Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Subdivision Development Compliance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission hears update on Granite Ridge Phase 5; required second access remains unresolved
Summary
Staff told the commission the development agreement and recorded site plans for Granite Ridge include inconsistencies about a required secondary/through access; city staff said phases 4 and 5 were recorded and approved although the emergency/secondary access required by the original development agreement was not secured.
Willard City staff briefed the Planning Commission on Feb. 20 about the status of Granite Ridge Phase 5 and related development-agreement obligations, including a required second or emergency access.
Staff said the development agreement approved in February 2015 included a site plan exhibit that contemplated a secondary (through) access, but later recorded plats for phases 4 and 5 do not include a through street. The agreement also required an emergency access connection through property owned by a third party (Parsons / Staker Parsons) to be secured by phase 3; staff reported there is no recorded agreement from Parsons granting that emergency access.
City staff and the commission reviewed engineering and planning files and concluded that phases 4 and 5 have recorded mylars and city approvals but that an inconsistency exists between the development agreement and the recorded plats regarding the secondary access requirement. Staff said this likely results from deferred conditions and the historical practice of signing subsequent phase mylars after the developer completed some required improvements, but that the lack of a signed emergency-access agreement had not been resolved as required by the original timeline.
Staff recommended that the city use the development-agreement and subdivision records as the basis for any corrective action and suggested the City Council may need to review whether a breach of the development agreement occurred. Commissioners and staff also discussed the difficulty of tracking deferred conditions over many years and the city’s need to avoid similar oversights on future projects.
No enforcement action was taken at the Feb. 20 meeting; staff said they would continue to gather records and bring recommendations to the City Council if necessary. Commissioners affirmed a desire for stricter upfront requirements and fewer deferred-condition agreements going forward.
