Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission asks governing body to review timing of roadwork and development agreements for Sweetgrass plat
Summary
After debate over whether required improvement plans and security must be in place before plat recordation, the planning commission approved an amendment asking the governing body to consider timing of roadway security and development agreements instead of strictly requiring recordation before creating parcels.
Commissioners and staff debated whether the Unified Development Code requires streets and utilities to be fully planned and secured before a plat can be recorded, or whether a recorded plat can proceed with improvement timing tied to later development triggers. The commission approved an amendment to its recommendation asking the governing body to review the timing of public and private improvements in the development agreement.
Development Director Charles Blumpline proposed language to put the roadway-security question before the governing body so engineering and council could weigh options. "Perhaps an alternative way forward would be to just have a blanket recommendation that the roadway security instrument be evaluated with city council consideration," Blumpline said. Commissioner Tony Laird proposed adding language requesting further discussion related to timing of the public and private improvements that would be contained within the development agreement; the amendment passed on roll call.
Why it matters: the sequencing decision affects whether the developer must post bonds or other security before parcels are created and donated to the city, which in turn affects the city's ability to accept and develop donated parkland without immediate construction of adjacent roadways and utilities.
