HomeMy WebLinkAboutMemo from PlanningChanges to the Agenda:
Item 9. Pinebridge Subdivision No. 1-The applicant has withdrawn the applicat ~ `~ ~- ~~ ~, ,,R
Items 11, 12, & 13. Fignut -Continue to May 19th at the request of the applicant due~~ their in `' " ,v 1
F 1~a
ability to obtain a letter from NMID. ~ ,~ ~ ~~~
Item 8. Fee Waiver by Mike McCabe
Cl7'Y ®~
Cd~CLE~ ®Fp1CE
The applicant received CZC and DR approval in July 2008 which is valid for one year. In order
to re-issue the CZC and approve the DR, the applicant will have to pay $187.00 (CZC) and
$173.00 (DR) fees to the Planning Department for administrative review.
Item 10. Zebulon Heights Subdivision No. 2- Time Extension
Location: The subject property is located on the south side of E. McMillan Road, west of N. Eagle Road.
Application: Request for an 18 month time extension to obtain the City Engineer's signature on the
fmal plat for the 2nd phase of the Zebulon Heights Subdivision No. 2 preliminary plat.
Background:
• This property was annexed & preliminary platted, and a CUP/PD was approved in 2005
under the old code, which required 5% open space.
An administrative time extension was approved for the CUP in 2006. The requirements
of the CUP/PD were met and remain valid.
• An administrative time extension was approved in 2006 for the 1 ~` phase of the
preliminary plat; the City Engineer signed the final plat prior to the expiration date. The
final plat for the next phase would need to have been signed by the City Engineer by March 27,
2009. Because the applicant could not meet this deadline, the subject time extension is requested.
Highlights of Request: The 1 ~` phase of the preliminary plat has been recorded; the 2nd phase has
not yet been submitted. The applicant has delayed the design of the 2°a phase due to the current
economic slow-down. For this reason, the applicant is unable to meet the UDC time requirements.
Written Testimony: A letter was received from the applicant in response to the staff report.
Outstanding Issue(s) for City Council: Because the preliminary plat for this development was
approved in 2005, the applicant does not feel that current open space requirements (10% of site
& differences in definitions of what qualifies as open space) should be imposed.
Staff Recommendation: Approval w/the condition the applicant submit an updated plat and
landscape plan(s) w/subsequent final plat application(s) that demonstrates compliance w/current
UDC open space requirements for the remainder of the subdivision.
Notes:
4/28/2009