The Preston City Council approved the preliminary plat for the Enclave East (Enclaves East) subdivision, a 19-acre proposal that would create 45 new lots plus one existing home and two open-space parcels, including a retention-pond parcel and central park/open space slated for homeowner association ownership.

Planning staff told the council the plat shows required lot sizes for the Residential A-1 zone and the proposed open-space parcels include a 23,798-square-foot retention-pond/open-space parcel in the southwest and an 18,922-square-foot central open-space parcel that would include pavilions and pickleball courts. Staff said the developers will provide 52 shares of consolidated secondary (irrigation) water; those shares are required at final plat.

Staff and the city’s engineering review found that developers’ stormwater, water and traffic studies provided the documentation the city needed. An earlier discrepancy in utility line sizing (10-inch vs. 12-inch) had been resolved and the plat shows a 12-inch line.

Planning and Zoning Commission (PNC) recommended denial by split vote, principally over the suggested alignment of Fifth East and concerns about creating offset intersections rather than straight road connections. The PNC’s concern was that the plan’s shifted 450 East alignment could produce “off-kilter” intersections and reduce usefulness of certain parcels; staff said a straight Fifth East alignment along the eastern edge of the property would make lot layout more difficult and likely require more cul-de-sacs.

Council members discussed stormwater, noting the submitted stormwater and water-impact studies had been reviewed by the city engineer. Councilors asked about the retention pond’s capacity and depth; staff said the pond as drawn is 3 feet deep and that the city engineer reviewed the stormwater study and found that the pond design met the stormwater requirements for the project (including 100-year storm assumptions reported in the engineer’s study). Councilors expressed differing views about whether the pond could be made deeper to provide greater capacity, and whether such a change would be a material alteration at the final-plat stage.

Some councilors voiced concern that the council’s earlier agreement with the developer on open-space buy-out arrangements had constrained PNC’s review, and that PNC had been effectively “painted into a corner” by prior council-level agreements; other councilors said the code and the engineer reviews supported moving forward. One council member said the area’s roads, particularly Fourth North, are already strained by existing and approved development and that the council should weigh traffic impacts carefully going forward.

Council voted 3–1 to approve the preliminary plat (three aye votes, one nay). The dissenting vote cited alignment and planning commission concerns. Council directed staff to continue working with developers on final-plat details and required conditions, bonds or agreements as typical before final plat approval. The council noted that preliminary plat approval permits developers to proceed at their own risk with some infrastructure work but that lots cannot be sold until final plat approval is recorded.