RIPON DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
COMMITTEE MINUTES – MILGEO PROPERTIES
Monday, April 9, 2007 at 2:00 P.M.

 
 
Attendees: Mayor Curt Pernice; Vice Mayor Chuck Winn; City Administrator Leon Compton, Planning Director Ken Zuidervaart, Building and Public Works Director Ted Johnston, Police Chief Dick Bull
 
Absent: Interim City Engineer Pete Santina, City Attorney Tom Terpstra.
 
Others Present: SKW and Associates David Stark, Developer Reyad Katwan, Cynthia and John Perry, Thomas Shelton, Charlie Rapp, Mitzi Johnston
 
MINUTES: MOVED, SECONDED (WINN/COMPTON) AND CARRIED TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 28, 2007, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT COMMITTEE MEETING.
 
1.         MILGEO PROPERTIES – CRW Development – This is a request to review the proposed site layout and timing of proposed development for Milgeo Properties located at 300 E. Milgeo.
 
K. Zuidervaart said that he had not made any changes to the Development Agreement since the last meeting in with the Developer on January 15, 2007.  He said that the Developer is presenting a new layout of the project.  The building permits are slated to being in 2008 under the infill exemption with 5 permits in 2008 and the remainder in 2009.  The models do not count toward the allocation schedule.
 
R. Katwan said that they had met with the Perry’s acquire their property not knowing the Perry’s were entertaining offers from other builders.  R. Katwan said that this new plan allows them to be able to develop their property and to be able to retain the existing lot.
 
R. Katwan said that his main concern is with the Development Agreement allocation schedule as he would like to be able to get 8 to 10 building permits in 2008 with the remainder in 2009. 
 
D. Starck said that he does not have the lot design for the other property and would like to get the survey location on the existing home.
 
J. Perry said that the existing home would be torn down and a new residence constructed.
 
T. Shelton asked if they had any idea of the square footage of the remaining lot and J. Perry said that he thought it was 22,000 square feet.
 
T. Shelton said that looking at the information it looks like there would be 19,420 square feet remaining.
 
R. Katwan said that he gave J. Perry more room.
 
J. Perry asked what the lots would be and K. Zuidervaart replied that they would be R1 which is 100 x 60 lot size.
 
L. Compton said that if less than 100 it would need to be wider and thought that this was changed in the zone.
 
R. Katwan said that it is his intent to work in cooperation with the other land owner and he would like to cooperate.  He said that he is making provision to stub out the property so the other land owner could develop their property.
 
T. Shelton asked where he was going to stub to and R. Katwan said that it would go beyond his property and that they would have to purchase the Right-of-way from him to build the street.
 
K. Zuidervaart explained to R. Katwan that he will be required to stub to the other property as per the Development Agreement.
 
R. Katwan said that he does not see any benefit for him to do this.  He said that he bought the piece of property and paid for it and the other developer should have to buy it from him as that would be fair.  He said that he is not going to develop and do the improvements if it is not going to benefit him.  He said that he would stub out the utilities.  He said that he paid fair market value and that the other developer should pay and do the improvements.
 
C. Pernice asked if the City has ever allowed a developer to just leave dirt and L. Compton said that as an example Magnolia Terrace the Developer had to do two street stub outs for a future developer.
 
R. Katwan said that he was told he would have to have a truck turnaround.  He said that for him to spend money for additional infrastructure creates a hardship.
 
K. Zuidervaart asked R. Katwan if what he wants is when this property develops he would have two corner homes that require that the front door faces one street and the garage the opposite street and the garage or the front door would be facing dirt?
 
C. Pernice questioned why the turnaround could not be at the end of the project and R. Katwan said that the street is strictly for the Perry’s benefit so they would not be land locked.
 
C. Pernice asked why Mr. Perry could not have access from another street and K. Zuidervaart replied that there is not enough room, it is too close.
 
R. Katwan said that the plan makes sense and he does agree with the City regarding the land plan and he is willing to provide the stub outs but to be asked to do more is unreasonable.
 
C. Pernice asked if the City could do a benefit assessment here and L. Compton replied that we could but the cost would be too expensive to set up that it looses its benefit.
 
R. Katwan said that there could be a separate agreement between the property owners.
 
C. Perry said that they were not originally planning on selling their property and Mr. Katwan was to put in a bulb, but now he is not and they would be required to buy the property?  C. Perry said that she would like to work with R. Katwan.
 
L. Compton said that unless the Council changes their mind, they have always required the developer to do the infrastructure.
 
R. Katwan said that it makes no economic sense to put this road in as it is only providing a benefit to the adjacent land owner.
 
L. Compton said that the City has made everyone else do it and can’t see why that would change now.  He said that when Chesapeake came in they had to put in a high amount of infrastructure that benefited Shadow Hawk.
 
K. Zuidervaart explained that the City is always trying to look in the best interest of the City.
 
R. Katwan said that the other developer should agree to meet half way as the amount of infrastructure is a burden on him.
 
C. Pernice said that if this is a burden and you can’t develop then they can’t develop either and suggests that they work together.
 
R. Katwan said that if you look at the yield for this and they also have to put in a wireless remote for the PD which is an ancillary benefit for them to.
 
R. Katwan said that he would have to work with and get an agreement with the Perry’s.  He said that he bought in at the top of the Market.  When he had initially approached he was not sure where the Perry’s were.  R. Katwan said that the Perry’s have been very cooperative and he has not recently dialogued with them.
 
K. Zuidervaart said that staff would recommend that they put the road in.
 
C. Winn said that at the last meeting on this project there were two separate developments.  C. Winn said that they will only accept one road and it necessitates access.
 
C. Winn said that he has spoken to a lot of Developers and understand that they are in the business to make a profit.  C. Winn said that the City is interested in the whole area including the Carolinas, etc. and when this project is completed he wants it to be an asset to the City of Ripon.  C. Winn said that we do not want half streets or an unfinished project.  The infrastructure is a given.  C. Winn said that the inclusion should be discussed and worked out and they should both see it as one large project.  C. Winn said that Ripon is a desirable area.
 
R. Katwan said that the Community is lucky to have both Council members and that he thinks that he can go back and talk to the Perry’s.  He said that he can appreciate where the City is coming from.  He fell in love with Ripon and it is a nice place to be.  R. Katwan said that the deal has to make economic sense for him.
 
C. Winn again encouraged them to work out something collectively.  He then asked if the Perry’s would have ten lots and J. Perry replied yes, nine new lots and one existing lot.
 
T. Shelton said that there has been an offer made for the purchase of the nine lots.
 
K. Zuidervaart informed T. Shelton that it would be a ten lot subdivision. 
 
K. Zuidervaart said that the Milgeo development would have R1 zoning and would be required to provide two affordable units, 1 very low and 1 low.
 
R. Katwan asked about the granny flat option and K. Zuidervaart said that the granny flat is at a 2 for 1 ratio and would have to be single story units without alley access.
 
R. Katwan asked if they are able to build the granny units then the house could be sold at market rate and L. Compton replied yes and said that he did not want to imply granny as in age restricted as they are not.
 
K. Zuidervaart said that the lots fronting on Milgeo would be required to have garages that discourage backing out onto the street.  The setback for garages is 40.  Corner lots will have the garage facing one corner and the front door facing the other corner and these garages are allowed to meet the setback of the residence.
 
K. Zuidervaart then said that 25% of the project will be one story units.
 
R. Katwan said that his only issue is on the allocation.
 
L. Compton asked if there were more available and K. Zuidervaart replied that there are five available in 08 and he could get the remainder in 09.  He said that the five permits in 08 would put them at 4.1% growth rate.
 
R. Katwan asked if there were any miscellaneous permits in 08 as he would like to roll in and complete the project in a timely manner.
 
K. Zuidervaart said that he would at the schedule again.
 
R. Katwan asked if he get into a deal with the Perry’s would he still have the same allocation.  K. Zuidervaart said that they are currently at 3 percent in 09 and so could issue more in 09 if Council approves.
 
R. Katwan said that he would like to have an opportunity to show the reason why he would like to get more allocations in 08.
 
T. Shelton ask how the allocation schedule would reflect on the Perry’s development and K. Zuidervaart explained that an additional 50 permits could be issued each year for infill projects and 50 permits for senior projects and so would have enough in 09 no matter who develops.
 
L. Compton informed T. Shelton and the Perry’s that a Development Agreement would be required for their project.
 
C. Winn asked that there were enough permits available and K. Zuidervaart replied yes, that they can be 1% over the 3% cap if Council approves this.
 
T. Shelton asked if whoever buys the nine lots would have to do a DA and R. Katwan replied that this is a subdivision.  Any division of property into more than four parcels is a subdivision.
 
C. Winn informed the parties that these permits would be available to anyone and are not automatic unless there is a development agreement.
 
D. Starck commented that as an R1 lot the property would not meet the frontage improvements and L. Compton replied that these types of items are addressed in the Development Agreement.
 
K. Zuidervaart said that there is a sewer stub out to this property put in by the developer at the cost of the developer across the street.
 
R. Katwan said that he does propose to stub out to the Perry’s property.
 
L. Compton asked the Council Members thoughts on the allocation of more units in 2007 and C. Pernice said that the Council does not like to go beyond the 4%
 
R. Katwan said that he would like to do 8-10 units including the models in 08 and the rest in 09 and so he is asking for an additional three permits in 08.
 
C. Winn replied that if R. Katwan is asking the Council if they would approve additional permits in 08, he does not know this answer.  He said that why K. Zuidervaart is proposing is going over the 4%.  He said that the Council receives a tremendous amount of flack on doing this.  C. Winn said that they are trying to provide flexibility that would benefit the Community.
 
R. Katwan said that he could have the DA remain as written and then make a request to the City Council for more permits in 08.
 
C. Pernice asked if he would be breaking ground in 08 and R. Katwan said that it would depend on how things work out with the Perry’s.  If all goes right, he will have a tentative improvements plan.  D. Starck said that he could have a tentative subdivision map ready in July.
 
R. Katwan said that he would have a March or April start.
 
C. Pernice said that he could make a request at the City Council meeting.
 
C. Winn said that staff would make a report.  If the properties were combined it could make a difference on the vote.  The reason for the exceptions to the allocation is to get infill properties developed.
 
The meeting was adjourned at 3:00 P.M.