Res 01-334
RESOLUTION NO. 01-334
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON, APPROVING WITH
CONDITIONS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OF MEADOWLANE,
FEDERAL WAY FILE NO. SUB96-0004.
WHEREAS, the applicantEd Flanigan, applied to the City of Federal Way for preliminary plat
approval to subdivide certain real property known as Meadowlane and consistingof approximately2.6 acres
into ten (10) single family residential lots located at the northeast quadrant of the intersection of Southwest
344" Street and 35" Avenue Southwest; and
WHEREAS, on April 12, 2000, an Environmental Determination of Non significance (DNS)
was issued by the Director of Federal Way's Department of Community Development Services pursuant to
the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW 43.2IC; and
WHEREAS, no comments or appeals on the DNS were submitted to the Department of
Community Development Services; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Way Land Use Hearing Examiner on December 5, 2000, held a
public hearing concerning the Meadowlane preliminary plat; and
WHEREAS, following the conclusion of said hearing, on December 18, 2000, the Federal
Way Land Use Hearing Examiner issued a written Report and Recommendation containing findings,
conclusions, and recommending approval of the preliminary plat of Meadowlane subject to conditions set
forth therein; and
WHEREAS, on January 22, 2001 the City Council Land Use and Transportation Committee
considered the record and the Hearing Examiner recommendation and voted to forward a recommendation
for approval of the proposed Meadowlane preliminary plat to the full City Council, with no changes to the
Hearing Examiner recommendation; and
Resolution No. 01-334 , Page #1
rcg~1f
WHEREAS, the Federal Way City Council has jurisdiction and authority pursuant to Section
20-127 of the Federal Way City Code to approve, deny, or modify a preliminary plat and/or its conditions;
and
WHEREAS, on February 6, 2001, the City Council considered the written record and the
Report and Recommendation of the Hearing Examiner on the Meadowlane preliminary plat, pursuant to
Chapter 20 of Federal Way City Code, Chapter 58.17 RCW, and all other applicable City Codes;
Now THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON,
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Adoption of Findings of Fact and Conclusions.
1.
The findings of fact and conclusions 'of the Land Use Hearing Examiner's
Recommendation, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference, are hereby adopted as the
findings and conclusions ofthe Federal Way City Council. Any finding deemed to be a conclusion, and any
conclusion deemed to be a finding, shall be treated as such.
2.
Based on, inter alia, the analysis and conclusions in the Staff Report and Hearing
Examiner's recommendation, and conditions of approval as established therein, the proposed subdivision
makes appropriate provisions for the public health, safety, and general welfare, and for such open spaces,
drainage ways, streets or roads, alleys, other public ways, transit stops, potable water supplies, sanitary
waste, parks and recreation, play grounds, schools and schools grounds, and all other relevant facts as are
required by City Code and state law, and provides for sidewalks and other planning features to assure safe
walking conditions for students who walk to and from school.
3,
The public use and interest will be served by the preliminary plat approval granted
herein,
Resolution No, 01-334 , Page #2
Section 2. Application Approval. Based upon the recommendationofthe Federal Way Land
Use Hearing Examiner and findings and conclusions contained therein as adopted by the City Council
immediately above, the preliminary plat of Meadowlane, Federal Way File No. SUB96-0004, is hereby
approved, subject to conditions as contained in the Recommendation of the Federal Way Land Use Hearing
Examiner dated December 18,2000 (Exhibit A).
Section 3. Conditions of Approval Integral The conditions of approval of the preliminaryplat
are all integral to each other with respect to the City Council finding that the public use and interest will be
served by the platting or subdivision of the subject property. Should any court having jurisdiction over the
subject matter declare any of the conditions invalid, then, in said event, the proposed preliminary plat
approval granted in this resolution shall be deemed void and the preliminary plat shall be remanded to the
City of Federal Way Hearing Examiner to review the impacts of the invalidation of any condition or
conditions and conduct such additional proceedings as are necessary to assure that the proposed plat makes
appropriate provisions for the public health, safety, and general welfare and other factors as required by
RCW Chapter 58,17 and applicable City ordinances, rules, and regulations, and forward such
recommendation to the City Council for further action.
Section 4. Severabilitv.lfany section, sentence, clause, or phrase ofthis resolution should be
held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or
unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of any other section, sentence, clause, or
phrase of this resolution.
Section 5. Ratification. Any act consistent with the authority and prior to the effective date
of the resolution is hereby ratified and affirmed.
Resolution No, 01-334 , Page #3
Section 6. Effective Date. This resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage by
the Federal Way City Council.
RESOLVED By THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON,
THIS .-ntlPA Y OF
F"hTII"ry
, 2001.
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
~~:[1: /;Z~
MAYOR MIKE /
L-"
APPROVED As To FORM:
~C.~
CITY ATTORNEY, BOB C. STERBANK
FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: 01/30/01
PASSED By THE CITY COUNCIL: 02/06/01
RESOLUTION No. 01-334
Docum,", ID #13128
Resolution No, 01-334, Page #4
Page - 1
CITY OF FEDERAL WAY
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
IN THE MATTER OF:
)
)
MEADOWLANE PRELIMINARY PLAT)
)
)
)
)
)
FWHE#00-28
SUB No. 96-0004
PROCESS IV
I.
SUMMARY OF APPLICATION
~ ~D: ~ GnllE ~
~
CIty of Federal Way
The applicant proposes to subdivide approximately 2.6 acres into ten separate residential
lots. One residence exists on the subject property.
II. PROCEDURAL INFORMATION
'.\
Hearing Date:
Decision Date:
December 5, 2000
December 18, 2000
At the hearing the following presented testimony and evidence:
1. Jim Harris City of Federal Way
2. Steve Calhoon 3350 Monte Villa Parkway, Bothel/, WA 98002
3. Scot Sherrow 3350 Monte Villa Parkway, Bothel/, WA 98002
2. Ed Flanigan 826 SW 355'" Ct. Federal Way, WA 98023
3. Richard Perez City of Federal Way
6. Jim Femling Public Works, City of Federal Way
IIIl ((
LXillBIT
Page-2
At the hearing the following exhibits were admitted as part of the official record of these
proceedings:
1.
Staff Report with all attachments
2.
Section 20-155, Federal Way City Code
III. FINDINGS
1.
The Hearing Examiner has heard testimony, visited the site, admitted documentary
evidence into the record, and taken this matter under advisement.
2.
The Community Development Staff Report sets forth general findings, applicable
policies and provisions in this matter and is hereby marked as Exhibit "1" and
incorporated in its entirety by this reference.
3.
All appropriate notices were delivered in accordance with the requirements of the
Federal Way City Code (FWCC).
4.
The applicant has a possessory ownership interest in a rectangular, 2.6 acre parcel
of property located at the northeast corner of the intersection of SW 344'" Street and
35'" Avenue SW within the City of Federal Way. The relatively flat parcel is
improved with a single family residential dwelling adjacent to the intersection, and
the applicant requests preliminary plat approval to allow subdivision of the site into
ten single family residential lots with the existing home located on lot 10.
5.
The site, abutting p¡¡¡rcels, and parcels in the nearby area are located within the
Single Family-High Density designation of the City of Federal Way Comprehensive
Plan and the Single-Family Residential (RS-7.2) zone classification of the Federal
Way City Code (FWCC). The RS-7.2 zone classification requires a minimum lot
size of 7,200 square feet and all proposed lots satisfy said criteria. Lot 10 which will
support the existing home will contain approximately 22,568 square feet.
6.
The preliminary plat map shows a single plat access road extending east from 35'"
Avenue SW near the center of the parcel to the east property line where it turns
north and dead ends at the north property line. The applicant will construct half
street improvements for the north-south portion of the road and construct a
temporary cul-de-sac turnaround at the north property line which will be removed
when the road is extended upon development of parcels to the east and north. A
Page - 3
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
38 foot wide private access tract extends south from the east-west plat road to
provide access to four lots. The house on lot 10 will maintain its existing access
onto southwest 344'" Street. A 20-foot wide, 180 foot long, storm water tract is
located between the 35'" Avenue right of way and the northernmost three lots.
The 1973 King County Soils Survey Map shows Alderwood gravelly sandy loam
soils on the site. These soils are moderately well drained and exhibit slow runoff
and slight erosion hazard properties and can support urban development.
Vegetation is mostly a grassy pasture area with mature cottonwood trees and a few
small evergreen trees along the west property line and around the existing house.
No wetlands or other critical areas are located on the site and no priority plant or
wildlife species are known to inhabit the site.
A visit to the site confirms the description of the neighborhood characteristics in the
staff report. The parcel is located in the southwest portion of the City, north of
Pierce County and the City ofTacoma in a residential area with both small and large
lot sizes.
The preliminary plat shows no land set aside for open space and the applicant
proposes to pay a fee-in-lieu of providing an on site recreation area. The applicant
questioned whether the fee-in-lieu payment is calculated over the entire site or
whether it would exclude lot 10, the large lot supporting the existing home. Section
20-155 (b) FWCC states in part:
All residential subdivisions shall be required to provide open space in
the amount of 15% of the aross land area of the subdivision site... A
fee-in-lieu payment may be made to satisfy open space requirements
at the discretion of the park's director....(emphasis supplied)
Thus, the fee in lieu payment is calculated on the full 2.6 acre parcel.
The applicant will construct sidewalks along both sides of the interior plat road and
access tract, the east side of 35'" Avenue SW across the plat frontage, the north
side of SW 344'" Street across the plat frontage, and the west side of 34'" Avenue
SW (the internal half street).
Very little filling and grading will be required due to the plat topography, and
landscape buffers will not be required due to abutting single family zoning or
collector streets.
Page - 4
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
As previously found, access will be provided via an intemal plat road extending east
from 35'" Avenue SW and then north to the north property line. This street is
designed to provide future connection to SW 342nd Street, east of the site. The
applicant must construct the internal roads to City standards and dedicate said
roads to the City. Frontage improvements on 35'" Avenue and SW 344'" street will
comply with the collector standards of Section 22-1524 FWCC which include a 34
foot wide street section with curbs, gutters, six foot planting strip with street trees,
six foot wide sidewalks, and street lights in a 60 foot right-of-way. The King County
General Bicycle Plan also calls for bike lanes on both streets. The applicant has
secured a right-of-way modification to delete on street parking, and will also request
a modification of street standards to allow the sidewalk to meander around utility
poles.
The internal plat roads must satisfy the requirements of the neighborhood access
street standards set forth in Section 22-1525 FWCC which include a 28 foot wide
street with curbs, gutters, four foot planting strips with street trees, five foot
sidewalks, street lights, and a 50 foot wide right-of-way. 34'" Avenue SW will be
constructed to a 20 foot minimum paved width which is necessary for the half street
improvements. Both the Public Works Department and Fire Department have
conceptually approved the road improvements to include the temporary turnaround
at the northeast corner of the plat.
The applicant must comply with the school impact fee ordinance and make a
payment of $2,383.00 per single family housing unit to offset the impact of the
development on the Federal Way School District.
Tacoma Public Utilities will provide both domestic water and fire flow to the site and
the applicant will locate fire hydrants in accordance with the direction of the fire
department. The Lakehaven Utility District will provide sanitary sewer service to
each lot subject to a developer extension agreement.
The applicant must construct the storm drainage facilities in accordance with the
1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual and the City's amendments
thereto. The Public Works Department has reviewed the preliminary stonn drainage
plan which includes a water quality tract at the northwest corner of the site. The
applicant proposes to direct storm drainage to the City's regional storm drainage
pond at SW 342"d Street, and must pay an acreage charge for said detention
capacity as determined by the Public Works Director. The applicant questioned
whether lot 10 could be excluded from the acreage charge since the storm water
runoff from said parcel already drains to the ditch or percolates into the ground.
Page-5
17.
18.
The 340'" Street regional storage facility accommodates drainage from a tributary
area of 121 acres and the cost therefor is calculated on a per acre basis. As
parcels develop and propose using the regional facility, proportionate share
payments are made to reimburse the City for the cost of constructing the pond.
While it is true that drainage from Lot 10 may already drain to the regional facility
site, it is also true that the balance of the plat will also drain thereto. Were
exceptions to be granted for existing homes, plat applicant's could also request that
all non impervious surfaces which presently drain to the facility also be excluded,
and that only new impervious surfaces be considered. Such would be inconsistent
with the FWCC and the pro rata share calculations for the storm drainage facility.
Therefore, the applicant must pay the acreage charge as determined by the Public
Works Director.
Prior to obtaining preliminary plat approval the applicant must show that the request
satisfies the criteria set forth in Section 20-126(c) FWCC. Findings on each criteria
area hereby made as follows:
A.
As previously found, the project is consistent with the City Comprehensive
Plan which designates the property as single family-high density. The
proposed density and lot sizes are consistent with density allowances and
applicable comprehensive plan policies.
B.
The project is consistent with all applicable provisions of the FWCC to include
Chapter 18, Environmental Policy; Chapter 20, Subdivisions; and Chapter
22, Zoning. Development of the subdivision will meet all applicable
development codes and regulations.
C.
The project is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare and
makes appropriate provision for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, roads,
alleys, other public ways, fire protection, domestic water and fire flow,
sanitary sewers, parks and recreation, schools and school grounds, and safe
walking conditions.
D.
The preliminary plat complies with the design criteria listed in Section 20-2
FWCC.
E.
The preliminary plat also complies with the development standards listed in
Sections 20-151 through 157 and 20-158 through 187 FWCC.
Page - 6
IV. CONCLUSIONS
From the foregoing findings the Hearing Examiner makes the following conclusions:
1.
2.
3.
The Hearing Examiner has jurisdiction to consider and decide the issues presented
by this request.
The applicant has established that the proposed preliminary plat of Meadowlane
satisfies the criteria set forth in Section 20-126(c) FWCC, is consistent with the
single family residential-high density designation of the comprehensive plan, and
satisfies all bulk regulations of the RS-7.2 zone classification.
The proposed preliminary plat will serve the public use and interest by providing an
attractive location for a single family residential subdivision consistent with
development in the area, and which will accommodate future connections of City
streets. Therefore, the Federal Way City Council should approve the preliminary
plat subject to the following conditions:
1.
Prior to final plat approval, signage shall be installed on the temporary cul-de-
sac barricade as required by the Public Works Director. The signage shall
be a minimum size of three feet by three feet, with three-inch letters, and
state, "This street is planned for future extension. For further information
contact the City of Federal Way Public Works Department at 253-6614131."
2.
As required by the Public Works Director, a note shall be included on the final
plat to the following effect, "Lots 1-5 must access from interior plat streets,
and lots 6-9 must access from the private access tract."
3.
Prior to final plat approval, the applicant shall install signage as required by
the Public Works Director and Fire Department to assure the temporary cul- .
de-sac is maintained in an accessible manner at all times. A note shall also
be made on the final plat map, clearly indicating the temporary cul-de-sac
bulb is to be accessible for turn-around at all times.
4.
The final plat map shall include language as required by the Public Works
Director and Community Development Director, identifying provisions for
release of the temporary turn around easement and removal of the
temporary cul-de-sac bulb upon future extension of the roadway. The
temporary easement should be worded to release automatically upon future
extension, and future development would be responsible for removal,
Page - 7
8.
9.
replacement, and repair of the temporary bulb and associated sidewalks as
applicable.
5.
Private utility service lines are not permitted across the public water quality
tract, unless approved by the Public Works Director.
6.
Prior to final plat approval, all utility poles required or proposed to be
relocated, must be outside of any sidewalk, as required by the Public Works
Director.
7.
All streets shall have a minimum pavement section of three inches Class B
asphalt over six inches of crushed surfacing to support the traffic loads, as
required by the Public Works Director.
As required by the Public Works Director, in order to install code required
street frontage improvements, right of way dedication is required on the
northeast corner of SW 344'" Street and 35'" Avenue SW to accommodate
the sidewalk radius.
The offset at the intersection of SW 343'" Street must be minimized to the
maximum extent possible, as required by the Public Works Director.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is hereby recommended to the Federal Way City Council that the preliminary plat
of Meadowlane be approved subject to the conditions contained in the conclusions above.
(I
DAmTH," Ihu~f-
Sf'E N K. CAUSSËA~ -~
Hearing Examiner
TRANSMITTED THIS RDAY OF DECEMBER, 2000, to the following:
APPLICANT:
Ed Flanigan/Bob Hanson
10803 Kent-Kangley Road, Suite 102
Kent, WA 98031
Page - 8
Jim Harris
City of Federal Way
P.O. Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
Steve Calhoon
3350 Monte Villa Parkway
Bothell, WA 98002
Scot Sherrow
3350 Monte Villa Parkway
Bothell, WA 98002
Ed Flanigan
826 SW 355'" Ct.
Federal Way WA 98023
Richard Perez
City of Federal Way
P.O. Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98023
Jim Femling
City of Federal Way
P.O. Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98023
City of Federal Way
c/o Chris Green
P.O. Box 9718
Federal Way, WA 98063-9718
RIGHTS TO RECONSIDERATION AND CHALLENGE
THE BELOW STATED RIGHTS TO RECONSIDERATION AND APPEAL AND DESIGNED
TO
PROVIDE
NOTICE
OF
TIME
LIMITS
AND A
GENERAL
OUTLINE
OF
PROCEDURES.
THE
SPECIFIC
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
REQUEST
FOR
RECONSIDERATION ARE FOUND IN SECTION 22-488 OF THE FEDERAL WAY CITY
CODE.
THE SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR CHALLENGES TO THE HEARING
EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDATION ARE FOUND
IN SECTION 22-489
OF THE
FEDERAL
WAY
CITY
CODE.
CLARIFICATION
OF
THE
RIGHTS
TO
RECONSIDERATION AND CHALLENGE AND THE NAMES AND ADDRESSES
OF
PERSONS WHO HAVE A RIGHT TO CHALLENGE MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE CITY
CLERK OF THE CITY OF FEDERAL WAY.
RECONSIDERATION
Any person who has a right to challenge a recommendation of the
Hearing Examiner under the Federal Way City Code may request the
~i
Hearing
Examiner
to
reconsider
any
aspect
of
his
or
her
recommendation by delivering a written request for reconsideration
to
the
Department
of
Community Development
within
seven
(7)
calendar days after the date of issuance of the Hearing Examiner's
recommendation.
The person requesting the reconsideration shall
specify in the request what aspect of the recommendation he or she
wishes to have reconsidered and the reason for the request.
The person requesting the reconsideration shall within seven (7)
calendar days following issuance of the recommendation, mail or
personally deliver a copy of the request for reconsideration along
with a notice of the right to file a written response to the
request to those persons who have a right to challenge under
Federal Way City Code. Proof of such mailing or personal delivery
shall
be
made
by
an
affidavit
attached
to
the
request
for
reconsideration at the time of delivering the request
to the
Department of Community Development. The notice shall state that
such response must be received by the Department of Community
Development within seven (7) calendar days following the filing of
the request with the department.
Any person filing a response to a response to the reconsideration
request must distribute that response by mail or personal delivery
to those persons having a right to challenge under the Federal Way
City Code.
Proof of such distribution by mail or personal delivery
shall be made by affidavit attached to the response delivered to
the Department of Community Development.
Within
ten
(10)
working
days
after
expiration
of
the
reconsideration period, the Hearing Examiner shall notify the
persons who have a right to challenge under the Federal Way Zoning
Code, whether or not the recommendation will be reconsidered. The
Hearing Examiner may reconsider the recommendation only if he or
she concludes that there is substantial merit in the request.
The
process of reconsideration will be in accordance with Section 22-
488 of the Federal Way City Code.
CHALLENGE
The recommendation of the Hearing Examiner may be challenged by any
person who is to receive a copy of that recommendation.
The
challenge, in the form of a letter of challenge, must be delivered
to the Department of Community Development within fourteen (14)
calendar
days
after
the
issuance
of
the
Hearing
Examiner's
recommendation or, if a request for reconsideration is filed, then
within fourteen (14) calendar days of either the recommendation of
the Hearing Examiner denying the request for reconsideration or the
reconsidered recommendation.
The letter of challenge must contain
a clear reference to the matter being challenged and a statement of
the
specific
factual
findings and conclusions of
the Hearing
Examiner disputed by the person filing the challenge.
The person
filing the challenge shall include, with the letter of challenge,
the
fee established by the City.
The challenge will not be
accepted unless it is accompanied by the required fee.
The
person
challenging
the
recommendation
shall
within
said
m,
fourteen (14) calendar day period mail or personally deliver a copy
of the letter of challenge along with a notice of the right to file
a written response to the challenge to those persons who have the
right to file a challenge under Section 22-489 of the Federal Way
City Code.
The notice shall state that such response must be
received by the Department of Community Development within five (5)
working days following the filing of the written challenge with the
department.
Any person filing a response to the reconsideration request must
distribute that response by mail or personal delivery to those
persons having a right to challenge under Section 22-489 of the
Federal Way City Code.
Proof of such distribution by mail
or
personal delivery shall be made by affidavit attached to the
response delivered to the Department of Community Development.
The
recommendation of
the Hearing Examiner may be
challenged
whether or not there was a request to reconsider the Hearing
Examiner's recommendation.
Any challenge of the Hearing Examiner's
recommendation will be heard by the Federal Way City Council.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
CLARIFICATION OF DECISIO
ALL PARTIES OF RECORD ¿.
STEPHEN K. CAUSSEAUX, JR., HEARING EXAMINER~~
JANUARY 4, 2001
CLARIFICATION OF DECISION REGARDING PRELIMINARY
PLAT OF MEADOWLANE, FWHE#OO-28, (SUB96-0004)
On December 18, 2000, the Examiner issued a decision recommending approval
of the preliminary plat of Meadowlane. There were two inadvertent errors in the
decision as noted below:
,."
1.
Preliminary plat's are not reviewed under Process IV, but are
reviewed under the provisions of Federal Way City Code (FWCC)
Chapter 20, Division 6, Preliminary Plat.
2.
There is no right to reconsideration and challenge of the Hearing
Examiner recommendation under the preliminary plat process.
Pursuant to FWCC Section 20-127 (attached hereto), following
receipt of the final report and recommendation of the Hearing
Examiner, a date shall be set for a public meeting before the City
Council.
This memo serves to clarify these processes and recommendation.
SKC/jc
(} .'~~ fI~~
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW, ACTION
Pursuant to Section 20-127, following receipt of the final report and recommendation of
the hearing examiner, a date shall be set for a public meeting before the city council.
The city council review of the preliminary plat application shall be limited to the record of
the hearing before the hearing examiner, oral comments received during the public
meeting (so long as those comments do not raise new issues or information not
contained in the examiner's record) and the hearing examiner's written report. These
materials shall be reviewed for compliance with decisional criteria set forth in section 20-
126. The city council may receive new evidence or information not contained in the
record of hearing before the hearing examiner, but only if that evidence or information: (i)
relates to the validity of the hearing examiner's decision at the time it was made and the
party offering the new evidence did not know and was under no duty to discover or could
not reasonably have discovered the evidence until after the hearing examiner's decision;
or (ii) the hearing examiner improperly excluded or omitted the evidence from the record.
If the city council concludes, based on a challenge to the hearing examiner
recommendation or its own review of the recommendation, that the record compiled by
the hearing examiner is incomplete or not adequate to allow the city council to make a
decision on the application, the city council may by motion remand the matter to the
hearing examiner with the direction to reopen the hearing and provide supplementary
findings and/or conclusions on the matter or matters specified in the motion.
After considering the recommendation of the hearing examiner, the city council may
adopt or reject the hearing examiner's recommendations based on the record
established at the public hearing. If, after considering the matter at a public meeting, the
city council deems a change in the hearing examiner's recommendation approving or
disapproving the preliminary plat is necessary, the city council shall adopt its own
recommendations and approve or disapprove the preliminary plat.
As part of the final review. the city council may require or approve a minor modification
to the preliminary plat if:
(a)
The change will not have the effect of increasing the residential density of the
plat;
The change will not result in the relocation of any access point to an exterior
street from the plat;
The change will not result in any loss of open space or buffering provided in the
plat; and
The city determines that the change will not increase any adverse impacts or
undesirable effects of the project and that the change does not significantly alter
the project.
(b)
(c)
(d)