DOCSLIB.ORG

Does Your Planned Community Need Subdivision Approval? By: George Asimos As Originally Published As a Special to the Legal Intelligencer, PLW, April 20, 2009 ______

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Does Your Planned Community Need Subdivision Approval? By: George Asimos As Originally Published As a Special to the Legal Intelligencer, PLW, April 20, 2009 ______ Does Your Planned Community Need Subdivision Approval? By: George Asimos As originally published as a Special to the Legal Intelligencer, PLW, April 20, 2009 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ GEORGE ASIMOS, an attorney and partner with Saul Ewing, has practiced transactional real estate and land use law exclusively for more than 20 years. He represents developers, telecommunications companies, industrial operators and other land owners in acquiring and obtaining project approvals from municipal boards and commissions in matters relating to zoning, subdivision and land development. Asimos works out of the offices in Chesterbrook, Pa., and Harrisburg, Pa., and can be reached at [email protected]. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ With the case of Frank N. Shaffer Family Limited Partnership v. Zoning Hearing Board of Chanceford Township, the Commonwealth Court has shaken up the world of planned community and condominium practitioners as it has addressed, for the first time, the question of whether the Uniform Planned Community Act (and by reference the Uniform Condominium Act) supersede the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code subdivision requirements. Here is how the case arose. The Shaffer Family Limited Partnership owned 25 acres of vacant land. In June 2005, the partnership applied for a building permit for a single-family dwelling on the northwest corner of the property. Zoning and construction permits were later issued and, thereafter, a certificate of occupancy was secured. In October 2006, the partnership created the “Shaffer Planned Community” out of the entire property under the Uniform Planned Community Act by recording a declaration and plat, according to the opinion. The plat showed the property divided into three areas: “Unit 1” containing the house on one acre; “Unit A” containing approximately 22 acres of vacant land; and “Common Open Space,” a narrow strip of approximately two acres of vacant land located along the southern border of the property. The declaration defined a unit “as being a separate and distinct parcel of real property, the location and dimensions of the vertical boundaries of which (the equivalent of “lot lines”) are shown on the plat and the horizontal unit boundaries of which a coextensive with the horizontal boundaries of the subject property.” Immediately after recording the declaration, the partnership conveyed, by deed, Unit 1 with a separate tax parcel number to the Shaffers’. The Chanceford Township Zoning Hearing Board upheld the township’s issuance of an enforcement notice citing the appellants’ violation of the township’s Subdivision and Land Development Ordinance, or SALDO, by reason of appellants’ failure to submit a land development plan and for unlawful subdivision. The Common Pleas Court of York County upheld the decision of the Zoning Hearing Board. On appeal the appellants questioned: • Whether a planned community “unit” interest is less than the full bundle-of-rights property interest, such that creation and division of a unit interest is not subdivision or land development; • Whether a unit is a portion of a parcel of real property with rights of ownership or occupancy that cannot exist separately from a planned community and therefore incapable of being a divided lot; • Whether creation of a planned community out of the entire parcel and later conveyance of a unit is not a subdivision or land development under §5106(c) of the UPCA, and • Whether §5106(c) of the UPCA is inconsistent with §107(a) of the Pennsylvania Municipalities Planning Code. The statutory language that has motivated planned community and condominium practitioners to approach some plats and declarations from the perspective that they are not subject to subdivision approval by municipal government is contained in Section 5106 of the UPCA, which corresponds almost verbatim with Section 3106 of the Uniform Condominium Act. Those statutes make the following three statements: • A zoning, subdivision, building code or other real estate use law, ordinance or regulation may not prohibit a planned community form of ownership or impose any requirement upon any structure in a planned community which it would not impose upon a physically identical structure under a different form or ownership. • Except as provided above, no provision of the sub-part invalidates or modifies any provision of any zoning, subdivision, building code. • The creation of a planned community under Section 5201 (relating to creation of planned communities) out of an entire lot, parcel or tract of real estate shall not, in and of itself, constitute a subdivision or land development for the purpose of laws, ordinances and regulations. Also relevant is the definition of “subdivision” in §107(a) of the Municipalities Planning Code 53.P.S.§10107(a): “The division or re-division of a lot, tract or parcel of land by any means into two or more lots, tracts, parcels or other divisions of land including changes in existing lot lines for the purpose, whether immediate or future of lease, … transfer of ownership or building or lot development.” The court concluded that: “the Partnership’s division of the property into three units [actually two units and common open space] and subsequent conveyance of a unit without Township approval established unlawful subdivision and land development under the SALDO which required the Partnership to submit a final plan for subdivision or land development to the Township.” The court also concluded that the creation of the units was the division or allocation of the 25- acre parcel “into planned community units, either as land or space, and that [t]hese actions unquestionably fall within the meaning of subdivision and land development under §303.” The -2- court further stated that nothing in §5106(c) supports the notion that creation of a UPCA unit from a lot, parcel or tract of land shall not constitute a subdivision or land development. Rather, the court said, §5106(c) “merely provides that declaring a planned community form of ownership does not in and of itself establish a subdivision or land development.” The court also implicated the Uniform Condominium Act, insofar as it cited Robert S. Ryan in “Pennsylvania Zoning Law and Practice” § 11.3.10, which states that “filing a condominium declaration for an existing structure already in compliance with subdivision requirements would not of itself require second subdivision approval, but that the owner has no favorite status when converting a new structure or subdivision of the tract.” The court’s use –– or misuse –– of certain terms makes it difficult to discern its reasoning. For example, the court states that “appellants’ §5106(c) argument appears to confuse the act of declaring a planning community form or ownership [which presumably the court is saying is protected from subdivision regulation under §5106(c)] with creating new units of real property [which is presumably is not protected].” Since it is the declaration of the planned community that establishes the units by description in the declaration and the attached plat, it seems that these two acts are one and could not be the basis for a legal distinction between what is permitted without subdivision approval, on the one hand, and not permitted without subdivision approval, on the other. Perhaps the court is saying that the declaration and establishment of the units by plat does not require subdivision approval but that the conveyance of the units does. Clear, however, is the court’s focus on the description of the unit. While the land owner relies on the theoretical notion that a planned community is a common interest form of ownership and that a planned community unit is somehow inseparable from the remainder of the property from which it is created (and therefore not a subdivision) the court did not seemed persuaded. Relying on the declaration description of the “unit” as if it was an admission of the applicability of subdivision regulation, the court concludes “even the declaration defines a unit as a parcel.” Further reinforcing this point, the court then proceeded to compare the similarity of the unit boundaries to lot lines along with the cases decided under the Condominium Act, Brookhaven Borough v. Iacobucci and Bensalem Township v. Salem Harbour Joint Venture, which involve the conversion of existing apartment buildings into condominiums. So, it is fair to say that the Shaffer court’s decision ran contrary to the expectations and understanding of many practitioners based, as they were, upon years of following the commonly accepted practice of splitting ownership within developments simply by means of the imposition of planned communities or land condominium regimes. The uncertainty suddenly created by this case has impacted some transactions midstream. In order to keep projects on track, some parties may be well-advised to seek an official determination from the appropriate municipal officials that the grant of a land development plan, for example, pertaining to a given planned community or condominium project does not also require subdivision approval. I believe that such a determination can be issued consistent with both Shaffer and the MPC definition of subdivision in some instances, particularly those where the development has a plainly unified layout and the division of ownership
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chapter 155, SUBDIVISION of LAND
    Chapter 155, SUBDIVISION OF LAND [HISTORY: Adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Warren County 2-24-1981. Amendments noted where applicable.] GENERAL REFERENCES Planning Commission -- See Ch. 36. Building construction -- See Ch. 76. Road names and signs -- See Ch. 142, Art. I. Zoning -- See Ch. 180. ARTICLE I, General Provisions § 155-1. Purpose. A. The purpose of this chapter is to establish certain subdivision standards and procedures for all the unincorporated areas of Warren County, Virginia, as provided for by the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended. B. These articles are part of a long-range plan to guide and facilitate the orderly, beneficial growth of the community and to promote the public health, safety, convenience, comfort, prosperity and general welfare. More specifically, but not in limitation, the purpose of these standards is to provide for: (1) The change that occurs when lands and acreage become developed for residential, commercial and industrial purposes. (2) Protection for the purchasers of lots to assure that they are buying a commodity that is suitable for building and use. (3) The avoidance of placing an unreasonable burden on the county to provide educational services, water and sewer services, fire and police protection, solid waste disposal and other public services or the necessity of an excessive expenditure of public funds for the supply of such services. (4) The coordination and beneficial design and maintenance of both public and private streets. (5) Control of subdivisions or building sites in floodplain areas of streams and drainage courses and in unsafe land areas. (6) A distribution of population and traffic which will tend to create conditions favorable to health, safety, convenience, comfort, prosperity and general welfare.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustainable Subdivision Planning and Design: Analysis, Literature Review and Annotated Bibliography
    Sustainable Subdivision Planning and Design: Analysis, Literature Review and Annotated Bibliography Issues in Urban Sustainability No. 7 __________________ by David R. Van Vliet 1994 __________________ The Institute of Urban Studies FOR INFORMATION: The Institute of Urban Studies The University of Winnipeg 599 Portage Avenue, Winnipeg phone: 204.982.1140 fax: 204.943.4695 general email: [email protected] Mailing Address: The Institute of Urban Studies The University of Winnipeg 515 Portage Avenue Winnipeg, Manitoba, R3B 2E9 SUSTAINABLE SUBDIVISION PLANNING AND DESIGN: ANALYSIS, LITERATURE REVIEW AND ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY Issues in Urban Sustainability No. 7 Published 1994 by the Institute of Urban Studies, University of Winnipeg © THE INSTITUTE OF URBAN STUDIES Note: The cover page and this information page are new replacements, 2015. The Institute of Urban Studies is an independent research arm of the University of Winnipeg. Since 1969, the IUS has been both an academic and an applied research centre, committed to examining urban development issues in a broad, non-partisan manner. The Institute examines inner city, environmental, Aboriginal and community development issues. In addition to its ongoing involvement in research, IUS brings in visiting scholars, hosts workshops, seminars and conferences, and acts in partnership with other organizations in the community to effect positive change. SUSTAINABLE SUBDIVISION PLANNING AND DESIGN: Analysis, Literature Review and Annotated Bibliography Issues in Urban Sustainability 7 David R. Van Vliet Institute of Urban Studies 1994 ii PUBLICATION DATA Van Vliet, David R. Sustainable Subdivision Planning and Design: Analysis, Literature Review and Annotated Bibliography (Issues in Urban Sustainability; 7) ISBN: 0-896023-00-2 I. The University of Winnipeg.
    [Show full text]
  • Designing Planned Communities Is a Clear Statement of the Design Issues That Are Critical to Creating Livable and Well-Designed Planned Communities
    URBAN DEVELOPMENT DESIGNING PLANNED Th e compositional form of most planned communities defi nes their development struc- ture. Th ey became popular because of development problems that arose under traditional zoning and subdivision regulations, which did not originally include this concept. Th e zoning ordinance regulates land uses and lot sizes. Th e subdivision ordinance regulates DESIGNING PLANNED street and block layouts and requires developers to provide public infrastructure such as streets, sewers, and other utilities. Th ere is a gap here. Neither ordinance gives designers or developers the fl exibility to design a planned community that includes common open space, resource protection, and better and varied design. Th is book shows how to design COMMUNITIES planned communities that overcome these problems. “Designing Planned Communities is a clear statement of the design issues that are critical to creating livable and well-designed planned communities. Professor Man- delker draws on his long experience with planned community and land use regula- tion to explain the meaning of good design for planned communities. He shows how design concepts for planned communities can be translated into effective de- COMMUNITIES sign guidance by local governments. Examples of design standards are provided from comprehensive plans, design guidelines, design manuals, and planned community regulations. Throughout Designing Planned Communities, the reader is taken through the complex problems of design regulation to an eff ective design program that can create planned communities in which we want to live. Planners and lawyers will be interested in what Mandelker has to say about the design issues facing a growing number of planned communities throughout the country.
    [Show full text]
  • Building Codes and Housing
    Building Codes and Housing Building Codes and Housing David Listokin Rutgers University David B. Hattis Building Technology Inc. Abstract This article examines whether and to what extent building codes affect housing costs. It first describes these technical provisions, then considers how building codes could theoretically affect housing costs, and finally analyzes empirical studies on the subject. While the latter are dated and suffer from other limitations, the more rigorous quan­ titative analyses indicate that codes increase housing costs by 5 percent or less. Further, building codes are in a state of flux and we need to examine how the current generation of regulations affects housing. Thus, building codes merit contemporary investigation; however, these regulations have much less impact on housing costs compared to other regulations such as zoning and subdivisions requirements. Introduction and Summary This article considers the regulation of housing construction (single-family and multifamily, new construction and rehabilitation of existing buildings), focusing on the building code (a broad term specifically defined in this article). It first describes the building code and then traces its history. The history of the building code is important because numerous events and disparate parties have shaped the code, which currently is in a state of evolution. The code is moving toward two national model templates that influence local building code regulations, and away from the three regional-oriented model codes that have been influencing local regulations. In theory, the building code could adversely affect housing production and could increase housing costs through both substantive (technical) and administrative impediments. Examples of the former include restrictions of cost-saving materials and technologies and barriers to mass production; the latter encompasses such barriers as administrative conflicts among different administering parties (for example, building and fire departments) and inadequately trained inspectors.
    [Show full text]
  • Subdivision Regulations
    SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS LAUDERDALE COUNTY, ALABAMA FOREWORD A subdivision is defined as the development and division of a lot, tract, or parcel of land into two (2) or more lots, plats, sites, or otherwise for the purpose of establishing or creating a subdivision through the sale, lease, or building development of the lot or lots . Further explanation of the definition and any exemptions from these subdivision regulations can be found in Section 2-1-60 of these regulations. Any individual who plans to develop and/ or divide a parcel of land in the County should consult with the County Engineer early in the planning phase of the development to assure compliance with these regulations. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLE I PURPOSE AND POLICY ARTICLE II DEFINITIONS ARTICLE III APPROVAL OF SUBDIVISION PLATS ARTICLE IV PLAT AND PLAN REQUIREMENTS ARTICLE V DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARTICLE VI INSTALLATION OF PERMANENT REFERENCE POINTS ARTICLE VII OMIT ARTICLE VIII VARIANCES ARTICLE IX CONFLICT WITH PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PROVISIONS ARTICLE X LEGAL PROVISIONS APPENDIX I SAMPLE CERTIFICATES APPENDIX II SUBDIVISION FLOWCHART AND SAMPLE FORMS APPENDIX III AMENDMENTS APPENDIX IV APPLICABLE STATE LAWS APPENDIX V ACCEPTANCE OF ROADS AND STREETS FOR COUNTY MAINTENANCE APPENDIX VI TYPICAL SECTIONS 2 ARTICLE I PURPOSE AND POLICY 1-1 PURPOSE AND POLICY 1-2 TITLE 1-3 FEES 1-4 ENFORCEMENT AND VIOLATIONS 1-5 AMENDMENTS SECTION 1-1 PURPOSE AND POLICY The subdivision regulations set out herein have been adopted pursuant to authority granted by Code of Alabama 1975 , § 11-24-1(b) to establish procedures and standards for the design and development of proposed subdivisions or additions to existing subdivisions within the subdivision jurisdiction of Lauderdale County, Alabama.
    [Show full text]
  • Subdivision Ordinance of Carroll County, Virginia.”
    SUBDIVISION OF LAND Chapter 113 From the CODE of CARROLL COUNTY (Adopted by the Carroll County Board of Supervisors) (June 8, 2009 to be effective July 1, 2009) (Amended by the Carroll County Board of Supervisors) (April 12, 2010) (Amended by the Carroll County Board of Supervisors) (June 14, 2010) (Amended by the Carroll County Board of Supervisors) (October 12, 2010) (Amended by the Carroll County Board of Supervisors) (March 10, 2014 - Amendments in Bold Print) (Amended by the Carroll County Board of Supervisors) (April 14, 2014 - Amendments in Bold Print) {Y0115663.1 013277-070995 } 1 SUBDIVISION OF LAND Chapter 113 From the CODE of CARROLL COUNTY COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA {Y0115663.1 013277-070995 } 2 SUBDIVISION OF LAND Chapter 113 SUBDIVISION OF LAND ARTICLE I General Provisions 113-1. Title; legislature authority, applicability. 113-2. Purpose. 113-3. Word usage. 113-4. Definitions. 113-5. Interpretation; prevalence of more-restrictive standards; effect on easements and agreements. 113-6. Administrative official ARTICLE II General Requirements 113-7. Points of emphasis. 113-8. Reservation of land for public and semipublic uses. 113-9. Alteration or vacation of subdivision. 113-10. Resubdivision. 113-11. Allowable error of closure. 113-12. Advertising standards. 113-13. Recording of plats; submission of property report. ARTICLE III Plat Review and Approval Procedure 113-14. Application. 113-15. Preliminary plat approval or disapproval. 113-16. Review and approval of improvements. 113-17. Installation of improvements; bond. 113-18. Submission of final plat. 113-19. Time restrictions for final plat approval. 113-20. Certificate of approval. 113-21. Recording of final plat.
    [Show full text]
  • MINOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL Total Fee & Calculation
    Date Received Stamp Warren County Regional Planning Commission Warren County Administration Building 406 Justice Drive, Lebanon, Ohio 45036 OFFICE USE ONLY W C R P C File No. Form Updated 02/01/21 APPLICATION FOR MINOR SUBDIVISION APPROVAL Total Fee & Calculation 1. Property Owner Phone Fax Address Email 2. Agent Phone Fax Address Email Status of Agent: Realtor Attorney Purchaser Surveyor Other/Specify 3. Property Location: Township Section Town Range or Military Survey Name of Street(s)/Road(s) Property Fronts on 4. Property Description: Existing Parcel: Acreage Road Frontage (feet) Sidwell ID # Proposed Parcel: Acreage Road Frontage (feet) Zoning Class Wastewater Disposal Type: Central Sewer On-Site Water Supply Type: Central Water On-Site 5. Application Requirements: a) A completed application for the proposed parcel to be created less than 5 acres in area and another for the remainder if also less than 5 acres in area. Parcels that are over 5 acres in size that have an access easement are subject to a Minor Sudivision review (Subdivision Regulations Pg. 21) b) A metes and bounds legal description of the proposed parcel being created. c) A survey plat of the proposed subdivision submitted per the required filing standards of the Warren County Tax Map Depart ment, including all existing structures on the existing and proposed parcels. Contact the Warren County Combined Health District (see back) about including septic system leach fields on the survey plat. d) Zoning certification that the proposed parcel and remainder each meet zoning requirements. e) A letter from the Warren County Combined Health District which indicates the proposed subdivision of the property, if not served by central sanitary sewer, is acceptable if involving existing and/or intended use of onesite wastewater disposal.
    [Show full text]
  • Islamic Cemetery
    TMre Gase : lslamic Gemetery Hearinq Date: September 2,2020 Tulso Metropoliton Areo Plonning Commission Case Report Prepared bv: Owner and Applicant lnformation: Nathan Foster Applicant: Tim Terral, TEP Owner.lslamic Society of Tulsa Location Map: Applicant Proposal: (shown with County Commission Districts) Minor Subdivision Plat 1 lot, 1 block, 21.78 1âcrês Location: South of the southeast corner of East 191st Street South and South Memorial Drive .!":'i t a b Zoninq: AG (Agriculture) Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the minor subdivision plat Gountv Commission District: 3 Commissioner Name: Ron Peters EXHIBITS: Site Map, Aerial, Minor Subdivision Plat 1 MINOR SUBDIVISION PLAT lslamic Gemetery - (Tulsa County) South of the southeast corner of East 191"t Street South and South Memorial Drive This plat consists of 1 lot, 1 block on 21.78 + acres. The TechnicalAdvisory Committee (TAC) met on August 20,2020 and provided the following comments: '1. Zoning: Approved as submitted. 2. Addressing: Approved as submitted. 3. County Engineering: Final release required for drive configuration. 4. Sewer/Water: Lots will be served by on-site sewage disposal approved by Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality. Water service available through the rural water district. 5. Utilities: Telephone, Electric, Gas, Cable, Pipeline, Others: All release letters have been received. Oil & Gas certificate was submitted. Waivers of Subdivision Regulations: 1. None Requested Staff recommends APPROVAL of the minor subdivision plat subject to the requirements of the Subdivision & Development Regulations. 1L AG AG SUBJECT TRACT AG AG o LEGEND Bixby Corporate Limits Feet ISLAMIC 0 200 400 CEMETERY -.# 16-13 12 13 Feet ISLAMIC Note: Gnphic averlays may not precisely 0 200 400 Subject al¡gn w¡th phys¡cal features on thø ground, Tract CEMETERY Aer¡al Photo Date: Fêbruary 2078 16-13 12 7l OWNER / DEVELOPER Islamic Cemote ENGINEER / SURVEYOR lslamic Sæiety of Tulsa Tulsa Eng¡neering & Planning Associates, lnc.
    [Show full text]
  • SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Section General Provisions
    CHAPTER 150: SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS Section General Provisions 150.001 Title 150.002 Authority 150.003 Jurisdiction 150.004 Purpose 150.005 Subdivision Defined 150.006 Compliance 150.007 Subdivision Administrator 150.008 Coordination of Plans 150.009 Administrative Fee 150.010 General Definitions 150.011 Moratoria on Development Approvals Subdivision Review Procedure 150.020 Approval Levels 150.021 Subdivision Types 150.022 Approval Authority 150.023 Plan and Plat Requirements 150.024 Plan and Plat Submittal and Review Periods 150.025 Appeals 150.026 Effects of Approvals - Prerequisites Subdivision Design Standards, Reservations and Dedications, Required Improvements 150.030 General 150.031 Subdivision and Street Names 150.032 Blocks 150.033 Lots 150.034 Streets & Street Improvement 150.035 Drinking Water Improvements 150.036 Sanitary Sewerage Improvements 150.037 Oversized Water & Sewer Facilities 150.038 Storm Drainage Improvements 150.039 Sidewalk Improvements 150.040 Basements 150.041 Street Name Signs 150.042 Traffic Control Signs & Markings 150.043 Street Lights 150.044 Monuments 150.045 Subdivision Entrance Signs and Landscaped Medians 150.046 Phasing 3 2008 S-9 4 Boiling Springs - Land Usage Guarantee of Improvements; Warranty Against Defects 150.050 Financial Performance Guarantee in Lieu of Immediate Installation for Approval 150.051 Duration of Financial Performance Guarantees 150.052 Default 150.053 Release of Guarantee Security 150.054 Warranty Against Defects Legal Provisions 150.060 Interpretation, Purpose, Conflict 150.061 Repeal and Reenactment of Existing Subdivision Ordinance 150.062 Effect Upon Outstanding Preliminary Plats 150.063 Effect Upon New Territory Added to Jurisdiction 150.064 Modifications 150.065 Amendment 150.066 No Liability 150.067 Validity 150.099 Violations, Penalty GENERAL PROVISIONS § 150.001 TITLE.
    [Show full text]
  • SUBDIVISION of LAND Chapter 192 SUBDIVISION of LAND 5 192-1
    SUBDIVISION OF LAND Chapter 192 SUBDIVISION OF LAND 5 192-1. Power of Planning Board. 5 192-2. Declaration of policy. 5 192-3. Purpose. 5 192-4. Procedure. 5 192-5. Preliminary plat application and approval. 5 192-6. Final plat application and approval. 5 192-7. Improvements. 5 192-8. Utilities. 5 192-9. Monuments. 5 192-10. Preliminary plat specifications. 5 192-11. Final plat specifications. [HISTORY: Adopted by the Common Council of the City of Glens Falls as Ch. 102 of the 1967 Code. Sections 192-2D, 192-4, 192-5, 192-6, 192-7, 192-10 and 192-11 amended at time of adoption of Code; see Ch. 1, General Provisions, Art I. Other amendments noted where applicable.] GENERAL REFERENCES Rre prevention and building eonslrvetion - See Ch 109. nod prevention - See Ch. 113. Zoning - See Ch. 220. 5 192-1 GLENS FALLS CODE 5 192-3 5 192-1. Power of Planning Board. By authority of the resolution adopted by the Common Council, pursuant to the provisions of Article 3 of the General City Law, the Planning Board has the power and authority to approve plats for subdivisions within the City of Glens Falls. $ 192-2. Declaration of policy. It is declared to be the policy of the City Planning Board to consider land subdivisions as part of a plan for the orderly, efficient and economical development of the city. A. Land to be subdivided shall be of such character that it can be used for building purposes without danger to health or peril from fire, flood or other menace.
    [Show full text]
  • Subdivisions: PLATS, PARCELS, and PLANNING
    Subdivisions: PLATS, PARCELS, AND PLANNING Elliot R. Lawrence, Office of the Property Rights Ombudsman March 27, 2015 I. Objectives—Legal Aspects of Subdivision Process a. Purpose of Subdivision Regulation b. What Is and Isn’t a Subdivision c. Plat Approval Process d. Minor Subdivisions e. Required Procedures and Hearings f. Amendment and Vacation of Subdivisions g. Infrastructure Guarantees h. Vested Rights i. Conditions on Plat or Development Approval II. Purposes of Subdivision Regulation a. Accurate Property Descriptions b. Ensures Compliance With General Plans and Zoning Ordinances c. Facilitates Development and Use of Real Property d. Provides for Efficient Development and Delivery of Utilities and Public Services e. Helps Prevent Title Disputes III. What Is a Subdivision? a. Subdivision Statutes are found in Part 6 of LUDMA i. Cities: §§ 10-9a-601 to -611 ii. Counties: §§ 17-27a-601 to -611 b. Definition found at Utah Code Ann. §§ 10-9a-103(52) and 17-27a-103(57) c. A “Subdivision” is any land that is divided into two or more lots i. For the purpose (present or future) for offer, sale, lease, or development ii. May be created by plat, deed, metes and bounds description, device and testacy (wills), maps, or other recorded document iii. Includes all types of land use, including agricultural d. Approval from a land use authority is required for any subdivision IV. What Isn’t a Subdivision? a. Some divisions or boundary adjustments are exempt from regulation b. A bond fide division of agricultural land: i. In a County’s jurisdiction (unincorporated), for agricultural purposes ii. In a City jurisdiction (incorporated), division to join one of the new parcels to a contiguous parcel of unsubdivided agricultural land c.
    [Show full text]
  • INTRODUCTION to the COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Alan M
    INTRODUCTION TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Alan M. Efrussy, AICP "Planning is the triumph of logic over dumb luck" -Anonymous as quoted by David L. Pugh, AICP "The best offense is" a good defense" - Anonymous as quoted by Alan M Efrussy, AICP The purpose of this chapter is to describe the importance, purposes and elements of the comprehensive plan. This discussion represents the author's perspective and recognizes that there are a number of ways to prepare a comprehensive plan and that different elements may be included in plans, reflecting the particular orientation or emphasis of the community. What is important is that a community has a comprehensive plan. This author and many cities’ planning commission members in Texas are indebted to the authors of chapters regarding the comprehensive plan published by the Educational Foundation, Inc. of the Texas Chapter of the American Planning Association, as part of earlier editions of the Guide to Urban Planning in Texas Communities. The earlier authors were Robert L. Lehr, AICP, planner and former Professor of Urban and Regional Planning at the University of Oklahoma, and Robert L. Wegner, Sr., AICP, Professor, School of Urban and Public Affairs, at the University of Texas at Arlington. Definition of a Comprehensive Plan A comprehensive plan can be defined as a long-range plan intended to direct the growth and physical development of a community for a 20 to 30 year or longer period. Ideally, and if feasible, it is appropriate to try to prepare a comprehensive plan for the ultimate development of a community. This will allow for ultimate utility, transportation, and community facilities planning, and therefore can aid in a more time and cost-effective planning and budgeting program.
    [Show full text]