12/31/1980 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS DATE: November. 5 193 0 Project Name: Sylvan Estates Subdivision. RECOMMEND APPROVAL: RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: X RECOMMEND DISAPPROVAL: PROJECT WITHDRAWN:] \- The Technical Review Committee recommends the following: 1. Alignme6t 6f r;oa..dFwith. 30thvenue 2. Planting non-acces's,,••easement on.east property line. 3. Suggest planting landscaping buffer as a result of re- quest from residents';of..Apple Way. 4. Extensio'.i1, of dead, -end road tying into radio tover parcel. 5. Re -design 'entirO p`.ro, &Gt.-.and return i -t to the T.R.C. Mr. Walker also suggested that. it be'stated on preliminary and final plats that both ea,seaiehts--a'nd roads will not be main- tained by the _County. The above recommendations were unanimously approved by every member of the T.R.C. present at the meeting of Nov. 4, 1980. ADMINISTRATOR NELSON STATED THAT THE MAIN DIFFERENCE THEY HAVE WITH THE DEVELOPER IS THE SWITCH -BACK DESIGN OF THE ROAD. HE NOTED THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE HAD THEM CONNECT WITH 30TH AVENUE BUT WITHIN THE REGULATIONS WE HAVE RIGHT NOW, WE DO NOT HAVE ANY LEGAL RIGHT TO OBJECT. HE FELT THERE SHOULD BE SOME STATEMENT ON THE PLAT, HOWEVER, ABOUT THE ROAD NOT MEETING DOT SPECIFICATIONS. ATTORNEY COLLINS STATED THAT HIS ATTITUDE IN REGARD TO THE COMMISSION°S AUTHORITY ON APPROVING PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLATS IS THAT THEY HAVE CONSIDERABLE DISCRETION, AND EVEN IF OUR REGULATIONS DO :NOT SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS CERTAIN AREAS, IT WAS HIS FEELING THAT IF THERE IS A VALID REASON FOR REQUIRING SOMETHING ON THE PLAT, THE BOARD HAS THE AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE IT; IF THE DEVELOPER DOES NOT LIKE IT, HE HOS HIS REMEDIES.. THE ATTORNEY POINTED OUT THAT IF THE BOARD DOES ALLOW A PLAT TO BE PUT OF RECORD WITH A DEFICIENCY THEY,ARE AWARE OF, THEY EVENTUALLY WILL BE BLAMED FOR IT. DEC 311980 47 Bow iw.