Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Assembly hears presentation on Ridgeview Heights subdivision, staff seeks $943,150 appropriation
Summary
Land management staff presented the Ridgeview Heights subdivision plan and asked the Assembly to appropriate $943,150 from the general fund balance for capital projects (roads, utilities and contingencies). The proposal would rezone the property to RE4, reduce lots from 31 to 16, retain ~140 acres for recreation and proceed to future sale ordinances; no vote on the ordinance was recorded.
Land management staff presented an overview of the Ridgeview Heights residential subdivision project and requested the Assembly consider ordinance 2025-20-1G, which would appropriate $943,150 from the general fund balance to the capital projects fund for development-related costs.
Danny Welch (land management) described the 214-acre site off Old Nana Highway, said staff reduced the prior concept from 31 to 16 lots in response to public input and proposed rezoning from G1 to RE4 so lots meet minimum RE4 size. Staff said about 67 acres would be residential and roughly 140 acres would be retained for recreation and trail protections. “We did hold 2 public meetings...59% supported the residential development in this area; 89% supported the outdoor recreational area,” Welch reported, summarizing survey feedback.
Staff provided financial estimates and a development timeline. Key figures presented included professional services and construction costs estimated at about $760,973 and an appropriation request of $943,150 (which staff said includes contingency). Staff estimated a net revenue figure of roughly $103,000 and cited an average assessed land value per lot of about $871,000 over a 10-year horizon. Project timing discussed included 9 months to complete rezoning steps and 6–12 months for survey, ROW work and platting, with additional months before land sale; staff said they would return to the Assembly with a sale ordinance and that the borough stages development and sale separately.
Assembly members questioned whether trail connectors and encumbrances would be shown to prospective buyers; staff said rights-of-way will be noted on plats and maps and that marketing commonly highlights trail access. Ms. Wilson pressed on the funding source; finance staff and the mayor’s office clarified the appropriation would come from the borough general fund. Mr. Kress and others asked about contingencies and a GVA reimbursement tied to power hookups; staff said GVA reimbursement requires hookups within five years of pole installation. No committee vote on the ordinance was recorded in the provided transcript; staff concluded by saying they will return with a sale ordinance when ready.
