HomeMy WebLinkAboutOctober 21, 1975 Planning Commission Minutes j)ic ��lyJ�
October 21, 1975
7:30 P.M.
The Planning Commission meeting was called to order at 7:30 P.M. by
Chairman Don Banks. Roll call found the following members present:
Emery, Loveland, Phillips, Griffin and McDowell. Absent being
Commissioners McManama and Zander. Also present ®ere City Administrator
Ron Young, Bob Milts from Marquess and Marquess, Secretary Janice Corbettt
and Dorothy Overholt from Town and Rural.
The minutes of September 16th and October 14, 1975 were presented for
approval. A correction was noted on the September 16th minutes, Page 1,
4th paragraph.. The name of "Jean Phillips" was omitted from the first
sentence inthat paragraph. With no further corrections or additions,
motion was made by Griffin, seconded by Loveland to approve the minutes as
corrected.
Chairman Banks stated that Andy Cochran has applied for a building permit to
build a home in Scenic Village Subdivision and was turned down because the
subdivision has not been accepted by the City. W. L. Moore, Developer, was
issued seven (7) permits by the City Council and Chairman Banks stated he sees
no reason why a permit.was not given to Mr. Cochran. Cammissioner Phillips
asked Administrator Young how many units there are in the original subdivision.
Administrator Young stated there are 100 lots.. Administrator Young explained
to the Commission that in 1967 the City Council passed an ordinance saying that
no building permits would be issued in a subdivision and no building permits
would be issued for anything that requires construction improvement plans or
site improvement plans prior to the completion of the improvements. In 1973 the
City Council passed an ordinance saying that. no occupancy would be allowed in
homes. This varied from the first ordinance saying that they would issue building
permits based on the various people that had requested permits within the subdi-
vision. In otherwords, the Council is allowing themselve's the discretion of
determining who is going to have building permits before the completion of a
subdivision. Commissioner Emery asked Administrator Young when the subdivision
would be completed. Administrator Young replied that it would be completed in
two weeks. Administrator Young explained that anytime you do anythihng like this
you set a precedent and what has happened to the City in the past is a result of
the City Council varying from this rule. Administrator Young went on to say that
in Malotts Subdivision permits were requested before the subdivision was completed.
In fact, Unit #1 has never been accepted because of the connection problem with
BCVSA on the sewer line. The subdivider in Scenic Village Subdivision asked for
seven (7) permits. He asked our Building Inspector and was issued the permits.
After the permits had been issued, our Building Inspector found out they were
illegal according to the ordinance and cancelled them. The developer approached
the Council and the Council said that since the permits had already been issued
to let them go ahead and have them but no more permits would be issued. In the
meantime the developer has sold lots within the subdivision and the contractors
that purchased the lots have come in requesting their building permits. Chairman
Banks said that the developer had to sign an agreement for the seven (7) permits
and no one would occupy these homes until the subdivision has been accepted. He
sees no reason why this contractor, who is willing to sign the same agreement,
should not be allowed to obtain a permit. Administrator Young stated that a
recommendation should be made to the Council as to whether or not to allow
anyone from this point on to build in a subdivision prior to completion of
the subdivision. Chairman Banks stated that he has talked to three or four
Councilmembers and one in particular feels they have already set a precedent
but he thinks that only the developer should be allowed building permits. The
other three members feel that anyone who is willing to sign an agreement should
be issued building permits. Commissioner Emery asked Administrator Young if he
has looked into Medford' s situation regarding their issuance of building permits.
Administrator Young replied by saying that he has and said that sometimes
management is a reactionary thing. So far Medford has not had any problem to
this area since they always have a bond surety. Commissioner Emery asked Admin-
istrator Young that even though a contractor is bonded couldn't this possibly
backfire on the City. Administrator Young replied that it could but. the quickest
way to get your money back is to have a subdivision go through,. put up the bond,
sell the• lots right away to other contractors without putting in any improvements
and you have your money back very quickly because you can up the cost based on
the fact that the subdivision will have improvements. Commissioner.Emery s
suggested that when .a .subdivision is taken in that no lots can be sold until
the subdivision has been completed. Commissioner Griffin said he remembers
Malot' s subdivision when they wanted to build in the second phase and there
were still many things in the first phase that had not been completed. After
eeviewing what had been discussed, a motion was made by Griffin, seconded by
McDowell to approve the one (1) permit for Mr. Cochran. Roll call vote:
Emery, yes; Loveland, yes; Phillips, yes; Griffin, yes; McDowell, yes;
Banks, yes. With all in favor,•motion carried. 1
Administrator Young mentioned three (3) alternates regarding the issuance of
building permits.
1. Allow only to the Subdivider.
2. Allow only after certain improvements have been completed.
3. Allow after bonding.
Commissioner Emery stated that the one. point that has bothered him in tonight's
discussion is where the City, is going.to stand. Chairman Banks stated that the
City must be protected and does not thin$ the City Council- is protecting the
City by allowing permits before the completion of subdivisions. At this time,
Administrator Y-ung told. the Commission that a concensus should be taken. This
would be something to be brought before the Council.
Banks - Stick to the ordinance the way it is written and not to allow. any
building permits no matter what the reasons are.
Emery - Stick to the ordinance the way it is written. Goes along with Chairman
Banks.
Griffin - Goes along with Chairman Banks.
McDowell - Stick toathe ordinance the way it is written.
Planning Commission Minutes
October 21, 1975
Loveland - Stick to the ordinance the way it is written.
Mr. Bob Milts, Marquess and Marquess, representing Leonard, Flanagan and
Farnsworth Subdivision was recognized by the Chair. Administrator Young
said the major concern would be the stipulation of front lot lines and
street widths and it would be up to the Commission to decide on these
points. Dorothy Overholt from.Town and Rural was recognized by the Chair.
She stated that she plans to sell the property but is concerned that some_
of the conditions will make it too expensive for the middleman to purchase.
Short discussion was held. Administrator Young read the original conditions:
1. Various lots have less than 70 foot frontage lot lines, but variance may
be allowed for lots with 70 foot frontage at the building line.
2. In lieu payment for park fee requirement amounts to equivalency of 0.48
acres.
3. Flood control should be required as part of the improvement drawings on
creek areas.
4. Full street improvements with concrete curbs, gutter, and sidewalks should
be required with the subdivision. Full street improvements and widths
with 70 foot right-of-way with concrete curb and gutter should be required
on Glenn Way to West Pine Street, Snowy Butte Lane where it is contiguous
with the development and Malabar Drive to Beall Lane. All costs should be
borne by the developer.
5. Phase development may be approved by the Commission.
6. Final Plat and improvement drawings must meet all standards of the City.
After a short discussion was held the following conditions were recommended
by the City Planting Commission:
1. Glenn Way must be improved to 40 feet paved section with concrete curb, gutter,
and sidewalks on 60 feet right-of-way within Subdivision boundaries at
ownerts expanse.
2. Glenn Way must be improved to 40 feet paved section with concrete curb and
gutter from notth boundary of Subdivision to West Pine Street with 50 feet
right-of-way.
3. Malabar must be 40 feet paved section, frontage improvements.
4. Standard street paving, improvements required within subdivision on all other
streets.
5. Variance will be allowed for (a) front lot line widths as shown on Plan
presented; (b) park land dedication will be allowed in conjunction with
in lieu park fees; (c) phase development will be allowed.
6. Drainage facilities under streets, with proper rip rap at street areas on
creek slopes shall be provided.
7. All other improvements must comply with City standards.
8. All costs for improvements must be borne by the developer or a City '
approved assessment district may be formed.
Motion wasr:made by Griffin, seconded by Loveland to approve the Leonard,
Flanagan and Farnsworth Subdivision concept for a preliminary plat with the
above conditions. Roll call vote: ' Emery, yes; Loveland, yes; Phillips,
yes; Griffin, yes; McDowell, yes; Banks, yes. With all in favor, motion
carried.
Administrator Young stated that public meeting notices must be in one week
prior to being published in the paper.
With no further business to be brought bfefore the Commission, motion was made
by McDowell, seconded by Emery to adjourn the meeting. Meeting adjourned at
9:10 P.M.
ice Corbett , Secretary