Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning And Zoning Board - Minutes - 04/15/1968• MINUTES OF MEETING PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD SPECIAL MEETING April 15, 1968 Call to Order: Chairman, Don Stuart called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. on April 15, 1968. Members Present: Don Stuart, Lynn Anduss, Marcile Wood, Charles Rhoades, Tom Coffey, Tom Bennett, Art March, Jr., City Attorney, Gene Allen, City Planner, and Bob Engelke, Assistant City Planner. Item #1 Consider proposed Subdivision Ordinance. Bob Engelke: Presented the Ordinance and pointed out changes from the last copy. Don Stuart: Asked for comments. Marcile Wood: Questioned Section 3.1, Paragraph 4. Bob Engelke: This is to draw attention to the historical spots in order to preserve them if possible. Marcile Wood: Requested the removal of the comma after strips and streets in Paragraph 10 on Page 9. Bob Engelke: In answer to Don Stuart's question on the release of guarantee, this could be done in phases of subdividing or improvements under any part of the guarantee. • Having control would be up to City Council. Alvin Miller: Escrow amounts to 1 1/2 times the amount it takes to finish a job according to F.H.A. Bob Engelke: It can be broken down into logical units such as block by block, rather than house by house. Don Stuart: Section 4.5 does not refer to a final inspection. Alvin Miller: Before the City would release they would have to have a basis for their release, wouldn't they? Gary Haxton: If I start a filing, what do I have to give to the City before I can start? How do you determine it? Bob Engelke: Referred him to Page 8, Paragraph 1 under The Final Plat shall be accompanied by the following: Mr. Engelke stated you would make an estimate of your cost and the City Engineer would check to see if it was acceptable. Don Stuart: You could have funds available to pay for part of the improvements, or show that you can acquire adequate funds to complete it. Gene Allen: It would take a bond or certified check from an individual to show the available amount of money. Don Stuart: The lending institution could submit a letter stating the estimated amount, but I do not feel this would be sufficient for City Council. Tom Coffey: Basically, you would have to satisfy City Council along with the Planning and Zoning Board, and the requirements would vary. Don Stuart: There has to be a cost estimate approved by the City. Estimates may be furnished to the City Engineer by the developers engineer. PLANNING & ZONING BDAle- MINUTES Page 2 April 15, 1968 Howard Jones: Spoke for the Contractor's Association. Ga several comments from the Association. Questioned section of the proposed ordinance. Read the section beginning "whoever divides", and questioned it since it does not say whoever divides and develops. As the property is sold, we I be the person dividing if I were selling it? Charles Rhoades: Of the land inside the City Ido riot feel it is much of a problem. Gene Allen: Annexation will proceed the subdivision activ Howard Jones: is the seller of raw ground responsible for what the balance of what this ordinance says? Art March: "All subdividers and developers shall be affect by the provisions of this Ordinance, could be added to the ordinance. Bob Engelke: If he is selling for the purpose of develops[ I think he is in fact a subdivider. Don Stuart: The problem is not solved by making the purch responsible for meeting the provisions of this Ordinance r than the seller. Gene Allen: I have never had any trouble in enforcing thi very clause in several cities I have had connection with. one who first begins to split the land is who is beginning our problems. Problems arise in areas where they sell and split up the areas. Charles Rhoades: This could affect the desirability of ar to the City. Gene Allen: If we transfer this to the buyer rather than seller I feel the minimum remain as 10 acres as it now rec Howard Jones: Questioned Page 4, Section 1.2, Paragraph Do we have to require that it becomes part of an official subdivision? Lands that are annexed are not always part a subdivision. I agree that we want to control this for street purposes. Mr. Jones also questioned Page 5, Pare Gene Allen: Stated that "with two year extension folloo approval of each final plat" should be added to the end Paragraph 4. Howard Jones: Page 10, Section 3.5, Paragraph 3 - We against acquisition of park land, but are against this particular method. The individual is penalized by th' of the land area for park sites. Six percent has no ship to people. Also questioned the option agreement Gary Haxton: What is the difference between the pub and the way the school obtains their sites? Gene Allen: There is the option to get a cash Conti or take the land contribution. The difference betw land and schools, many school districts do obtain J people are eligible to use parks as they are publi, parks. They are the property of the community whi are in. Howard Jones: High Density buildings would requi park land. Mrs. Reihl: Acquiring park land makes the City Mr. Sutherland: Low Density could contribute 40t and High Density 10% toward parks. Apartments ' would contain more people and much more park la utilized. page 3 April 15, 1968 PLANNING & ZONING BOA- MINUTES g Alvin Miller: We can't be adding to the cost of buying a . home, why already many people are unable to begin to purchase one. I hate to see such a great increase in costs. It now costs $500 to merely get a Building Permit which is only the beginning. Mr. Sutherland: We need to provide park land to develop a desirable city. Howard Jones: Should the planned unit development have to be affected by the 6%, or would it be considered separately? Don Stuart: We need to get this Ordinance passed, but these questions are all good. Gene Allen: Minimum size for a planned unit development may be two acres. One-half acre would not be usable for much of anything as open area. You would then have the alternative of a cash contribution which would go into a park fund, but would be used for the immediate area, not just anywhere in the City. Mrs. Wood: There are other ways of obtaining park land. It used to be 8%, but that was changed. The community needs to obtain a solution and when it is reached we can remove this 6%, but retain it until that time. Alvin Miller: Why should a young home buyer have to pay a penali for park land? Don Stuart: The park land in the area of his home would raise the property value. Gene Allen: The time of subdividing would be the day of • reckoning. We are talking about park sites within the area being subdivided. Tom Bennett: How do they establish the 6% of what? How was this value arrived at? Gene Allen: A straight 6% of the land value. Don Stuart: Whoever buys the lot and builds the home will be for the parks. Gene Allen: The cost of the land for a park is less than 1/3 the cost to develop the park such as lawn, sprinklers, etc. which make up the other 2/3. Marcile Wood: Would you say that the streets in new sub- divisions use 6% or what percentage of the land? Gene Allen: Forty to forty-five percent of land was once required for streets and now it is twenty to twenty-five percent, so is apparently cut in half at the present time. Don Stuart: Would you review how the money would be handled? Gene Allen: A trust fund to buy land and develop parks within the neighborhood of the subdivision. It should go into a general fund where it might be spent for the specific area, but definitely not to be spent for an area clear across town. It could be held in escrow for several years until it could be used for the specific subdivision. Some of the progressive cities of rapid growth are communities where they have dedication of park land. The most successful developers are those who were aware of the need for park facilities. Fort Collins needs this type of thing now. We need to make a decision on this Subdivision Ordinance. It is generally acceptable to the community including the park land donation. Howard Jones: If we were to make a donation and payment of 6o would you develop 6/10 of an acre suitably, or would you t • PLANNING D ZONING BOA- MINUTES Page 4 • April 15, 1968 let it set idle when it is a small site? Would you ask for cash, or develop the area no matter how small it may be? Will you have sufficient funds to take care of the area? Parks has always been a problem and all parks here today were paid for by taxation. Jim Stuart: What about a Park Ordinance to provide for these problems? Art March, Jr.: There would be nothing legally wrong with a separate Park Ordinance. Marcile Wood: Could we delete it from this Ordinance? Lynn Anduss: I move that we accept the Subdivision ordinance with the exception of Section 3.5, Paragraph 3, with the recommendation to City Council that they consider the establish- ment of a separate Park Ordinance. Charles Rhoades: Seconded the motion. John Carmack: Stated that he had several questions concerning the Subdivision Ordinance which had not yet been discussed. Marcile Wood: Moved that the original motion and the second be amended to include Section 3.5, Paragraph 3 now with a possibility of amplification later by expansion, or a Park Ordinance. Tom Bennett: Seconded the motion. Gene Allen: Recommended a $15.00 charge for plat consideration. Don Stuart: So done. Vote on Amendment: Three to two for motion. Don Stuart and Charles Rhoades were opposed. Don Stuart: Call on amended motion. Five to one in favor of motion, Don Stuart opposed. Item #2 Meeting adjourned. Respectfully submitted, PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD " . Robert 0. Engelke Acting Secretary skd