PC meeting 07/25/05

ITEM NO 4A:            PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR LAWRENCE COUNTRY CLUB ADDITION NO. 2; 2501 PRINCETON BLVD. (SLD)

PP-06-13-05:  Preliminary Plat for Lawrence Country Club Addition No. 2.  The property is generally described as being located at 2501 Princeton Blvd.  This proposed one-lot subdivision contains approximately 0.957 acre.  Submitted by Landplan Engineering for Lawrence Country Club, property owner of record. 

PC meeting 07/25/05

ITEM NO 4B:            FINAL PLAT FOR LAWRENCE COUNTRY CLUB ADDITION NO 2;2501 PRINCETON BLVD (SLD)

PF-06-23-05:  Final Plat for Lawrence Country Club Addition No. 2, a  final plat of a portion of the Lawrence Country Club Golf Course and the right-of-way for Yorkshire Drive south of Princeton Boulevard.  The property is generally described as being located at 2501 Princeton Blvd.  This proposed one-lot subdivision contains approximately 0.957 acre.  Submitted by Landplan Engineering for Lawrence Country Club, property owner of record.

Items 4A & 4B were discussed simultaneously.  Haase was recused.

STAFF PRESENTATION

Ms. Day showed the overall boundaries of the entire golf course, identifying the subject property where the applicant proposed construction of a new building for irrigation.  The bathrooms included in the original plan had been removed, so the building was now small enough to be constructed without obtaining a building permit.

Ms. Day showed how the boundaries of the request followed the line of Yorkshire Drive if it were extended.

The Commission noted that the new lot was flag-shaped and asked how redevelopment would occur if the golf course use were eliminated.  Staff explained the restrictions on the current plat that no residential development could take place on the new lot and no driveway access could be provided to serve it.  The property owner would have to submit a revised plan showing interior circulation and access if another use were requested sometime in the future.

Burress stated for the record that, for this application, Legal Staff had determined the Planning Commission was able to place the noted restriction against residential uses.  He (Burress) had asked Staff to provide at a later date some clarification from the Legal Department regarding the Commission’s ability to place use restrictions on a plat. 

APPLICANT PRESENTATION

John Selk spoke on behalf of the applicant, saying the applicant would like to “fast-track” this application because golf course improvements were scheduled for October.  He said the new pump house would allow for irrigation without relying on City water, and that a sizeable detention structure would be constructed next to the pump house. 

Selk explained the new pump house and detention basin created a minor liability, so a new limited liability corporation had been formed to isolate liability.  Burress expressed concern about this arrangement, but Selk said the attorney who drafted the agreement was not available for tonight’s meeting.

Selk verified several points for the Commission:

• Property owners adjacent to Yorkshire Drive would dedicate a shared access easement right-of-way with the LLC, which would be recorded with the Register of Deeds.
• The applicant(s) understand that replatting will be needed if bathrooms are proposed in the future.
• The pump house will be landscaped to minimize its visual impact on the surrounding area.

Staff clarified that the condition related to street trees applied to trees on public streets and was a common note on plats.  Typically, the applicant was responsible for planting trees along the public right-of-way unless they entered a separate agreement with the Parks Department.  In single-family development the trees were planted by the City and fees collected from the property owner.  This case was unusual, and the note gave the City the right to be on the subject property for the purpose of planting street trees, if such an agreement was executed.

COMMISSION DISCUSSION

Burress said he was concerned on two points.  First, the plat created a flag-shaped lot, which the Commission typically discouraged.  He said this might be acceptable in this case because of the residential use restriction.  Secondly, Burress questioned the apparent use of the plat to limit liability in case the pump failed and caused significant damage.

ACTION TAKEN

Item 4A

Motioned by Lawson, seconded by Eichhorn to approve the Preliminary Plat for Lawrence County Club Addition No.2, based on the findings of fact presented in the body of the Staff Report.

          Motion carried 6-0-1, with Haase abstaining and Student Commissioner Wright voting in favor.

Item 4B

Motioned by Lawson, seconded by Eichhorn to approve the Final Plat for Lawrence Country Club Addition No.2 and forward it to the City Commission for acceptance of easements and rights-of-way, based on the findings of fact presented in the body of the Staff Report and subject to the following conditions:

1. Submission of public improvement plans for all public improvements per approval of the Public Works;

2. Execution of a Temporary Utility Agreement; and

3. Provision of the following fees and recording documentation:

a. Copy of paid property tax receipt at the time of submittal of the Final Plat for filing;

b. Recording fees made payable to the Douglas County Register of Deeds; and

c. Provision of a completed Master Street Tree Plan per Section 21-708a.

     Motion carried 6-0-1, with Haase abstaining and Student Commissioner Wright voting in favor.