►
From YouTube: Planning and Zoning Board April 8, 2019
Description
Description
C
C
D
A
E
This
is
a
proposal
to
amend
land
development
code
by
removing
the
requirement
for
a
calculation
of
the
application
fee
for
right-of-way
vocations
that
is
based
on
currently
based
on
land
valuation.
So
the
city's
current
Street
vacation
process
requires
an
application
fee
based
on
the
property
value
of
the
land.
The
of
the
that
is
occupied
by
the
street.
E
The
city
attorney
has
provided
a
research
memorandum
that
is
in
your
packet
and
that
memorandum
recommends
that
we
remove
the
portion
of
the
fee
related
to
the
value
of
the
land.
So
the
proposed
amendment
removes
that
value
at
that
valuation
calculation
and
it
retains
the
nominal
fee
of
$200
to
cover
the
cost
of
processing
the
application.
So
you
can
see
that
change
on
page
2
of
resolution,
20
1906,
striking
the
evaluation
portion
of
the
fee
and
leaving
the
dollar
application
fee.
D
E
Usually,
the
requests
come
from
private
developers
lot
owners.
They
do
not
have
to
own
the
property
completely
surrounding
the
street.
They
request
a
vacation
of
the
street
and
state
the
reasons
for
the
vacation.
They
do
all
the
research
to
check
with
all
the
utilities
and
the
electric
and
gas
and
and
all
those
entities
that
may
have
an
interest
industry
or
infrastructure
industry.
They
do
all
that
research
upfront
and
then
they
apply
for
the
vacation
in
the
case,
and
then
it
depends
on
the
ownership
pattern.
E
If
the
street
does
segment
of
street
and
a
lot
of
times,
it's
a
segment
of
a
stream
like
a
dead
end
or
something
depends
on
the
ownership
pattern
where
once
the
street
is
vacated.
If
it's
approved,
where
the
ownership
goes
so
half
of
the
street
may
go
to
the
owner
on
one
side,
half
if
it's
a
different
owner
would
go
to
the
owner
on
the
other
side.
E
A
See
where
that
that
makes
sense,
and
it's
fair
based
on
what
the
attorney
is
has
researched
also,
my
only
question
really
would
be.
Is
this?
Obviously
that
was
bringing
in
some
additional
revenue?
$200
doesn't
cover
the
cost
of
the
staff
reviewing
this
should
or
or
is
it
in
our
purview
to
to
raise
the
fee
a
little
bit
to
help
offset
the
costs
or,
or
is
the
fee,
something
that
you
can
adjust
if
you
need
to
in
the
future?
Yes,.
E
C
E
E
F
E
F
Need
one
for
this
one
cuz
we're
not
doing
soar
all
right
Heather
earlier
for
the
record,
so
the
answer
that
question
the
impact
fees
are
a
completely
different
fee
generally,
when
you're
dealing
with
a
vacation
of
right-of-way
or
any
of
the
applications
that
you're
dealing
with
under
the
land
development
code,
they're
pre
development
applications,
so
they're
done
prior
to
a
building
permit
coming
into
the
building.
The
impact
fees
are
done
at
the
time
of
the
actual
building.
D
German
I
thought
your
excuse
me
terminate
I
thought.
Your
comment
was
very
good
in
regards
to
that
be
application.
Fee
spot
on
that
does
seem
a
little
bit
low
and
if
I
do
remember,
it
was
a
few
meetings
back,
but
there
was
some.
There
was
a
proposal
by
staff
to
adjust
fees
and
values
that,
unfortunately,
was
swept
away
to
pre
fast
I
think
that
nice,
to
that
almost
exactly
where
the
applicant
would
pay
a
more
kind
of
adjust
fee
to
to
what
the
work
they
were
causing
the
staff
to
do.
Yes,.
A
E
The
the
calculation
is
based
on
the
adjacent
land,
so
we've
had
applications
and
heather
has
more
history
on
this
I
think
any,
but
it's
usually
in
the
thousands
of
dollars
anywhere
from
2000.
We
had
a
recent
one
that
I
remember
processing
for
nine
thousand.
It
was
not
that
vacate
and
never
happened,
but
it
depends
on
the
surrounding
properties,
but
it
can
be
quite
high
of
the
property
adjacent
property
value
as
high.
It
depends
on
so.
G
E
No,
the
issue
is
that
it
is
called
an
application
fee
in
our
current
code
and
it's
calc,
you
related
as
a
valuation
of
right-of-way,
so
so
the
attorney's
memorandum
really
is
is
kind
of
telling
you
that
as
it
currently
stands,
this
ordinance
as
it
stands
is
a
problem.
So
it's
kind
of
solving
the
problem
and
Patrick.
Maybe
you
want
to
elaborate.
F
D
Question,
although
mr.
Trask's
opinion
is,
is
clear
and
it's
very
straightforward,
because
there
is
a
flaw
in
the
current
ordinance,
it
would
be
possible
for
someone
that
understood
the
value
of
the
vacation
to
collect
parcels
around
a
street
at
the
right
location
and
then,
frankly,
get
a
windfall
to
get
all
that
property
for
200
bucks.
E
This
I
will
tell
you,
based
on
my
experience
and
maybe
Heather's.
This
is
highly
unusual
charging
for
right.
It
was
most
most
jurisdictions,
don't
do
it
because
it's
it's
public
right
of
way
and
the
vacate
has
to
meet
all
the
standards.
So
if
there
is
no
public
purpose
for
it,
for
example,
one
of
the
standards
is,
does
it
lead
to
water,
and
our
code
says:
if
that's
if
it's
a
potential
water
access
or
water
view,
then
there's
a
public
purpose
there.
So
it
has
to
meet
all
the
purpose.
So.