Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

e yeah needs AIS are we set okay good thing you don't have a big old truck to run us over with I got a big old truck he does have stickers all over it he's got a couple of them all right well let's let's start I got bumpers that kill a SK dang start the Planning Commission with roll call please margarth BS Katie Souls Brian cir benck Bob K Joey McCoy and Andy Miller thank you all for putting up with me thanks Bob thanks for coming okay so a motion to approve the agenda so mooved second all in favor I I I any opposed thank you okay open forum for the Planning Commission anybody online or commissioner we miss the minutes the consent agenda oh sorry sorry consent agenda sorry um I have a motion to approve the consent agenda which are the minutes of January 15 2025 so moved second second I want the second was Martin yeah no worries all in favor any opposed thank you okay so now

open form thanks anet anybody for open form to the Planning Commission it doesn't look like we have anybody online well one person but any any open form items okay so we need to open a public hearing uh just cons consider the ascent major site plan and final plat a motion to open the public hearing so moved second all in favor I I any opposed thank you okay so uh staff report thank you commission commissioner chair um Alan FFF again assistant Town planner one second here so um Allan I think you know quite a bit of this and we were all here I think the public could if we could be a little fairly brief could we be about the certainly attempt it is that okay yeah slightly slightly condensed version if there's um you know stop me if there's a point that I need to to go back over but I will attempt to so maybe for the public explain that there is anybody out there that wasn't here we already reviewed all of this and if anybody in the public has has questions during the public uh we'll open this up for public comment and they can ask those questions at that time and we'll basically cover the high points but I'll I'll still give the the basic intro Le Flash the slides off but I'll I'll move on without a whole until the new content of the site plan okay again um presenting today on the ascent Condominiums the final plat and major site plan portion of this request um located at 601 South ZX the

uh proposed land uses just to summarize um the the merits for this case are um a new building with 17 new multi family units and then conversion of the existing uh exports with six additional units for a total of 25 here's the location and this one does differ slightly in that it shows the boundaries of the full extent of the subdivision impacted so this is the full extent of lots one and two as currently platted excuse me J middle inter review timelines obviously uh originating in May of the past year two review Cycles were able to be accommodated before tonight's public hearing public notice uh noticed separately from the variants for the the Planning Commission but consistent with noticing requirements in the uh Sky High news Middle Park times then applicant mailed notices again the existing conditions photo we need the referen this later on but the existing building with the proposed building just to the left here and then the same to development renderings um as shown during the the height variance request from opposite sides of the [Music] building so this uh slide shows the proposed subdivision uh plat labeling specifically labeling the Lots um the current configuration is just Lots one and two um this proposed subdivision is going to create a new lot three so that's why we suggested sequentially naming it and numbering it for lot three um the majority of it is being carved out of the previous lot one but the southeast side of lot three is slightly larger than where lot one was previously so this is shrinking lot two effectively by 02 Acres I believe was the

measurement again the proposed site plan um will go over different components of the site plan review on the later slides here and again the zoning map for for context of um just the existing business zone for this lot adjacent lots and then the PD Zoning for Grand Park to the South so getting into the zoning and land use kind of higher level review of this um we've got the the intent statement of the business district which speaks to um providing for a variety of commercial uses um obviously residential isn't necessarily referenced in the intent statement but um the proposed multif family use is a use by right already in the business district this isn't a resoning application so we don't necessarily need to um um spend too much attention to the intent statement since we're not proposing changing the existing zoning or the existing rights on the property and then just further the future land use map currently adopted in the 2010 comp plan but chose this this entire area as mixed use so that speaks to um envisioning additional residential uses in the [Music] area um reviewing kind of just the the checklist of different zoning requirements in the business District zone um these top four we're confirming are they meet the the site plan of the plat meet these standards the no issues identified with lot size lot width setbacks are full floor area um obviously this presentation was prepared before the variant so at the time Building height was not met but now with that variance being granted we can state that the proposed Building height um is in conformance with the approved maximum

of 49 and a half ft and then we've got open space minimum of 35% labeled here it's a a very small discrepancy measurement discrepancy but I'll outline that and it it should be an insurmountable obstacle um so to start talking through kind of different considerations of the the full review and the the site plan um propos development starting a higher level of site access um the the existing Street serving um the ski broker exports building is John's Drive which is kind of oriented in a in a curved um existing street so it goes from County Road 72 there on the left and curves up the highway 40 both named John's drive and then you know through the review um it was evident that there's a a street name discrepancy with the current connection or the future connection um to be formalized between John's drive and old Victory Road uh there's construction plans that were associated with the Elk Creek Condos development to the South and Grand Park that depict this future Road connection is John's Drive um the different sources Google Maps I think and the county assessor shows it as victory road that originally came to our attention because the fire district commented on not having a three-point intersection of all segments being John's drive so rather than uh have them officially label it as victory road we were concerned that that was also very similar to Old Victory Road and suggested a new name um the applicants proposed Twilight drive to rename this segment and then addition to change the um portion of the existing John's drive from that intersection point to County Road 72 so that the full kind of east west alignment of the road is

consistently named Victory or uh Twilight Drive excuse me and we're we're on board with that pending any comments or concerns from planning commissioner the board um additional notes on site access so the proposed lot three is going to well both Lots one and are proposed to have a cross access and parking easement uh across the drive aises and parking areas between both Lots so essentially that'll afford access guaranteed access to existing John's Drive um for lot three and then additionally uh an extension of the drive aisle and some additional parking I believe it's four spaces are proposed to be on the adjacent portion of lot two just to the right of the um a proposed Ascent building so taken as a whole uh access will be available from Johan's drive and the future uh Twilight Drive once RightWay is dedicated or access eement is dedicated and then the road is constructed on the south end of the site oh and additionally I think it's on this one for parking so uh minimum requirements we're taking the development as a whole for the proposed 25 units um required ratio of 1.5 spaces for two-bedroom units which they're all proposed to be two-bedroom units would be rounded up to 38 spaces 36 spaces are combinated um across these three lots including the small portion on lot two there and then two additional parallel parking spaces are proposed on Twilight Drive um there's a kind of a caveat in the code that allows off street parking to be counted towards required uh development's required parking which were in support of the the letter if the code states that it's only to be applied in the older sections of the business

district which are generally defined as West and North of Highway 40 and the county road 7284 intersections of the Safeway intersection so it doesn't technically apply on this lot um so we needed to flag it but we're in support of applying it here we think it's consistent with uh kind of best practice of minimizing unne necessary parking larger parking lots Cent are needed based on the the minimum code requirements regarding open space so I mentioned that the 35% we do we do not believe the 35% uh open space requirement was being met um the provided open space plan shows a calculation that meets the exact square footage requirements of 35% however you know kind of of confirming that all the areas depicted in the hashed area uh meet our definition of open space we found that these couple of landscape Islands or ashed off islands in the parking lot do not meet it they're not of sufficient width as uh required in the code and they weren't shown in the landscape plan as including actual Landscaping looked like they were just hashed off um so we believe once these are accommodated um with additional parking lot islands that 35% will be easily be met in addition to kind of the following suggestion or following item we identified regarding Landscaping all right one second so the landscape plan is proposed um the overall requirements are being met in terms of uh coverage of 15% of the lot area being met um there's additional tree and shrub requirements based on the required Landscaping um calculations are showing that's all

being met so no issues there there's additional uh landscape requirements uh related specifically related to parking lots um that that we had the flag as part of the review um you relate to parking lot perimeter Landscaping requirements and then parking lot Island uh Landscaping requirements in order to break up large expanses of parking and provide buffer from adjacent Street frontages or properties um it was explained as part of the initial review and response process that constraints with existing utility easements um potential drainage concerns are are factors for why Landscaping would not be possible along the highway 40 Street Frontage here in the trail we we do disagree we take we you know in terms of looking at Alternatives or accommodating design we think that the drive aisle adjacent to the parking can be reduced it's currently depicted at kind of varying widths of greater than the minimum uh our minimum in the code is 24 feet I believe the fire districts would be 26 feet which would take precedence but in either case the parking should be able to be drawn back from the property line even if it's a few feet um two to four to potentially greater distances especially on the right side here as the the curve of the RightWay kind of widens out um I believe we measured it up up to 35 or 36 ft width down there we believe that can be drawn in and kind of made a tighter drive a in order to accommodate some level of parking lot perimeter Landscaping that addresses the intent of the requirement snow storage calculations were provided uh the requirement is three square feet or one square foot of snow storage area for three square feet

of areas to be cleared um the exhibit shows the hatched areas um accommodate the required snow storage amounts we just have one um comment on there about since these are shared shared Lots slots one and three in terms of functionality and not delineating the different snow storage that unless each lot individually can accommodate its required snow storage that cross or snow storage easements should be included as part of approval of the the plat exterior lighting is uh is included as part of the site plan um submitt um for the most part these are existing lights highlighted here in yellow hopefully that shows up okay on the screen but there's a number of existing lights on the exterior of the parking lot along Highway 40 and along the trail proposed to be no changes and then two lights on the uh bottom half or South Southwest half of the lot that are proposed to be relocated to accommodate the buildings and then some addition uh building lighting mainly focused on that internal kind of exposed hallway area stairwell area of the the new building photometrics weren't provided at this stage and lighting details weren't provided at this stage until final electrical plans are to be um um created but those will be required as part of the building permit in [Music] Middle building elevations uh obviously we've spent time on these with the previous this case for the height variant we'll just comment here that um in terms of exterior design material requirements our code is is technically um pretty light lenient in terms of application for a fully Residential Building in the business district our

our uh commercial our building design require requirements only apply to uh commercial or mixed use developments um but are still encouraged obviously to meet and we did review it against those criteria anyway just to provide kind of the check and any guidance and found that there were that the building design was um very much in conformance I believe we had one comment about ground level additional ground level masonry but they do require or to include additional like stone veneer and um and masonry uses at higher floors so we believe the intent of the building of the material variety is all being met again this is a Subdivision plat I just wanted to uh bring this back up as a reference point for the the next slide so this is the current um existing condition essentially uh one item that we flagged has to do with this Transit license area that's depicted across lot to connecting the existing John's drive and old Victory Road um it's a 45 foot width area it's not labeled as an ement or as RightWay obviously yeah so it is is pretty unique it originally wasn't shown on the plat and we requested that all existing Dimensions easements what not be carried forward since this will be effectively the new uh Subdivision plat for a lot to it's overriding the previous one request this being moved forward the applicant is now labeling it as being vacated by this plat and we recognize that eventually you know when Twilight Drive is built it'll be dedicated as right of way this conect will be made and formalized so longterm it'll be there but we don't necessarily have guarantees on the timing of the recordation of this plat versus the construction of the road or any access

or RightWay uh dedications uh were requesting requiring that this be carried forward at least for the purposes of this plat and as a described as a terminable license agreement between the parties by the applicant you know we're not provy to that agreement necessarily but in terms of what we can control with the plat we're going to ask this be carried forward wait just to clarify um I'm sorry what is that exactly it's a a it's where the bus goes yeah it's utilized by the lift bus system and one of their lines traverses it from old Victory to John's currently got okay um Also regarding subdivision the subdivision uh portion of this request um you know in terms of our staff review of it we found that land dedication and or fees and lows appropriate are applicable um code states that they're applicable to any new residential subdivision um recognizing that this site has been previously platted um it originally platted in the 1980s as part of development that largely did not occur and then subsequent um pla amendments portions of site have developed but we're requesting that the new impacts be accounted for essentially in terms of the additional units and the additional developed Lots so that in this case it'll just be the change in area between the previous lot one and the New Lots one and three is what we're requesting as part of this subdivision and then future development would be you know we still see as applicable to this as new development right so we'll be including this as a condition of approval or recommended condition of approval at

least finally the so the request for the site plan itself is is um subject to these five review or approval criteria um number one that the proposed site development meets all requirements of the chapter currently our finding is not at this time but you know outlying identifying the deficiencies and then including them as recommended conditions of approval believe that we could state meet those criteria should those conditions be brought forward which will be outlined on the next slide and it's included in the draft resolution number two that the proposed site developments and conformance of the comprehensive plan we find that it does meet its criteria three that lot size dimensions and setbacks are all consistent with what's shown Final on the final plat and Zone District requirements obviously the final plat is going concurrently with this so we'll make sure that um that development is consistent with it and then the underlying Zone District requirements are being met for that no buildings or structures infringe on any ements um the plat is proposing to vacate portions of existing utility ements that um would be underneath the proposed building those are proposed to be vacated and relocated eventually that infrastructure is part of the construction plans for Twilight drive and the designs are already previously approved it's just final Construction we find that this CR criteria is met and then lastly the proposed site creating is consistent with requirements of any applicable storm drainage criteria or drainage plans again these uh discussion on this topic is included as part of uh mer is the town Engineers review comments there's still outstanding review comments associated with the engineering review but as a you know these will be covered as part of the general condition that all review comments are addressed so with that staff is recommending

approval subject to the following conditions um these are some summarized uh based on the draft resolution included in the packet but again they cover the kind of the topics flagged um as part of these slides including you know all referral comments the carrying forward that Transit license area um meeting uh maximum highight actually this one will be able to remove so Garrett hopefully can strike that from the resolution before we go forward with that um oh I I failed to address this one but trash enclosure so as part of the landscape plan or and Landscape requirements screening of trash areas is required as part of um new development the there is an existing trash area shown I can go back on the site plan if necessary but essentially there was an inclosure proposed with the initial submitt that has since been removed with the second submitt and we're not in agreement that that's appropriate the requirements of trash screening apply to new development so we want to make sure that it's covered here in the approval conditions and then going through kind of more standard uh conditions of approval related to fees and L items required as part of the subdivision checklist he Al I have a quick question so where are those on the resolution that I have in my hand or is were they added I printed this out last night they should be on there um I guess we can double check G do you have the actual resolution we'll we'll flash it up after my presentation here but there should be eight conditions of approval included yeah uh commissioner SS if you're looking at Planning Commission resolution 20250 02122 okay that's for the next item gotcha thank you yes but for 021 uh it has the exact same conditions

of approval in the resolution as presented here thank you perfect and then just last point of um including as the last uh condition here is the duration of approval um recommending it's included to just State referencing the town code that would' be one year um from approval of the Board of Trustees so that' be the final approval of this case and as a major site plan they're um they're limited to one year in duration after final approval I believe that's it yep happy to answer any questions on these specifics or again um following the applicant presentation hey any questions for staff take the applicant's presentation you can HPP up to the lecture a little bit faster there if you would you needed to be elevating while you were sitting here you got on there tell you what not fun I highly recommend stretching before skiing at my age it did not happen right Clark lipsum uh with Cornerstone for the record Lea Rosales with ter design we'll be quick promise well I'll be quick yeah uh okay uh this is the plot again uh Allan just showed this on I just kind of wanted to show this on on the screen go she going again site plan

rendered was on my screen uh site plan again I you know we talked about this previously not a lot of changes here um I want to run to the next slide because as Clark mentioned a little bit earlier um we would like to request uh that we looked at lot one which is the existing building spent some time doing some architecture realized that additional six units would just be too big just there's a lot more Square Footers than I think we're expecting so we would like to increase that to eight units in that existing building eight additional eight yes eight additional units so 10 total and we understand with that that means the lot is going to have to get a little bit bigger and so what you're looking at here is in there's a red line I know my you can't see my mouse but there's a red line on the lower right hand side of the screen that's kind of where that lot would adjust to and then some additional parking would be accommodated um adjacent to it so with that we're asking you that in the resolution that you guys document that it'll be 20 residential units between the two Lots at 1.35 Acres just a it's a like very slight lot line we're basically doing a lot line adjustment is with this plat is and creating a new lot with land that we don't adjacent to it so it makes sense and and we need housing and we're trying to address that with this project so we apologize for this late notice something we just talked about here last couple of day so I know Gare that I keep throwing stuff at you you know keeping things intered I wouldn't want you to be bored okay so that is one more request that we've got um on this uh I'm gon to got some renderings here but I'm just going to kind of flip go past those my computer will let me come on cool okay I'm gonna jump to the

conditions of approval and there's actually only a couple that we'd like to talk a little bit about and Skip to those yep it's they're on they're coming they're coming so we basically took all eight and so I'll start with the first one on the license agreement um that should not be shown on the Splat it's a it's a license can't can back me up on this it's a permissive agreement it's not a recorded easement it's a a written document that can be revoked by the town of Frasier or me with 30-day written notice um we built this road uh we kind of cowboyed it in not with boots like this uh but we cowboyed it in for the transit um to accommodated request the town had and and my company put it in built it in and literally you know scraped the top soil slammed in the gravel the road base Etc was never meant to be permanent and the transit license we're we're happy with the transit license I don't have any intention of changing or deleting the transit license at this time um and once there's a rideway connection through here then it would formally get terminated probably by us or the town or both um but we don't want to have a license agreement that's not uh a a a land use right like an easement shown on a plat it shouldn't be um and as I said it's permissive through a written agreement the importantly 4 w.1 uh construction plans for the El Creek Condos phase two um that realigns um Twilight Road um now it's an easement in that one but presumably once built uh and when we figure out the balance of myot 2 uh that gets granted as a rideway uh and and while we're building that we will be having to close the transit route temporarily we've done that before we'll just coordinate with

the transit system and and the town and it works pretty good but we would like that condition to be removed because we think it um puts uh B kind of a cloud on the title um and and I don't know what do you think Kent you know I'm not familiar with this Transit license I can speak generally to licenses they are revocable um that's the distinction between a license and an easement they can go away by the party that's benefited um if the if it covers attractive ground that's being used for Transit purposes and ultimately it's contemplated that that will be made a permanent route but you want flexibility to uh establish that location in the future um it's probably okay to not show it on the plat but have that agreement in place for an ultimate uh EAS permanent easement to go in place we just at some location yeah and what I would just ask just don't put it on here or if you want to put something you know subject to for the review with the town lawyer that would be fine cuz Garrett could send him the it's I think it's a two-page Transit license if I remember it's quite simple um and it was literally at the onset of the bus system coming and the town needed to because of where the buses could turn and how they could turn Etc they needed to connect through there um and so we accommodated um and again we like the bus system we want to support the bus system we don't have any intention of elim ating a road and we're going to develop on both sides of this but the reason it was a license was for complete flexibility so so yeah CLK our main interest is not just the bus system it's to make sure that connection continues wherever it is because a lot of us have come to depend on it too with traffic understand it's an you know it's an

important conviction and one of the reasons that we cowboyed it in there like we did you know kind of when we did it we're like you know not a big deal we'll just straight shot across here and uh and I think everybody recognizes it's uh pretty important particularly if something happened on the highway it creates kind of an alternative route and it's necessary not in that alignment for our future plans for what's laid out on my Lot 2 Etc and it'll get formalized uh when we get to that level but it just doesn't belong on this plat as a license yeah yeah just so some some kind of note on the plat though that says that this connection continues to exist a your discretion as to where it is so um anyway I let's just work with the itally it's you very clear I mean we have to have dual access Andy parcel for what we're going to develop on either side which is going to be more residential so you know I I think we have already an improved construction plan for the Road Corridor that is permanently going to go through there yeah okay so the to be vacated note on the plot was just an error on our part I'm going let you talk about trash trash the trash fras oh my goodness Katie Souls you might remember my trash of Frasier PowerPoint the dumpster enclosure issue PowerPoint you remember that 2009 again in 2015 okay which number are we looking at here this is on dumpster enclosures okay and and and yeah I I think I build the nicest dumpster enclosures you do yeah perhaps in the state of Colorado I don't know they're really expensive so why don't you want one here Well here here's here's what we want to see what we want to see is we want to see the code enforced on the Fraser Valley Center we want these dumpsters these are in the Town Road right away and they proliferated they've

gotten worse even since I've owned ski broker it's a real problem guys the code's really clear that's what the 09 presentation was about and the 2015 presentation is about and and we'd really like to see a I condition that says when this adjacent property is cleaned up we'll be glad to install a dumpster enclosure these are all part of the forest Meadow solar subdivision but the Fraser Valley Center needs to probably do a compaction dumpster down on the North End of its project where it was intended to be but this Road's going to start to get more and more heavy use as we develop my lot to and you know God Bless the people that sit out back at Rocky Mountain roasty and enjoy the view but sitting next to shipping containers and trash and I know who it is uh trust me I got you back Katie I'm trying to clean it up have nice Aspen trees hanging out there and you have your coffee with no trash um but but you know you guys have a code enforcement officer um you got two planners now uh and I think it's appropriate that if we're going to impose this on this project uh that it have a condition that it be imposed on um the Fraser Valley Center which they are all part of the original plan um and that we Implement an enclosure uh once theirs is cleaned up and addressed and that's I get where you're where what's you're after Clark very much so um but how the heck do we relate this project to a problem next door well and we do we do need to enforce our code we we take your message loud and clear but we can't have new projects coming along that say we're not going to live with the code as these guys over here are you know that's that that that that road is the same road I traveled at my daycare talking about the kids that you know if Johnny's got a six shooter why the hell don't I

have yeah you know but you get what I mean I mean it's I get what you mean and I appreciate that but I I think what we're saying is we don't want to not follow the code we do want to follow the code well then do but we want to give the town some impetus to make the adjoining neighbor follow the code too and and correlate the two like let's link them right I mean if it's good for goose is good for the gander The Frasier Valley manager Center I was going to say Parell what can you do about that problem yeah we get him during public comment he's like oh my God he's spinning our money uh I mean the fact of the matter is um they don't have permission to have the stuff in the town RightWay and it is in the town RightWay a lot of it and and that's an easy one for yall to clean up well we got a long agenda tonight I understand but I mean this is just an issue that we would like to have addressed I mean look I I cannot and won't go put up you know the the the serious big concrete stone beautiful structures that we put on the other stuff you know I I can agree you know I'll throw up a wood fence around this which I think meets the the uh code I you know but well that's the way you're going to make your point that that we'll have to live with that well but I mean I still want to Advocate and encourage that you know we you know try to address this issue I mean it's a problem all over town okay so I'm using this as the impetus to say guys come on but that probably the biggest one that that is a bad one I mean there's other ones but this is one of the biggest and the road's so narrow yeah anyway let's yeah okay okay thank you for listening to me on that so the next piece that we'd like to I'll talk about here is uh also item four and this has to do with the landscape treatment along Highway 40 that Allan brought up previously um so what I did here is I just quick and dirty section show kind of how much space we really have and really what this thing looks like and I'll Focus kind of on on the right side of the screen here but you've got a um about

1.2 feet between the curb and our property line and then from there you go down into a Swale which takes you to the trail and then you've also got all sorts of utility lines running through there is the light poles okay so the trail the trail is on the right side it says existing Trail Y and and so our concern that we brought up in a couple of times with with staff is um and the 26 foot Drive is what we show you suggested reducing it down to 24 but fire fire did say that any building's over 30 feet need a 26 foot fire lane so that kind of took care of that um and we've got you know utilities drainage snow removal I mean think about how that's going to get piled with snow from snow removal not just from the parking lot but from the trail itself as well so it's I understand why the code is written that way I mean I agree with with screening parking all day long I'm a l architect that's what I do uh but in this instance there just isn't the room and so we are improving the parking lot we're putting curb and gutter we're cleaning up you know that that Frontage there um from what it looks like today but again throwing shrubs in there they're gonna they're going to die they're not going to make it it you know so it just seems so would that I have a question would that be useful though by changing that allowing for a little more open space in there and planning something and wait wait wait let me hear me out and pulling out the the fingers that are coming into your lot because that seems those seems like the ones that are going to mess with your snow removal so the If This Were retail I would be severely pushing back on this and saying guys not a chance I need people to see our business like it that frankly makes no sense I actually advocate for and would like more screening and more Landscaping the building's built where it is and the parking lot is designed and built like it is

um uh and and you know I've even challenged her on you know can't we get exactly what you're talking about a little more out the front uh because some of the layouts from The Architects are using some of those existing storefronts for entries right trying to back units up and make it efficient so you don't have big hallways and things like this so and and that building you know uh I think the SE success of it going to be dependent upon you know how we can kind of dress up that very front because right now it's very sterile I mean that picture is awful that's up there it drives me nuts the bad parking lot um there is a cobble Rock Corridor that's between our curb and between the trail that has not been very well maintained I think we do have the right and the ability to go maintain it even though part of it's in the right away I don't think anybody's going to complain and I think we can make that look better uh some of the islands that are there are actually for power lines and Guy wires cuz this also has overhead power lines over it so planting any trees or shrubs I mean I've seen them come through with a chainsaw in front of beo and cut the tops off right because everything gets big and they can't have that so this is one of these things that we we like landscaping and we want good amount of landscaping around this project it's something we just can't accommodate in this particular section we just don't think it's reasonable and feasible because when they come through and plow the trail they use that area of plowing the trail too like we both plow snow there right so it's um not nothing is going to live there which is why it looks like it does um but I I do think particularly once the parking lot's redone and we have a nice curb that we can make it more zeroscape friendly looking nicer looking um and I would love to try to tighten up and create a little bit more of undulation in front of the very straight building uh and I you know probably leave that to her and say you know is there anything

you can come up with because I mean frankly it might even be nice from a protection perspective we will have a curve because we'll be cutting the we'll be grading the parking lot differently so there'll be a curve because we don't want cars running into the building um so I mean you know it's in our interest to make this thing look really good and it's a it's a remodel of an existing building so we kind of have a lot of what we have and and there's only so many things we can do so we're going to try to enhance and really dress it up every way we possibly can but we can't do it in that strip Clark on that one uh one of the plats that showed does a trail come under your property up near the North End um no it's off it's in the RightWay is it it's one it gets on our property Andy that the easement uh is past vicious cycle where the trail curves okay that's and then from from that curve which is around that pole yeah from that curve all the way down past my office to Winter Park it's on our land it it's in E yeah with the town from that point but otherwise it's in the c r okay so I guess we'd ask in that instance is that condition maybe be modified a little bit to just say you know we'll work with staff to the best of our ability to provide As Much landscaping as we can but um I think that their request was to meet the one pre and two shrubs for every 20 fet um now with or shrubs equivalent of two one so that we did the math it was like 70 shrubs in that location which seems which is a little bit more than I think we accommodate there so um I guess as long as we're given some direction to you know do the best we can um you know that's what I guess we're asking for there um the rest of the conditions we're fine with I think Clark had a question about market value on the on the fee and L the school impact fee um how that's determined so I

I can speak to that that was uh um a value that was used on projects since 2023 um Ros leg strong Town Homes uh the 461 Muse Town Homes here in Oldtown um I I recognize that that's not a codified market value um acreage but it was something that was arrived at um on previous projects and um Town staff believes we can utilize it moving forward uh for other applicable developments uh you know to to calculate that fee andl amount okay well Market values change all the time and they're you know dependent on properties and conditions of properties the state of the properties Etc so what what I would like to ask on that particular one um I'm all for schools I still want a six through 12 school down here even though my kids aren't here um I think it's important I think it's critical to the growth of our community um and um I I think uh what I would like to see in that regard is something to the effect of the applicant uh will work with the staff to determine uh the market value to use breaker for the school and Luffy um if that's acceptable to you all other words rather than have it stated is that is that fee already set no no the the for there's a formula Ka that's set the the variable in it is the the valuation of the land and and that's not something that you would ever set because it changes and every property has different values and there's different conditions and and so what what I would just ask is let us just work with the staff to better understand that I mean perhaps it's fine I'd just like to see how they derived it uh and how it correlates to our property it's it's a a theoretical vacant land valuation

correct yeah and I believe it was based on the entire County not just okay you know the but yeah again it may be fine but I would just ask that you know we note in there we're going to pay the school impact fee we just want to work with the staff to determine what that fee should be uh based on the formula that is codified yeah work with staff on that so is that something right but if it's codified no it's it's not a codified acreage value um the the formula is approved through a resolution from 1998 so that doesn't exist Chang yeah right um but but yes that value per acre is the key variable in question here then I'll just also add that the school district I think is recently done some commission to study or is working on updating I don't know if it' be a requirement dictated by the school district or if it's a suggested amount but that would be something that we'd want to refer to if we're going to kind of go back to the drawing board and assess the dedication fees well we're not yeah we're not talking about going back to the drawing board what we're saying is we want to understand your market value and how you derived it that's it um the school board can do what they want they don't have any jurisdiction over Frasier with all due respect um and they changed their code structure on fianl uh I want to say it was like right before Co and I I I think if I remember right but I remember Frasier did not adopt it that Frasier was happy with the structure that was in place which is the 1998 one so again we're happy to pay it I just want to understand how the market value per acre was derived fair enough yeah yeah thank you I think that's all we have thank you thank you so Clark I did appreciate your note on there for zeroscape or

sustainable landscaping and I hope eventually the whole town can move that direction we we're running out of water and we don't need to be and and that was another concern I the fees for thousand gallons in view of that so yeah that was a concern I brought up with L how am I gonna gotta water out there now to make this stuff live but this going to get crushed with snow plows and yeah I mean it just you know there's certain places where Landscaping is really appropriate yeah um and you know my office is a great example I mean we have a huge long area there with nothing but we have some really nice landscaped islands where the trees are getting really big now and they have nice shrubs and they're protected from the snow removal operations but they really complement and accentuate the building so I think there's appropriate spots and ways that we can address it just not in that stru and we have plenty of plenty of well getting less less moisture every year but still plenty of moisture to raise nice nice vegetation so thank you all for your time tonight we appreciate so is that landscape strip a code requirement and to wave it is we don't need a be it it is a code requirement but the actual specifications that are referenced as far as square footage of landscaping per area number of parking spaces those actually exist in chapter 14 our construction standards um so really allowing a variance to them is an administrative uh okay yeah approval okay thank you all thank you so do we want to just re remove that whole sentence about the site challenge she'll also reduce the width of the dry bile Jason Highway 40 well they're they're they're they're looking at that and that's look let's leave that language in there because even she laid it out it can be done but

what it results with as far as setback off the property line is well question about the leaving out the Landscaping in accordance with that's the issue yeah I I think I just want to clarify something and I think what I was trying to address and what Lila was trying to say maybe with Allen's idea there is a little variation there's a little bit so what what we would prefer and what we think makes sense is we leave the curb line where it is along the trail dress up the zeroscape there and we try to create more of a buffer in front of the building where currently I think it's a 5 foot sidewalk yeah and that you know maybe that undulates which actually could soften it and and to me make it way nicer from a residential entry perspective okay so that's what I was talking about I just wanted to clarify that for you guys maybe put out a picnic table or something so place for the kids to play yeah okay hey hey clar while you're up there because your foot don't want you up and down no it's fine um with um with Twilight drive and this is only semi- related but um is your plan to have like a sidewalk or a trail parallel to that yeah so Twilight drive has in the 4 w.1 approved construction drawings um it is a 60 foot wide collector Road 60 foot wide collector road so we did all the traffic studies on it and agreed we would do a 60ft wide collector road we actually have parallel parking capability designed but not required by us um because vyle has a parking problem murdocks the towns asked you know would y'all consider this so we laid in uh a road with Valley pans and parallel parking along there which actually works very nice and then correct me is it a sidewalk on one side Leila or is it on

both on that one it's on both it can't I mean it's a 60 foot wide Corridor so it's you know it's quite wide but I know that we show what we're required to build in the construction drawings but then we provided an exhibit to the town of uh an alternative that if you know they could figure out how to fund it um because we don't need the parking at the present moment I mean maybe the new designs of tww might need the parking uh in which case we would suggest we go put it in and have parallel parking along there but otherwise we we just wanted to make sure we could accommodate it for uh primarily vicious cycle which has very little parking which we knew would be an issue when they built it but but that the answer is yes it's it's designed very pedestrian or because we're going to be dropping another 150 roughly units next to this I mean that's a lot of units to absorb but we are going to be filling from this building to the El Creek Condos where our equipment yards going away that all is going to be residential be great for the businesses that are there it's gonna be really good for the businesses that are there I think okay cool thank you for that any other questions for applicant and there or and so any any members of the public might like to make a comment so a motion to close the public hearing so move second all in favor I I I okay so any further discussion from the commission so Alan and Garrett any thoughts for you about the Landscaping after disc the discussion um I I I can speak to it a little bit I think um you know that the applicant's proposal to modify the sidewalk width in

front of the buildings such that there's a consistent 26 feet drive a here and you don't have it Bo out at the end here um is understood and appreciated um I I recognize that's certainly more feasible than trying to say um have two different curve lines um on this you know parking aisle here uh just from a feasibility and you know it doesn't make to like have it doesn't make sense to have a bend in this parking Row for example um I I understand the concerns around the fact that the MX uh multi-use Trail itself is plowed and snow storage ends up there anyways um I I think the main concern is um granting you know this kind of waiver from those requirements uh and then having trouble enforcing it for Myer Lot 2 development to be very Frank um I I would imagine um with myot 2 that is truly Green Field I recognize that uh this site is kind of half Greenfield half um you know renovation or change of use of an existing building and there are constraints with where the existing exports building is located um and and kind of formalizing the existing parking area there's there's not much flexibility for the parking over here there is greater flexibility over here but given that it's kind of one contiguous site the inflexibility for lot one carries over to lot three um in a way um so I guess you know my my first reaction is I I do think that ex extending the sidewalk out um just so it's a consistent 26t Drive aisle here uh does make sense um and certainly can be considered um I can pull up the

resolution unless there's other questions on the site plan no then it wouldn't all be sidewalks that could be some landscape in there too sure yes I I guess to clarify I mean they would extend the curb line but that could allow for sidewalk or Landscaping in that area yeah um so to speak through the conditions as written so just off the bat condition number three which related to the building height is going away given the board of adjustments approval of the appeal um going back to condition two related to the transit license area uh I think that can go away well I I I would maybe suggest uh in confirmation with Kent that this condition maybe just be changed to not depict the license area on the plat I you know I not not being here when um the prior plat from 2021 was approved and recorded and not necessarily understanding why it was depicted that license was depicted on the plat at that time um I I think I'm generally I think staff is generally comfortable with the license simply not being shown um rather than being vacated through the plat I yeah so yeah and just clarify being vacated course Ken yeah right go ahead Ken just just to clarify I I haven't read this license agreement so yeah before I would opine on it one way or the other it'd be nice to read it and see how to properly address it if at all on this plat so I'll leave that condition for the town board then yeah so commissioner Souls this is what is in reference here it was this note to say it says Transit license to be vacated by

this plat I think that was the primary concern okay of Staff um okay so going back to the condition um number two staff is certainly open to rewarding it um yeah and the rewarding I'm sure this as Clark said it's as important to him as it is to the community but just some sort of wording that I connect continues so that this this this route from Community to community has this final piece so something about it being formalized with discretion and conversation with the town and developer something to have it mentioned well if because it is so important aren't they asking just to take it off of the plat yeah and then it's and then it it's not affected one way or the I think our concern just not shown on the I yeah our concern of it was just the setting the president of it going away if we have Assurance one way or the other that it's covered by the the license agreement I don't think we'd have any issue so maybe at this point it's just kind of further research and making sure that the town attorney is in agreement with kind of how being handled that what I was going to suggest is pretty much what Allan said maybe change that resolution note to uh the town lawyer and staff we work with the developer on uh the license agreement and that'll give Kent time to actually read it and know what we're talking about and I think then everybody will understand it and if it's just something that simple generic then when we come to the town board if it's still an issue then let's

address it at the Town board how about that great does that work cool so here's how the condition has been reworded the town attorney and staff will work with the developer to research and understand the nature of the existing 45 ft Transit license area as depicted on the previous existing plat so simply directing staff to work with the town attorney thank you on this item them thanks um condition three relates to the trash enclosure um requiring it that that the trash enclosure a trash enclosure be provided um it also speaks to reducing the width of the drive aisle to accommodate parking lot per perimeter Landscaping I think maybe this is a section that uh can be reworded yeah I say leave the trash enclosure but put work with staff to reduce the width of the drive aisle ajacent to Highway 40 to accommodate more that's it's got to say reduce the of the drive ball because he's going to do the can add the additional Landscaping yeah I'll have that extra space yeah yeah and it sounds like the the request is to have it not be perimeter Landscaping specifically so if that's the get along that stretch stone removal it would just Crush everything so maybe something like to accommodate a landscaping between the proposed and accommodate Landscaping okay yeah to accommodate landscaping and then we can remove the section to the code reference to the parking lot perimeter Landscaping uh uh I would maybe suggest still including this last sentence simply the landscape Improvement shall be included to the maximum extent feasible

perfect yeah that's good yep um so with regard s to the fees and L um I I I think this um condition still leaves open determination of that value per acre I I personally don't feel it's necessary to State it here but if the Planning Commission would like to I'm not is and you guys can still work with we absolutely will still work with the applicant to determine the appropriate fees yeah um and then I believe you know condition five six and seven are all really just our standard ones and duration of approval so okay good any further discussion from the board entertain a motion I'd like to make a motion to approve resolution 20 25022 with1 sorry wrong my hand 01 with the changes as just noted conditions by our Planner yeah and changes in the conditions there's no bu planner second all in favor any opposed he thank you okay okay can we move right to the last item or do we need a break real quick or let's get through it okay let's uh go to The Village at Grand Park filing three final plat and this this require public this is also a public hearing yeah sorry this is also a public hearing okay sove to open the public hearing second all in favor I any opposed thank you okay so stff report thank you chair Miller and the

Planning Commission Garrett Scott Town planner uh so the item before you all uh is The Village at Grand Park filing three final plat property owner is Grand Park development LLC this covers planning areas 1.1.3 and 1wb in brand Park uh the land uses that are proposed listed here are actually from the final plan development plan that was approved by the Board of Trustees in November for this area alongside the preliminary plat um and again this request is specifically just for approval of the final plat document here is a look at what that plat looks like uh creating um a total of 17 New Lots as well as dedicating rights of way for various um roads within the village of Grand Park area um what may be a bit more familiar to you all is this image it's the fpdp for this area as it was approved by the board in November um the applicant is still addressing comments on this fpdp in order to satisfy conditions of approval um and is working with staff to do so and once those comments are addressed this fpdp may be recorded uh this image is also from the fpdp which was provided in the packet for reference just depicting the various uh planning areas within Grand Park that are within this proposed development 1wa in red and 1wb in green and then this shows those areas of development overlaid with Google Earth aerial imagery just to give um an idea of the extent of the development speaking to the review and approval timeline um well I'll Breeze over the first few we all understand that the overall PDD was approved in 2005 um some initial f pdps for the

village of cran Park were approved soon after um this uh filing two final plat phasing plan was approved in uh 2011 um last year starting in January through November uh was the review process for um applications related to planning areas 1wa and 2W um that ultimately resulted in uh an approved preliminary platin fpdp uh that I mentioned for primarily onewa but also 1 WB um approved by the board last November um the uh Town staff received this final plat application in January on January 10th uh and we were able to complete one round of referral review ahead of today's uh public hearing so public notice was provided in the newspaper by the town and mail notices were sent by the applicant on February 10th um and proof of those notices are in the packet um so now this is the real meat of the presentation and um again a lot of this is outlined in the staff report but I just want to emphasize the big picture review findings um and staff's review of this final plat so this section of the code reference here allows for the approval of of what is called phased final plats essentially developments that once approved would actually be platted and recorded and therefore Lots legally created over a phased five-year period subject to the provision of infrastructure and dedication of either easements or rights of way for that infrastructure um so the idea is you know if you have a large development you're not going to build all the roads and water and sewer for it all at once uh this gives the applicant and developer flexibility to uh develop portions of that development over time and naturally extend infrastructure and a logical way to the rest of the

development um so as part of approval of a phased final plat our code requires a phasing plan uh with estimated dates for recordation of plats and infrastructure construction um and for recently approved developments in Grand Park that faced final plats this information has actually been provided as part of the fpdp so it's kind of maybe a bit of a quirky thing but um typically the fpdp for the entire Development Area gets recorded um first um alongside say the first phase of that plat so it I do think it makes sense for the fpdp to be the document through which this phasing plan requirement is documented so just to speak to four examples um West Mountain filing one fpdp this is the phasing plan that's depicted on that fpdp clearly identifies with the Roman numerals three phases shows the geographic boundaries of those phases as well as estimated dates by which construction would start and be completed for those phases so some of the other developments that I'll speak to provide slightly less information here's ELC condos 4 W1 still depicts generally um you know it depicts five five phases identifies an order to those phases but it does have this note that says that phasing does not to be does not need to be constructed in this sequential order as long as the infrastructure is in place to support it um for alpen glow at Grand Park this fpdp simply identified phases one two and three um doesn't provide any estimated dates and The Meadows at Grand Park um similarly just notes um with the

Roman numerals phases 1 two and three So speaking to the approved fpdp um for this area um it this is the phasing plan that was currently shown there um staff provided a comment to the applicant that this phasing plan is somewhat ambiguous there's a phase one depicted up here as well as phases 1 a through 1e for the Lots here um these phases 1 a through 1e are areas that are either already complete in the case of the gas station and Grand Park um offices and The Foundry or currently under construction in the case of the Market Street buildings and the medical center so it really doesn't follow a logical sequencing it doesn't really make sense to have phases 1 a through 1e and phase one um so staff is simply requesting that this phasing plan be updated include estimated dates of recordation and actually reflect um what's already even constructed or platted and what's yet to be completed um so this is really a condition of approval for the final plat but staff expects expects this to be accommodated through an updated fpdp when when you have those phasing plans are there like deadlines for completion so I'll I'll speak to um maybe as we have this one up here fpdp once approved per our current code they never expire so um that zoning approval exists essentially in perpetuity and once the document is recorded that zoning approval is valid um until it is amended essentially um the the duration of approval of a phased plat is 5 years so any Lots any

portions of the overall plat that are not recorded in that 5year period would expire subject to a possible extension that our code allows um but after that expiration period anything that's remains unplatted would have to go through the Subdivision plat Approval Pro approval process again does that make sense yeah okay so that's really the main deadline Behind These phasing plants um are there any further questions on this item so just like the red lines is that just generally what those phases phasing areas are yes because I asked because like Phase One by phase one then to a you can see the road is delineated there and then the road is not delineated into where it ties towards the rec center so I'm just wondering come doesn't show the road on there yeah so um I guess first the the red lines generally follow um lot boundaries um as depicted on the preliminary and now the final plat um as far as why certain roads are gr out uh compared to others you know I that's a valid comment um there doesn't seem to be too much Rhyme or Reason because some roads that are constructed such as old Victory Road in this area are gray out um whereas Main Street between Grand Park Drive and Second Street which is not constructed is also gray out um and then you have some roads that you know Grand Park Drive is already constructed so maybe this should be gr out so I I think that's also something that could just be cleaned up yeah and clarified

okay so the next items that I'll speak to are areas of the existing Village at Grand Park development that do not conform with the town's uh subdivision regulations these areas of non-conformity are proposed conditions of approval for the final plat um they should also be incorporated um into the phasing plan and and and noted on the phasing plan as as specified by staff so I I won't belor this point too much but I because I believe it's been raised several times both uh at the Planning Commission and the board the uh Market Street buildings um are not on platted Lots they are currently on this larger unplatted parcel um as shown here kind of outlined in blue um so this is in violation of a section of town code that requires that um building permits and construction only be allowed on platted Lots there are active building permits for these buildings certainly Town staff the town will allow construction to continue under those building permits we simply want to require that lots for these buildings be platted as soon as possible and essentially as the very first phase of this overall plat and require that no other Lots in the plat uh be recorded before these are um so just to emphasize that again um those lots are Lot 10 11a and 11b um as well as the right of way for Market Street um which accesses these Lots um as shown on the image in the left from the final plat um so again just recording these uh plats for these Lots um should be depicted as the first phase of the phasing plan and should occur before any other lots are platted so the Markus Street buildings are on lots 11a 11b and lot 10 but those lots are not recorded

correct okay the next uh item has to deal with um dedication and conveyance of ride of way so town code requires that any public infrastructure roads water lines sewer Etc be place in either an easement or dedicated ride of way um ride of way can be dedicated when a Subdivision plat is recorded this is very common think about a single family home subdivision that's accessed by a local street it's very typical to Plat the and you know create the right of way when you also plat all of those lots um with that said town code also allows for rights of way to be dedicated when final acceptance of infrastructure occurs so as a reminder when a developer buildt infrastructure that's ultimately public infrastructure whether that's you know roads water lines sewer lines the town has this acceptance process where we inspect it to ensure that it was built according to the plans um and and when that acceptance occurs uh the very last stage of it uh the ride of way should also be dedicated to the town essentially before or concurrently with that final acceptance so there are several existing roads in the village of Grand Park that have received final acceptance or will soon as soon as this year that are not in dedicated rights of way that I just want to discuss briefly here so um kind of going back in time to when some of these roads were built this image is from September of 2009 this is around the time the rec center was built as well as uh the gas station area so the roads built at this time were this portion of Grand Park Drive this portion of Market Street and this portion of Main Street um I will note that Market

Street this section built here um does exist in dedicated ride of way that is um for The Village at Grand Park Owners Association so that's a private road uh privately maintained not Town maintained there is a section of this portion of Main Street that lies in dedicated RightWay it's basically the portion from this red dot the intersection with Market Street up to the rec center property line um so this is in right of way but uh the other portion of Main Street um is not there is also a portion of Grand Park Drive that is in RightWay it's simply this section from Highway 40 to Market Street this other small section um is not okay so uh fast forwarding to 2014 um this is around the time The Foundry was constructed and additional roads were built this portion of Market Street this portion of Second Street and this tiny sliver of Main Street as it exists today the only one of these that is in right of way is second street from Highway 40 out to Maine um so I guess just backing up given when these roads were built um you know Circa 2009 2014 um they basically have all been final been granted final acceptance by the town There's a series of resolutions um approved by the board granting those acceptances um and therefore right of way should be dedicated for all of them they have not been yet correct right last thing I'll speak to uh more recently June 2023 is when this image is from um larger portions of roads were constructed around this time Grand Park Drive including the railroad underpass old Victory Road up to um American

Willow Drive uh to telmark and then this section of Main Street um adjacent to the hospital development that stretch of old Victory Road there is not not paved uh the the line shown in purple is all paved it's the section to the north that is the north unpaved yeah from that intersection so in in uh consultation with uh Public Works staff and in staff's review of previous board resolutions that granted acceptance staff has determined that um the lines shown in blue are roads that have had preliminary acceptance granted whereas the line show in green um are roads that are have had final acceptance uh by the town now the areas that are highlighted here are the areas with dedicated right of way um most of it is public uh the areas shown in red are um rights of way that the that were conveyed to the town again that one exception is uh this pink area here which is uh Market Street adjacent to the gas station that's a private ride of way but open for you know Public Access um so staff is essentially stating that the areas shown in green that are not highlighted in yellow these are roads that have final acceptance but no dedicated rideway and rideway should be dedicated for these roads as soon as possible essentially again as a first phase of this overall final plat um before any other lots are platted um the line shown in blue they have preliminary acceptance so um RightWay simply needs to be dedicated at the time of final acceptance which is anticipated um this year another thing that I just want to speak to is um the presence of other

Utilities in within the area I mean the applicant stated that um there are utilities uh in the village of Grand Park area broadly which is true uh the blue lines depict water remains within the area the green depicts SE lines um all the Lots proposed as part of filing three can be served by these existing utility lines except for um lot 16 which is proposed in this area um just needs a slight extension of the sewer m in order to reach it um so I I think the main thing is the dedication of Rights of way um given that um you know the town is plowing these roads the town is maintaining these roads in terms of restriping um repairing pavement and and things like that um the last thing I wanted to speak to is more of a process or Administration type of condition of approval just to clarify um you know how plats would be reviewed moving forward when this overall final plat is approved um so any individual plats that are to be recorded would be reviewed administratively by town staff to ensure consistency with the overall plat um if there are modifications proposed such as consolidation of lots creation of additional Lots or modification of lot boundaries compared to this approved or this overall final plot once approved then staff would determine whether those modifications constitute either a major or minor Amendment to the plat subject to the language in our code so if it's a minor Amendment then it can be re reviewed administratively by Town staff and it doesn't need to come back to the Planning Commission or the board if it's a major Amendment it does so that's the distinction here and this is what our code says and really I would argue it's

quite broad it simply says that a majority of these conditions must be met so three out of the five um and I think in general it it could cover things like lot consolidation uh split a lot into that was proposed to just be one lot into two or multiple Lots um so I I do think it gives the applicant broad flexibility in this case to modify lot boundaries if necessary compared to the final PL so just to give an example of this um in practice uh this occurred in 2019 with the recordation of lot 12C which was the lot for the medical Center um the image shown on the left is was the approved filing to Plat that depicted Lot C in a certain shape and configuration and shown on the right is the actual recorded plat for that lot it is fairly consistent um I mean obviously the lot boundaries along uh Telemark drive and the adjacent property can't change but some of the lot boundaries um adjacent to Grand Park Drive or Grand Park Properties excuse me were modified um in order to accommodate the site designed for the hospital generally speaking so this is something that my understanding was uh administratively approved given that the changes to the lot as recorded were really not too significant from what was previously approved and staff likely utilized the criteria uh in our code to consider it a a minor plat Amendment I have a question sure if I may I'm going back to the the road where it Narrows when we talked about that um uh

phase one across from the um I had those photos at a previous meeting by the car wash coming out of the rec center in that tight turn how tight it is and um I talked with Scott at the rec center and I said so do you like this for slowing dra down traffic and he said no it's dangerous it's narrow it holds up traffic when we have um larger Vehicles come through a truck so making that modification because I noticed that that lot kind of comes down and sticks out would that fall in here would you staff be able to approach that when the time comes and you go to build a hotel and change that access would that be something be covered by that's actually not the private road just to that's part of that's ours that's the dedicate recorded part of Main Street DED dedicated right away that's correct and um I think that absolutely can be addressed with the recordation of the proposed lot 4A um the lot boundary does uh kind of jut into that drive aisle very slightly um I think yeah there's a way to just open that up MH so but would that be something that what you were just mentioning that staff could take care of it wouldn't have to come back to us and you guys could just play ahead because this is something I'm not going to let go of I'm like a d i got to lighter anyway okay that's all I gotta say about that I I think that's definitely so any sort of modification of the lot for a boundary to give a little a little bit of extra room for that road is something that can be accommodated administratively and I think it's something that staff will be

um on the lookout for when lot 4A is ploted perfect thank you any further questions from the board all the questions from the board for staff then so just to conclude um staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the resolution with the conditions as proposed um and once approve the final plot will advance to the board for final approval from the applicant don't have much to share on this one it's a plat um I think again like we did last time we'll kind of walk through some of these conditions of approval um or let Clark walk through some of them sorry haven't checked my screen yet you can start screen yes so I think on the on the I'll just start with the phasing plan um the phasing plan in this instance uh there's not a timeline for any one of them and it's purposeful that way because you you can basically Hopscotch play checkers with it whatever you want depending on the user you may get um and uh depends on the market demands and investment our community but you know the intent is to set this up and go sell Lots um we've put the large majority of the public infrastructure in I think Garrett's covered that um but we would not we we would do the phasing plan in the same fashion we did in in 4 w.1 with a notation that you know any one of these can be recorded at any given time so long as the public infrastructure is there or a Dia is is entered into pertaining to any infrastructure that that particular lot might require most of these lots are already have the infrastructure in the roads adjoining them but there are a few that do require some minor public

infrastructure so that's would be my comment on um the phasing we we've done it this way [Music] um pretty much for a long time for a very very long time on these phased big scale you know large plats where you're creating a big lot with mixed juice development or big multiple Big Lots with mixed juice development and it takes uh a lot of money and and you know the right investor with the right design ideas for us to be able to sell one of those two and be willing to sell it to them and it's worked pretty well so yeah if it's if you're referring to how it's mentioned in the resolution could you give us a number of well I think it's on uh item two applicant MERS provide information related the proposed phasing plan for the sub is outlined in section 193 230 because what I think I understood was Garrett wanted like timelines for when Lots would get recorded uh and we can't do that um nor would we there are 17 plats 17 plats submitted to the town staff for review which reflects a plat for every single lot and phase that you show here that allows me for instance um if I had a another medical provider that came in and said hey we want that lot next to the medical center we got to record that plat it it's kind of how we derive the bowling ally theater uh The Foundry that is The Foundry the rec center um my office of course was kind of designed right at the get-go but I mean bottom line is you know having that flexibility allows us to jump when somebody in the market is looking to come and invest in our community and bring one of these these are very expensive buildings to go build very expensive so so that's the idea and I don't see anything wrong with a phasing plan so long as the public infrastructure is either there or is well thought out and is addressed in a Dia if it's not associated with that plat this is pretty broad though it just

says provide information it doesn't say timelines says outlined at section 193 230 which I think yeah says one of the things that Garett pointed out is at least note the lots that have been built on yeah make some of those question just the timeline and again if this a recorded document that never expires having timelines on it I say okay we anticipate 2026 it doesn't happen yeah yeah how does that all play out when a report a document that doesn't expire okay and so that's really are are we then not in compliance are we right you understand the yeah so I mean bottom line is I think we've got a well laid out plan and and as you can see almost all of the public infrastructures there um and doing it the way we've always done it is the right way to do it and and particularly in a project like this that has mixed use buildings and lots of different types of uses um the next one that I want to touch on um development Improvement Agreements are fine with each plat which is what we would expect um and it's what we've always done and if there's something required with that plat then we would put it in if there's not anything required with that plat for instance it's got the the road already built and the town's already accepted it and all the water and sewer and everything's in there and we're not going to cut the road open because we already stubbed Services into the lot which we do have in a lot of these cases then there's not going to be a Dia because all the improvements are going to be there and your Public Works director is going to confirm with the planning department yep yeah the the the next Improvement agreement that would come would be with the building permit application right so i' go record a plat sell it to you Andy you go design your building you bring in the B building permit application right and then there would be requirements for landscaping and sidewalks and things like that that would be derived from the building permit application process okay that

that's kind of the proper order of business and what we're trying to do is prepare lots to go sell them to other builders okay other developers so I won't be building all these I told you guys that a lot of times but um that's the goal okay I may build a few of them but um and then regarding the rideways um I just want to point I'm I'm a little confused because from the beginning of time we've always had the town lawyers involved and the town planners and we've done lots of these meetings lots of public meetings and I'm reading section 19412 public rideway and easements and it says uh number one all streets water distribution sanitary sewer collection and storm water facilities shall be located within a dedicated public rideway or easement unless otherwise approved by the town okay so it's either a rideway or easement and what we have in the village today is a complex approved by the town layout of easements with public infrastructure and granted rights away for very good reasons some of it flexibility some of it had to do with the town might not wanted to do snow removal at the time uh some of it had to do with the settlement on the railroad underpass uh which I think Kent might have been involved in um but nonetheless um Our intention would be as lots are platted the associated rideway next to that would get platted with it which is kind of it could create a hopscotch but you're already platting parts of an already existing easement but we want to maintain the flexibility that we've structured there um I mean I could have somebody walk in tomorrow and

say Clark we want to buy you know four Lots eliminate Main Street and build one giant you know hotel resort complex here and here's how we do it now we're coming back in to visit with you guys a about that but that Main Street Road that splits it is today in EAS it has water sewer storm in it they'd have to relocate it but they can do it without going through a complex rideway and so I guess my question to Garrett is why do you think you need a rideway and what is the G Town gain from a rideway that it doesn't already have valid question I think it's uh simply to comply with our code requirement that right away be dedicated when infrastructure is accepted by the town um I understand that functionally um an easement really serves the same purpose as rights of way but I think it it really serves to formalize um the streets that are already there and that the town is already maintaining the applicants point about Main Street um between Grand Park Drive and Second Street which um there's already water and Sue remains in that alignment but that section of the road is not paved that's a valid point um obviously we don't want rights of weight dedicated for a road that is not paved and does not exist however what town staff is talking about is roads that are formalized that would take a great deal of effort to remove reconstruct in a different location and that would require additional approvals anyway um through you know the fpdp type approval process um so I I believe the intention is to you know formalize the roads that are already there dedicate the r of of way to the town and um and and simply just be in compliance with our code because it is it is not in compliance with our code right now well I just I gotta hang on a second Andy I gotta take question go ahead please yeah so can't

we're plow on a street that we're pling streets that are not public not dedicated rights away is that a liability issue for us yeah that's one example you know I mean I get it too if you're trying to trying to make it easier to change things if you do but you're going to come in with a huge plat that's going to abandon some streets that are already in use it's going to take a process well and you want to make the process as simple as possible but still right yeah but again I I differ Garett keeps saying this isn't a compliance I'm reading from your code and it's section 19412 it says or easements okay guys so if you're telling me for 25 years we have this in R for 25 years with all of the public hearings okay all of the Town board meetings all of the Planning Commission meetings right all of the lawyers that I've paid both at the town and for us that for 25 years what they've done is not in compliance with a code and I'm reading your code it says or easements it says or easement so with all due respect Garrett I am reading your code and for 25 years I highly doubt all of those people viola your town Cod but you're in for a subdivision approval tonight on this plat so so what I can do it via easement Andy and a lot of the easements already exist that's your opinion but we've but I mean does it St your easements and are easements acceptable if they're written in a right fashion because you helped write some of them I if I could maybe respond to that before Kent yes that section of the code says easements or rights of way but it must also be read in conjunction with parts of chapter 19 and the specific section of the code that I am referencing is section 19-3 d460 item three regarding

conveyance of improvements other than by dedication on a plat and it says that conveyance shall be made prior to final acceptance of the improvements I.E conveyance of a right of way so easements are acceptable up and until the point where the town grants final acceptance of infrastructure okay that's not true either because conveyance of infrastructure happens with a bill of sale and you've got public infrastructure that crosses properties that are just not even in a road rideway right they're easements and your code even requires offsite easements for public infrastructure so again with all due respect the you know probably 30 people involved for 25 years didn't do this wrong they did it in compliance with the code and it's been done right and there's no reason to be changing it now uh it would further complicate things given all of the various easements that are there for good reason and I would have to go pull every single one of them and read every single one of them and put it all together and I see no reason to do that uh when the town's already accepted all the public infrastructure it's in operation it works perfectly fine and it was done for good reason Rod McGowan was involved um can't I'm sure was involved in the settlement on the railroad underpass matter which is allbe easement and those roads are used by a lot of cars today and here's the thing some of the easements are they are done because the former Town manager didn't want to take on plowing of certain areas and that was smart of him okay uh and it stipulates in the easement what the responsibilities are if I remember correctly those are really old but I would just like to say I don't think all those people have done anything wrong and I think everything is in compli with a code and I completely disagree with Garrett as would every single lawyer I've ever had involved in this project

and the former town lawyer so are these Ro maintained by the town no not all of them not all of them no they're not all maintained by the town some are um the ones that are the ones that are used for you know public you know like going to the rec center uh I'm not even sure they plow that one right now I got to look and see uh in front of office they don't so like the road in front of my office does not get plowed by the town our people take care of it um well a lot of people drive through that road going to the rexit we were not going to get rid of it but that was you know again it was smart of the town to say you know it kind of like is semi-related to the gas station and those facilities and you know is there would you be would you consider Clark not giving that as a road rideway and instead including in the plat and Grant an easement through it for inance so I mean there's lots of reasons that all these things were done and to sit here and say that they were done in violation of the code is just simply a false statement and and I don't appreciate it and and all of those very very smart lawyers would not appreciate that either so uh I think we're in compliance with the code we would like to propose that as we plat Lots uh the associated road with that lot or to get to it uh would get platted um in conjunction with that plat so it would just get added in it that's easy we we frankly Market Street was structured that way as a good example and is structured that way uh when these get approved so that we could actually record those plats um for Market Street okay it's got rights of ways for uh Market Street um to be granted right now it's got a temporary easement uh I think in place until such time as a rideway is granted because it's got water sewer and the town does take care of that road I think

predominantly because of The Foundry uh the parking uh so on so forth and it's kind of a key Connector Road and it is paved and they did finally accept all those improvements so any case that's my two cents on this and um uh the code speaks for itself we're in compliance with the code so um the last item I think um excuse me on that so would you mind reading that portion of code again Garrett suggest this condition be left wouldent and and the town staff to to look at this and see get a better opinion for the board when it goes to the trustee yeah okay so thank you Andy that's great thanks Andy um this is the same one I just dealt with yep right and what was the one hang on trying to wrap up up here guys about three okay and and guys The Market Street um just so you know the deal in and it's in the building permit for Market Street as a CO won't be issued for those building shells until the final plat has been recorded and I don't know if I have a final plat I could record today or not record this will give us one that we for sure could record without any questions but uh you know kind of hints the the need to get this wrapped up okay so and I think we'll be looking for cosos on those in October uh I mean it's just shells but that's the that's always been the Target and that's they're on track to do that so just FYI I don't really appreciate the idea that uh we wouldn't PL anything else because I think it is contrary to the health wellness and

economic development of the town if uh a hotel wanted a lot tomorrow and I wanted to convey it to him you guys should want me to convey the lot to the hotel year because you make a lot of money off of a hotel okay so just my two cents um I'm all for economic development of our community and and bringing in investors when when we can get them interested in bringing dollars to invest here okay so that's all uh for me thank you for the time I appreciate it Andy yeah and the Planning Commission so one question question about the the rec center Katie brought up one one issue oh and and this this is this is one of the only times we get to look at this whole neighborhood as a whole sure and I appreciate the phased approach but the turning the traffic circle which you know the plat turns the traffic circle in the drop off area into a a key connection point to the hotels Beyond which which is good but getting to the rec center now is a challenge and getting to the rec center when this neighborhood's built out is going to be really difficult we talked about is there any hope for a connection at rendevu road to the to the main parking that was going to be my solution uh however it comes with a plan that you got that we withdrew uh but you will see that again American Willow uh American Willow and development along the American Willow which we believe we have the right to do we withdrew it because it was more critical to get this approved and we didn't want to have the controversy uh over that matter and we feel like bringing it back in a much smaller what is going to be now a very much smaller presentation to you all uh was a more appropriate anyway that that should be on the radar even if it's not American Willow at least a connection but but that that was the solution that I was going to bring up to Katie is you know we get we put in the road um at rendevu uh intersection with the four-way signal there in American Willow

Drive across and we we reserved through the rec District's land uh an easement yeah for a public Road through there yeah okay and we did that you know obviously knowing full well that one day we would want to make a connection through there so so that's already been done that's on the plat that's in the dedication to that we gave to the rec center it's it's yeah it's it's there we have an easement uh they you know if if we didn't retain that they could say no we don't want to to one of the fou one of the challenges with large Subdivision plat like this that's going to involve so much in the future is making sure it all works together 100% agree and and I know that's your interest too Clark well and and you know I can't foresee everything but I'm like I've done this a little while yeah you have and and I I literally eat sleep breathe when I I don't sleep a lot but pretty much all I think about as this project and what it could be and should be in the future and when we're doing deals like the rec center for instance we try to catch everything that possibly could be or might need to happen if we don't get them all yeah but you know we try to be pretty thorough we're trying to make sure we get them all so yeah so um so in that case I think we've got what we need to make that connection if we can get that approved uh and then that I think will be I think it'll be good for everybody frankly um there so okay thank you you're welcome thank you guys so any any comments from the public anybody that's still awake um motion to close the public hearing so moved second all in favor any opposed thank you any further discussion by the board by the commission so are we uh from what I'm

hearing it sounds like we're kicking the can down the road on the conditions on on the street condition yes uhuh and and the uh I think the the building lots that ought to be done sooner rather than later that's that's for the Market Street buildings so I think Market Street yeah I think if you just added something in staff may make an exception if developer is offered a contract by the hotel or something that would accommodate something that would come in immediately not something that's planned it's coming in slow I think Garrett's concern is that it should have been done before the building started being built right yeah that's the and now it's yeah you know how long does it take to do that to Plat so the process to Plat and record lots for those buildings would essentially be after this overall plat is approved by the Board of Trustees um well the applicant is already fished and provided tonight with our conditions correct this uh if approved this is anticipated to go to the board uh the second meeting in March um uh the applicant has already furnished um plats for I believe the lots for the buildings themselves but not the the kind of Plaza lot in between the two buildings um I mean essentially since staff already has those in hand we could simply review if those are the plats to be recorded we could review those against the overall plot I believe they're wholly consistent with each other um and essentially those plats could be recorded uh basically immediately after um overall final plat approval is granted by the board for this so I mean so three weeks to a month technically I would maybe say April just

to be more conservative okay um he wouldn't necessarily have to do anything for that Plaza separ no that that is a fair point I mean yeah it's it's a separate law but the the buildings themselves don't touch that that middle th lot yeah so the concern is Lot 10 and lot 11a not necessarily 11b I think that's a fair assessment yes okay um so I I have the condition of approval up here I have that last sentence highlighted um you know the applicant is correct that the town will not approve their certificates of completion of their current building permits until those lots are plotted so that is a hard deadline um I I will be frank um prior resolutions by The Frasier board have required those lots PL lots to be ploted under certain timelines and it never happened right um I do understand the concern about if a um potential buyer for any of the other lots and filing three comes along um this condition would effectively prevent that buyer um um from purchasing a lot until the Market Street buildings are platted um I I think staff's strong recommendation is just to require those plats be recorded and place the strictest conditions possible to do so get it done yeah they needs to stay on there as a condition a long time yeah yeah because somebody wants to buy one of those lots it ain't going to happen in 30 days anyway you know closing on so yeah so I think just to close the discussion on this condition is everyone on the commission with comfortable leaving this last sentence here yeah y

certainly subject to you know final approval by the board but I think it's approval um backing up to the earlier conditions I think condition two um staff has no objections to you know not uh providing specific dates as part of the phasing plan I think that's fine but I think uh the phasing plan should reflect platting of the Market Street Building lots and dedication of Rights of way as the first phase essentially so I've I've added this sentence here in bold simply just saying that the applicant does not need to provide dates for proposed recordation of everything else but I think so long as the phasing plan is consistent with the other requirements specifically conditions four and five I think staff would be acceptable to not requiring dates I mean it's it's a valid point by the applicant that okay yeah so uh and then condition three I just added for E each plat to be recorded just to specify that um as plats are recorded staff will evaluate the need for development improvements agement any other discussion oh and on condition five can we just approve it and add something that the um uh final language approved by the town attorney and staff or leave it as is I I I preference would be to leave it as is and have staff confer with Kent about this ahead of the board meeting

yeah any other discussion call for a motion I move to approve resolution 22522 with the changes that uh Garrett has made I'll second any further discussion all in favor I any opposed thank you okay thank you everybody I don't find anything after that one so is that it any further business or anything folks or no any a motion to adjourn I to adjourn second all in favor thank you awesome thank you