Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout18-00305 Staff Review Summary.pdf (5)City Staff Review Summary Application Status: Review Application Number: 18-00305 Land Use - Final Plat Applicant Details Thomson Farms - The Grove Final Plat Phase 1 Application Reviewed Date: 06/05/2018 Applicant: Paul Bringhurst Address: Approx. 1000 Yellowstone Hwy Property Owner 160 W CAnyon Crest Dr. Suite 3 Alpine, UT 84004 STILLWATER EQUITY PARTNERS LLC Property Details PROPERTY ID LOCATION RPRXBCA0174803 Parcel Size : 18.25 acres Authority § 6.13 (E) "The Commission may recommend that the amendment be granted as requested, that it be modified, or that it be denied" City Staff Reviews RESUBMIT 06/06/2018GIS Final Plat Review This plat isn't in the right format see Idaho Code 50-1304 Essentials of Plats. * Are the subdivision and street names unique and is the plat called out as a subdivision? Doesn't indicate that it is a subdivision in Title or any other text. * Does the boundary close, and the exterior dimensions match the boundary description on the plat? Second call is way to long (West 1,1141.47). Boundary description doesn't close back to P.O.B * Does the subdivision fit with adjacent parcels and section breakdown? Doesn't show adjacent owners on plat * Are adjoining landowners identified (subdivision or record of survey references)? Adjacent owners not shown on plat. * Is all needed COGO information (curve and line tables, calls, etc.) contained on plat in order to map all lots, open spaces and R-O-W? Since boundary doesn't close I didn't check the interior lot. Looks like address on the building foot prints, address should not be shown on plat this has not yet been assigned addresses * Are the required signature blocks shown? The Examinging Surveyor's Certificate is incomplete. The Recorder's Certificate does not need Plat Book and Page. * Is the owner dedication complete, and does the owner of record and/or mortgagee match the plat dedication? Owners certificate should have the owners name typed below the signature line. * Are the street widths and calls shown? The matchline is covering some of the street centerline calls on sheet 2 RESUBMIT 06/27/2018GIS Final Plat Review Version (2) submitted 6/22/2018 via email. * Are the subdivision and street names unique and is the plat called out as a subdivision? Doesn't indicate that it is a subdivision in Title or any other text. Page 1 of 3Report Date: 08/17/2018 11:48 am City Staff Review Summary Application Status: Review Application Number: 18-00305 Land Use - Final Plat City Staff Reviews * Does the boundary close, and the exterior dimensions match the boundary description on the plat? Second call is way to long (West 1,1141.47). Boundary description doesn't close back to P.O.B * Is all needed COGO information (curve and line tables, calls, etc.) contained on plat in order to map all lots, open spaces and R-O-W? Looks like address on the building foot prints, address should not be shown on plat this has not yet been assigned addresses * Are the required signature blocks shown? The Examinging Surveyor's Certificate is incomplete. The Recorder's Certificate does not need Plat Book and Page. * Is the owner dedication complete, and does the owner of record and/or mortgagee match the plat dedication? Owner's name should be typed below the signature line. * Are the street widths and calls shown? The matchline is covering some of the street centerline calls on sheet 2 RESUBMIT 06/28/2018PZ Final Plat Review Version (2) submitted 6/22/2018 via email. * Is the final plat in sufficient detail to determine if it is consistent with the preliminary plat? Does the final plat meet the conditions of the preliminary plat and/or Preliminary Master Plan? The notes specify Madison County as the jurisdiction with authority instead of Rexburg. COMPLETED 07/23/2018GIS Final Plat Review Version (3) submitted July 20, 2018. * Are the subdivision and street names unique and is the plat called out as a subdivision? Okay * Does the boundary close, and the exterior dimensions match the boundary description on the plat? Okay * Are the required signature blocks shown? Only need's one recorder's certificate * Are the street widths and calls shown? Okay RESUBMIT 08/17/2018GIS Final Plat Review * Are the required signature blocks shown? Remove County Approval certificate. RESUBMIT 06/29/2018PW Final Plat Review An additional 4 feet of right of way is needed to accommodate the de-acceleration lanes. Version (2) submitted 6/22/2018 via email. COMPLETED 07/23/2018PZ Final Plat Review Version (3) submitted July 20, 2018. * Is the final plat in sufficient detail to determine if it is consistent with the preliminary plat? Does the final plat meet the conditions of the preliminary plat and/or Preliminary Master Plan? The notes specify Madison County as the jurisdiction with authority instead of Rexburg. Page 2 of 3Report Date: 08/17/2018 11:48 am City Staff Review Summary Application Status: Review Application Number: 18-00305 Land Use - Final Plat City Staff Reviews RESUBMIT 07/03/2018PW Final Plat Review * Has the development agreement been implemented? Development agreement has been written. Not yet executed. * Are streets and drainage ways dedicated to the public? Required right of way width is 92' (including existing state right of way). Plat shows less than 92' total right of way on southwest end. * Utility easements dedicated Notes refer to 15' utility easements, plat shows 10' utility easements. Notes refer to Madison County Public Works and County Standards. Notes also mention a lighting district. Cut and paste carryover? * Is there an irrigation certificate? Is there an irrigation certificate on the plat? * Are the water rights released to the city? Have the water shares been signed over to the City? RESUBMIT 07/24/2018PW Final Plat Review Version (3) submitted July 20, 2018. * Has the development agreement been implemented? Development agreement has been written and provided to the developer, but is not yet executed. * Are streets and drainage ways dedicated to the public? Required right of way width is 92' where the right turn lane will be located (including existing State right of way). Plat shows less than 92' total right of way on southwest end; this is acceptable as long as the turn lane and taper required by ITD fit within the additional dedicated right of way. * Is there an irrigation certificate? An irrigation certificate required on the plat. * Are the water rights released to the city? The water shares need to be signed over to the City. COMPLETED 08/17/2018PW Final Plat Review Version (4) submitted 8/14/2018 * Has the development agreement been implemented? Development agreement has been written. Not yet executed. * Are streets and drainage ways dedicated to the public? . * Is there an irrigation certificate? . * Are the water rights released to the city? The water shares must be signed over to the City per the development agreement. Page 3 of 3Report Date: 08/17/2018 11:48 am