• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, planning adjacent topics, and whatever else comes to mind. No ads, no spam, no echo chambers. Create your FREE Cyburbia ID, and join us today! You can also register through your Reddit, Facebook, Google, Twitter, or Microsoft account.

Random Thoughts Deserving No Thread of Their Own 2019

DVD

Cyburbian
Messages
13,805
Points
40
I love when I get the two planners have different opinions problems. Any thoughts on this one:

We have a hillside ordinance that went in around the '70s. The plat was done in the '60s. Portions of the plat were build and even have some houses. The part I'm dealing with is a couple lots that were never built on and the odd part, the road that serves the lot was never built. The big question is density. Hillside regulations severely limit it which makes this kind of a legal non-conforming plat. Which option works for you and which is way off:
1. Since we have a vested plat from before the ordinance nothing applies.
2. Since the plat is vested you get all the lots, but you need to build the road and the new homes are subject to all the hillside rules.
3. Since nothing was built the whole plat is out and you need to redo it which will kill the density - you get maybe half the lots.

I lean toward 2. The other planner says 3, but since they're not here I can't get a reason behind that. I can understand that there are other civil problems like water and sewer extensions because existing stuff if sub standard. Also the platted road width isn't wide enough to put in today's road standard, but civil might have some ways around that. My feeling is that the only way I can touch the density on this one - I so love touching dense things - is if we open a new plat and I have nothing requiring a new plat.

Either way I passed the buck and told the guy to file for an official opinion. I'll try to find out later if there is something I'm missing that says replat is needed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dan

AG74683

Cyburbian
Messages
6,052
Points
26
I ran some calls with EMS today, trying to get ahead of my clinicals.

Nothing major, but I think this is where I belong.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dan

Maister

Chairman of the bored
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
27,159
Points
61
I love when I get the two planners have different opinions problems. Any thoughts on this one:

We have a hillside ordinance that went in around the '70s. The plat was done in the '60s. Portions of the plat were build and even have some houses. The part I'm dealing with is a couple lots that were never built on and the odd part, the road that serves the lot was never built. The big question is density. Hillside regulations severely limit it which makes this kind of a legal non-conforming plat. Which option works for you and which is way off:
1. Since we have a vested plat from before the ordinance nothing applies.
2. Since the plat is vested you get all the lots, but you need to build the road and the new homes are subject to all the hillside rules.
3. Since nothing was built the whole plat is out and you need to redo it which will kill the density - you get maybe half the lots.

I lean toward 2. The other planner says 3, but since they're not here I can't get a reason behind that. I can understand that there are other civil problems like water and sewer extensions because existing stuff if sub standard. Also the platted road width isn't wide enough to put in today's road standard, but civil might have some ways around that. My feeling is that the only way I can touch the density on this one - I so love touching dense things - is if we open a new plat and I have nothing requiring a new plat.

Either way I passed the buck and told the guy to file for an official opinion. I'll try to find out later if there is something I'm missing that says replat is needed.
#2 is the 'correct' option in my view as well. I can already hear lawyers arguing that requiring a re-plat to occur because an ordinance changed (ex post facto) places "an undue burden on my client, and represents a 'taking' by the government." Option 2 recognizes the lots were created before the ordinance and as such are legally nonconforming. New road and building construction should meet current code requirements, as they were not in existence at that time.
 

luckless pedestrian

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,487
Points
40
I feel like Mounds/Almond Joy really over extended their reach with that commercial. Those two aren't candy you make advertisements for. They are the kind of candy you forget about for years until you're at the checkout line in Tractor Supply and see it on the end cap with other long forgotten candies of yesteryear. They aren't cool like a Snickers, or hip like Skittles or Starburst.

omg perfect image

but I still get them here and there

@DVD it might be #3 if there is a provision in either your code or state law that says if you don't use it, you lose it in x years so you may want to check that before you start poundin' the fists!

lol

kirk.gif
 

Hink

OH....IO
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
14,860
Points
40
I enjoy when I am right, but let it go, only to see my rightness come back to me. Why argue with someone when in the end they will find out you are right?

This happens all too often with contractors and developers. It is the little things...
 

Bubba

Cyburbian
Messages
4,877
Points
29
Yesterday, as an Atlanta sports fan:

Braves - fantastic ninth-inning win after I gave up and assumed they would lose in a complete-game shutout by a pitcher we traded to the Cards eons ago
United - solid win in the last regular season match to lock up second in the East
NASCAR - Chase Elliot blows an engine after a couple of laps and finishes dead-ass last
.
.
.
...and then there's the Falcons. Ye gods they're terrible. Fire everyone.
 

gtpeach

Cyburbian
Messages
1,994
Points
17
I love when I get the two planners have different opinions problems. Any thoughts on this one:

We have a hillside ordinance that went in around the '70s. The plat was done in the '60s. Portions of the plat were build and even have some houses. The part I'm dealing with is a couple lots that were never built on and the odd part, the road that serves the lot was never built. The big question is density. Hillside regulations severely limit it which makes this kind of a legal non-conforming plat. Which option works for you and which is way off:
1. Since we have a vested plat from before the ordinance nothing applies.
2. Since the plat is vested you get all the lots, but you need to build the road and the new homes are subject to all the hillside rules.
3. Since nothing was built the whole plat is out and you need to redo it which will kill the density - you get maybe half the lots.

I lean toward 2. The other planner says 3, but since they're not here I can't get a reason behind that. I can understand that there are other civil problems like water and sewer extensions because existing stuff if sub standard. Also the platted road width isn't wide enough to put in today's road standard, but civil might have some ways around that. My feeling is that the only way I can touch the density on this one - I so love touching dense things - is if we open a new plat and I have nothing requiring a new plat.

Either way I passed the buck and told the guy to file for an official opinion. I'll try to find out later if there is something I'm missing that says replat is needed.
I also agree with #2. It could be that functionally, they can't do anything with the current configurations due to other constraints, but the lots have already been approved. It would be up to the developers/builders to file for any variances to try to get around those, and if not possible, to reconfigure the lots in such a way to make them usable. But I don't think there's any reason inherently you can require the lots to be reconfigured.
 

Faust_Motel

Cyburbian
Messages
356
Points
16
1. Since we have a vested plat from before the ordinance nothing applies.
2. Since the plat is vested you get all the lots, but you need to build the road and the new homes are subject to all the hillside rules.
3. Since nothing was built the whole plat is out and you need to redo it which will kill the density - you get maybe half the lots.
I'd go for 1 with a little bit of 2. We recently lost a case like this, state law and case law may apply, YMMV. In our case:

-the landowner is vested in the plat, and gets to build the road where the plat puts it.
-Inasmuch as the plat creates the location and configuration of the road, the landowner is vested in those things (turnarounds, widths, curve radii, etc.)
-If there are specific requirements in the specs for depth of sub-base, type of asphalt, etc. those have to meet current specs.
-the houses themselves are subject to the development standards of today. Unless those standards completely preclude a house from being built on the lot. My ordinance has rules allowing for flexing the rules to allow a house to be built on a pre-existing, nonconforming lot. This nicely avoids having to go through a variance analysis.
 

Dan

Dear Leader
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
17,758
Points
58
I ran some calls with EMS today, trying to get ahead of my clinicals.
My wife is in the clinicals stage of her psych MSN program. She has to drive to Syracuse two or three times a week, which can be grueling when the nearest Interstate is about 45 minutes away, and you're also working part time. (A classmate She can only share so much, due to HIPPA and exhaustion, but she still says she made the right decision. :)

In other news, Go Bills.
 

terraplnr

Cyburbian
Messages
2,225
Points
25
Saw "Joker" last night. Pretty much what I expected, well done but very triggering and I can't imagine seeing it again for many years. It reminded me of "Taxi Driver" and I wonder if that's why De Niro is in it.
 

WSU MUP Student

Cyburbian
Messages
9,736
Points
32
Saw "Joker" last night. Pretty much what I expected, well done but very triggering and I can't imagine seeing it again for many years. It reminded me of "Taxi Driver" and I wonder if that's why De Niro is in it.
I want to go see it and will probably some evening this week but the first time I saw one of the previous, I thought it was some sort of dark comedy with Ty Burrell playing a failed clown (sort of like Buckets) until we got to the end and saw the title card. I swear Joaquin Phoenix looks like a dirtier, hungry version of Burrell in these previews.
 

luckless pedestrian

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,487
Points
40
Saw "Joker" last night. Pretty much what I expected, well done but very triggering and I can't imagine seeing it again for many years. It reminded me of "Taxi Driver" and I wonder if that's why De Niro is in it.
Ha - last night my 15 yo and his buddy went to the Joker which I had no interest in seeing so I saw Downton Abbey - he said it was pretty dark
 

DVD

Cyburbian
Messages
13,805
Points
40
My favorite code to nail people with lately - depending on the zone you have to shade sidewalks and open space areas by 50-75%. No big deal? We measure shade at solstice. Have you been to Arizona? Have fun with that developers.
 

Faust_Motel

Cyburbian
Messages
356
Points
16
My favorite code to nail people with lately - depending on the zone you have to shade sidewalks and open space areas by 50-75%. No big deal? We measure shade at solstice. Have you been to Arizona? Have fun with that developers.
Wanna not have seas of asphalt anymore? We do a shading requirement for parking lots. 50% or better is the requirement.
 

DVD

Cyburbian
Messages
13,805
Points
40
We do in the more downtown areas,, but not all. Our council isn't that aggressive. So I can only hit the sidewalks and the open spaces for the most part. I just hope developers get the point when I ask for shade every time that they'll start appeasing the shade nazi.
 

WSU MUP Student

Cyburbian
Messages
9,736
Points
32
I've been listening to this a lot since yesterday morning:



This one is pretty good too:



RIP to Ginger Baker. By all accounts he was a total asshole from early on in his life but he was also one of the best drummers ever.
 

AG74683

Cyburbian
Messages
6,052
Points
26
For lunch, I ate some left over Mexican food I forgot in the fridge on Friday. I'm not sure if that was the best idea.

We had a fire prevention thing at the elementary school in town earlier today. I didn't have to do much, just help kids through a truck. They seemed to enjoy it though.

And in other news, I decided over the weekend I wasn't going to bother with the girl in finance. Too many red flags for me to mess with.
 

Dan

Dear Leader
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
17,758
Points
58
Saw "Joker" last night. Pretty much what I expected, well done but very triggering and I can't imagine seeing it again for many years. It reminded me of "Taxi Driver" and I wonder if that's why De Niro is in it.
I have no desire to see it. I know saying "I don't want to see it" is like saying "I don't own a TV" in a discussion about Better Call Saul or Chernobyl. However, the whole Batman universe has gone through so many revisions, timelines, and different canons, I can't keep track of it. Same thing with most of of the superhero genre, so I usually just pass it over in the theaters, streaming, or on TV.

I really wan to see Ad Astra. The ads have disappeared from TV the moment it was released, though. I hope it didn't flop.
 

Planit

Cyburbian
Messages
11,862
Points
37
We do in the more downtown areas,, but not all. Our council isn't that aggressive. So I can only hit the sidewalks and the open spaces for the most part. I just hope developers get the point when I ask for shade every time that they'll start appeasing the shade nazi.

I remember seeing a solar panel array shade 1/2 the parking lot at a grocery store. They even had flyers posted about how much power they saved with this. But I really liked the shading of the car while we shopped. Fry's Marketplace, north of town….

 

DVD

Cyburbian
Messages
13,805
Points
40
I remember seeing a solar panel array shade 1/2 the parking lot at a grocery store. They even had flyers posted about how much power they saved with this. But I really liked the shading of the car while we shopped. Fry's Marketplace, north of town….

Didn't even have to look at the map to know it's the one at Bell just off the freeway. It's down the road from my house, but far enough that there are closer Fry's to shop at. We try to get that kind of thing for larger centers now, but they seem rare.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
19,377
Points
43
I love when I get the two planners have different opinions problems. Any thoughts on this one:

We have a hillside ordinance that went in around the '70s. The plat was done in the '60s. Portions of the plat were build and even have some houses. The part I'm dealing with is a couple lots that were never built on and the odd part, the road that serves the lot was never built. The big question is density. Hillside regulations severely limit it which makes this kind of a legal non-conforming plat. Which option works for you and which is way off:
1. Since we have a vested plat from before the ordinance nothing applies.
2. Since the plat is vested you get all the lots, but you need to build the road and the new homes are subject to all the hillside rules.
3. Since nothing was built the whole plat is out and you need to redo it which will kill the density - you get maybe half the lots.

I lean toward 2. The other planner says 3, but since they're not here I can't get a reason behind that. I can understand that there are other civil problems like water and sewer extensions because existing stuff if sub standard. Also the platted road width isn't wide enough to put in today's road standard, but civil might have some ways around that. My feeling is that the only way I can touch the density on this one - I so love touching dense things - is if we open a new plat and I have nothing requiring a new plat.

Either way I passed the buck and told the guy to file for an official opinion. I'll try to find out later if there is something I'm missing that says replat is needed.
I think there are a couple of variables that could be at play here. What does your regulations say pertaining to the duration of un-built nonconformities, what does state statute say regarding platted regulations, and are they classified as legal lots of record at this point?

However, I agree with #2 as well.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
19,377
Points
43
Watching the last game of the season for my oldest... (there is one more but I am out of Town for that one) and I think I am more stressed than he is.
 

Dan

Dear Leader
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
17,758
Points
58
Aaaaand I'm updating the laptiop to Mac OS Catalina.
 

Hink

OH....IO
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
14,860
Points
40
The landscape code is something that people just don't "get". Oh they can follow the standards, but they don't get it. I mean why would we want frontage trees, they would block the front of the building? Why would we want parking lot trees, they are in the way.

I like when people look at our code at first and say, "oh yea this won't be a problem at all", then come in with a plan that has a site that is 87% impervious surface. Good luck trying to fit 50 trees on the site.... :shrug:
 

Maister

Chairman of the bored
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
27,159
Points
61
Tim Horton's is locating on a corner lot and wishes to have one of their wall signs facing the adjacent single family residential neighborhood. In my great and unmatched wisdom, I feel this is wrong.
 

mendelman

Unfrozen Caveman Planner
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
12,676
Points
41
I am not a fan of most traditional "Fall" flavors or flavor combinations.

For instance, I don't like pumpkin pie or apple-cinnamon.

Love fresh apple cider though.
 

luckless pedestrian

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,487
Points
40
Tim Horton's is locating on a corner lot and wishes to have one of their wall signs facing the adjacent single family residential neighborhood. In my great and unmatched wisdom, I feel this is wrong.
oh best planner ever in history - how will the peasants in their cape cod style homes know there is a Tim Horton's just down the street then, our faithful leader?
 

Gedunker

Moderating
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,106
Points
35
Twice in the last month I have had window salesmen knock at my door to try to hit me up to replace my original wood windows.
Maybe I should have started reglazing at the front of the house rather than the rear. ;)
 

DVD

Cyburbian
Messages
13,805
Points
40
My daughter and I spent waaaayyyy too much time playing the untitled goose game last night.
My daughter's game was "try to get me". Which is basically dodge ball with small stuffed animals. Notice the key word "try". She was always mad when you actually got her. You should only try to get her.
 

dw914er

Cyburbian
Messages
1,367
Points
18
I love when I get the two planners have different opinions problems. Any thoughts on this one:

We have a hillside ordinance that went in around the '70s. The plat was done in the '60s. Portions of the plat were build and even have some houses. The part I'm dealing with is a couple lots that were never built on and the odd part, the road that serves the lot was never built. The big question is density. Hillside regulations severely limit it which makes this kind of a legal non-conforming plat. Which option works for you and which is way off:
1. Since we have a vested plat from before the ordinance nothing applies.
2. Since the plat is vested you get all the lots, but you need to build the road and the new homes are subject to all the hillside rules.
3. Since nothing was built the whole plat is out and you need to redo it which will kill the density - you get maybe half the lots.

I lean toward 2. The other planner says 3, but since they're not here I can't get a reason behind that. I can understand that there are other civil problems like water and sewer extensions because existing stuff if sub standard. Also the platted road width isn't wide enough to put in today's road standard, but civil might have some ways around that. My feeling is that the only way I can touch the density on this one - I so love touching dense things - is if we open a new plat and I have nothing requiring a new plat.

Either way I passed the buck and told the guy to file for an official opinion. I'll try to find out later if there is something I'm missing that says replat is needed.
I have used No. 2 in the past will hillside regulations (and fire code updates) that occurred after a subdivision was mapped and mostly built out with the exception of a few lots. For the remaining lots, a Variance was included to deal with some of the hillside provisions that were impacted to meet the fire code requirements; it was probably one of the few Variances I have processed that I felt was truly justified.

I think No. 3 would be a problem in most states.
 

Doohickie

Cyburbian
Messages
1,819
Points
27
It takes a village.

So in my neighborhood there are a few known "drug houses" where it's pretty obvious what's going on. One a few blocks over burned down last year and now is an empty lot.

The one closest to my house (and even closer to the elementary school) has a long history. The people who owned the house have a daughter, "Miss Patty," who's had drug problems for years. When she was younger she'd occasionally bring home a "friend who's going through a bad stretch" and her kind-hearted parents would tolerate it. Fast forward several years, and her elderly parents are now in assisted living, and she brought all her "friends" to stay with her, and things went downhill fast. They couldn't afford to pay utilities, so they're living in a house with no service. The house became an epicenter of petty crime.

One of the neighbors finally persuaded the owners to sell him the house, and so began the eviction process. It's taken several months to run the legal traps but Miss Patty and her friends are finally getting kicked out.

So on Nextdoor I saw a post by someone who's helping Miss Patty out. She's organizing volunteers to pack her stuff up, collect money to put the stuff in storage, helping her get in touch with homeless services, getting her shelter space and working to get her into subsidized housing. She's even arranged fosters for Miss Patty's dogs. I knew some of Miss Patty's backstory and I was kind of concerned about what would happen to her when the eviction order came. I'm kind of flummoxed that one of the neighbors is going through all this trouble to help out another neighbor in need. She can't fix Miss Patty's problems, but she's doing what she can to help her transition to a different, and hopefully better, living situation.

Yes, our neighborhood has problems, but we also have some good neighbors.
 

DVD

Cyburbian
Messages
13,805
Points
40
I hate our downtown code and dealing with multi-family. The idea is to get a big common entry on the street, but since developers don't really want to do that we have all these "interpretations" that let them put all the patio doors on the street and call it good. We usually get a decent common front entry, but mine being a housing project is going to get away without one.
 

Hink

OH....IO
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
14,860
Points
40
I have never once thought to myself, that person has made me so mad I need to fight them. I may make fun of them for being dumb, or for whatever reason they have aggrieved me, but I have never thought about physical action against someone. I just don't understand what hitting someone does for the betterment of a situation.
 

Doohickie

Cyburbian
Messages
1,819
Points
27
So on Nextdoor I saw a post by someone who's helping Miss Patty out. She's organizing volunteers to pack her stuff up, collect money to put the stuff in storage, helping her get in touch with homeless services, getting her shelter space and working to get her into subsidized housing.
They actually got her into a motel for the time being.
 

kjel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
12,157
Points
34
Reason #28 to require undergrounding all wired utilities.

View attachment 45624

The backstory.
Earlier this year PSE&G dropped a pole in the middle of the driveway apron of one of my projects. Never mind that their markout crew spray painted a neon orange circle with an X on the ground where it was actually supposed to go. It sat there for 3 months waiting for PSE&G to come out and move it where it was supposed to go so the apron could be poured and the last layer of asphalt put down in the little parking area.
 

AG74683

Cyburbian
Messages
6,052
Points
26
I had to go over to the fire department to drop off some alarm forms. I noticed one of the guys was there, but I didn't know where he was. I went to the office and dropped the forms off and when I was coming out I heard him walk over behind one of the trucks. I went over there and he wasn't there. I walked around the entire garage and he wasn't in there. He was in one of the bathrooms by the dining room. He had been in there the entire time. I have no idea what that noise was. It sounded like fire boots walking around. Creepy!
 
Top