Laserfiche WebLink
paving.) <br />If Chesnut paved the road as an assessment project with the county paying 25% of the cost (as it <br />does on all assessment projects) but with no other property owners being assessed, Chesnut <br />would pay 75% of the improvement cost but represent only 16% of the front footage impact <br />(180' of frontage on 1,100' of paving project frontage). With an approved assessment project, <br />Chesnut will pay only 12% of the cost although he has 16% of the impact on a frontage basis <br />Therefore, although Mr Chesnut may eventually pay only 12% of the project cost for 16% of the <br />project frontage, he might also eventually pay 75%-100% if the assessment project is not <br />approved and the County decides not to share in the costs. <br />Because the site plan approval condition based upon 952.09(5)(c)5 as applied to the Chesnut <br />project does not meet the "rough proportionality' test, it should be considered unconstitutional as <br />applied. To make the site plan approval action constitutional the Board should delete the road <br />paving condition and replace it with the condition proposed by Attomey Barkett. That condition <br />is as follows: "Prior to issuance of a C.O., the applicant shall pay his fairshare for the paving of <br />12`h Street S.W.". Such a condition satisfies the "roughly proportional test" and eliminates <br />potential timing problems. <br />In addition, the Board should suspend application of LDR section 952.09(5)(c)5 and direct staff <br />to initiate an LDR amendment to bring LDR section 952.09 into confoiniance with current case <br />law. <br />RECOMMENDATION: <br />Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners: <br />1. Delete the site plan approval LDR section 952.09(5)(c)5 road paving condition applied to <br />the Chesnut site plan <br />2. Attach the following replacement approval condition to the Chesnut site plan project: <br />"Prior to issuance of a C.O. for the project the developer shall pay his fairshare for the <br />paving of 12th Avenue S.W." <br />3. Direct staff and the Attorney's Office to initiate amendments to the road paving and <br />escrowing requirements of LDR section 952.09 to bring such regulations into <br />conformance with current case law. <br />ATTACHMENTS: <br />1. Chesnut Location Map and Site Plan <br />2. Approval Conditions <br />3. Barkett Request <br />4. LDR Section 952.09 <br />5. Paving Assessment Agenda Item <br />FEBRUARY 19, 2002 <br />