to Folks Road from this property to be restricted to a 50’ wide x 40’ deep cross access easement to be centered on the property lot line between Lots 1 and 2;
    2. The 25’ Access Easement for the existing driveway for the existing house on Lot 2 be labeled as “Temporary 25’ Access Easement;”
    3. The proposed 25’ wide by 40’ deep cross access easement shown along the north line of Lot 1 be removed; and
    4. The note, “Existing Drive to be relocated to north property line at the redevelopment of Lot 2 or the Mayhugh property whichever comes first”, be removed.

 

          Motion failed, 3-6, with Comm.’s Krebs, Burress and Haase voting in favor.  Comm.’s Angino, Lawson, Eichhorn, Erickson, Johnson and Jennings voting in opposition.  Student Commissioner Brown voted in opposition.

 

Motioned by Comm. Burress, seconded by Comm. Angino to approve the Preliminary Plat for Hodge Subdivision, subject to the following condition:

 

  1. The 25’ Access Easement for the existing driveway for the existing house on Lot 2 be labeled as “Temporary 25’ Access Easement.”

 

          Motion carried 8-1, with Comm. Krebs voting in opposition and Student Commissioner Brown voting in favor.

 

DISCUSSION ON THE ACTION

It was clarified that the Final Plat could be approved on the basis that it did conform to the Preliminary Plat just approved, with the understanding that, if Lot 2 were proposed for development in the future, it would need to dedicate half the required right-of-way as shown on the plat for shared access with the property to its north.

 

ACTION TAKEN

Item 10B

Motioned by Comm. Burress, seconded by Comm. Angino to approve the Final Plat for Hodge Subdivision and forward it to the City Commission for acceptance of easements and rights-of-way, subject to the following conditions:

 

1.      Provision of the following fees and recording documentation:

    1. Current copy of paid property tax receipt at the time of submittal of the final plat for filing;
    2. Recording fees made payable to the Douglas County Register of Deeds; and
    3. Provision of a completed master street tree plan.
  1. Submittal of public improvement plans to the City Public Works Department (or letting of construction contracts for public improvements undertaken by benefit district) prior to filing of the final plat; and
  2. Execution of a Temporary Utility Agreement.

 

Motion carried unanimously, 9-0, with Student Commissioner Brown voting in favor.

 

The Commission returned at this point to Item 9.