Subdivision Code Update. Introduction & Explanation

Transcription

1 Subdivision Code Update Introduction & Explanation

2 Purpose of Meeting Share approach to subdivision code update. Determine if City Council agrees with approach and wants staff to proceed. Identify Council objectives with subdivision code update.

3 Proposal: Repeal Title 17 Subdivision Code Adopt a new Title 17 based upon Model Subdivision Code Insert local preferences: Number of lots in short plats Fee simple unit lot subdivisions

4 Background Information Current Code Adopted 1987 Last Updated 2011 (Adoption of Fee Simple Unit Lot Subdivision Provisions)

5 Background Information Developments since original adoption Changes in state laws, e.g., Deadlines for submitting final plats Local option for short plats 9 lots vs. 4 lots. New case law Nexus & Rough Proportionality Nollan vs. California Coastal Comm.(1987) Dolan vs. City of Tigard (1994) Koontz v. St. Johns River Water Management Distr. (2013) Use of text from other jurisdictions Not always consistent with state law, e.g., Preliminary and final short plats Fee simple unit lot subdivisions

6 State-defined Subdivisions (Ch , RCW) Subdivisions 5 or more lots (sometimes referred to as long plats) Preliminary plats Final plats Short plats 4 or fewer lots (sometimes called short subdivisions) Boundary line adjustments (No new lots created) Binding Site plans (commercial or mixed use only) Condominiums

7 Palm Court Subdivision 5 lots Zoned RS 7200

8 Another recognized form of subdivision PUD Planned Unit Development Allows flexibility in site development. e.g., clustering to preserve open space. Provisions defined in zoning code. PUD s considered rezones by the courts. PUD s still follow standard subdivision procedures.

9 Montesa PUD 12 Lots Average Lot size 4,155 s.f. Zone RS 7200

10 Mint Grove PUD 33 Lots Average Lot Size - - 4,279 s.f. Zone RS 7200

11 Fee Simple Unit Lot Subdivisions Not a type of division described in state statutes. Developed by Master Builder Association. Alternative to condominium approach. Lots sizes typically smaller than minimum lot size. Structures do not meet setback or coverage standards.

12 Fee Simple Unit Lot Subdivisions Issues Subdivision Type: Typically involve more than 4 lots. Renders the plat a subdivision under state regs. Processing Subdivision requires preliminary and final plat approval. Preliminary and final plat require review/approval by Planning Commission/City Council. Past fee simple subdivisions reviewed/approved administratively. Lack of procedural description in current code

13 Monterra Fee Simple Unit Subdivision 53 lots Zoned RMM

14 Hall Lake Townhomes Fee Simple Unit Subdivision. 8 lots Zoned RMM

15 Short Plats Divisions of 4 lots or less. Requires summary approval within 30 days. (RCW (2)) City s Current Code uses same process and time frame as long plats (5 or more lots). 90 days for preliminary plat approval. 30 days for final plat approval.

16 Short Plat 4 lots Zoned RS 7200

17 Current impetus to amend subdivision code. Gateway site development: Encumbered by binding site plan for Gateway Place. Will require amendment to binding site plan. No method in current code to amend binding site plan.

18 Benefits of Model Subdivision Code: Fully up to date with current state law and case law. Address compliance issues described above. Many additional provisions summarized in staff memo, e.g., Subdivision improvement agreements, Provisions for subdivision phasing, Methods for handling illegal subdivisions and innocent purchasers of such lots, Provisions for plat vacations/alterations, Methods for amending plats and binding site plans, etc., etc.

19 Issues for consideration: Does Council want staff to proceed with amendment process? Does Council have specific goals or objectives with amendment? Number of lots in short plats? Retain fee simple unit lot subdivision provisions?

20 Discussion & Final Directions