• Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, the built environment, planning adjacent topics, and anything else that comes to mind. No ads, no spam, and it's free. It's easy to join!

Development review ✅ Master planned communities with more than one underlying property owner: supplemental application materials?

Dan

Dan

ADHDP / Dear Leader
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
20,835
Points
72
A bit of a background: land ownership in the community where I work is somewhat fragmented. By necessity, our form-based code allows regulating plans for a TND that cover an area that might include lots with different property owners.

The neighborhood design section of the FBC was written in a way that considers underlying fragmented land ownership in a single master planned regulating plan area. I didn't want to hard code submittal requirements in the code, since they might change from time to time. I'm now working on checklists for the FBC, one of which is a regulating plan submittal guide. I know what kinds of maps and drawings we need (cover sheet, existing conditions, conceptual development plan, zoning plan, thoroughfare plan, park and civic site plan, drainage plan, phasing plan), and what needs to be on those sheets. However, I'm trying to figure out what kinds of agreements should also be part of a regulating plan submittal when there's different neighboring property owners involved.

Any suggestions about what kinds of agreements need to be part of a master planned community project with more than one property owner involved?

For what it's worth, here's what I wrote as part of the phasing plan checklist section of the submittal guide:


We expect that most (if not all) TND projects will be developed in phases, over several years (or a couple of decades). If land in a regulating plan area has different owners, each will probably have their own timeline for development.

An individual phase area should represent an area that the applicant expects will be developed at one time, under one final subdivision plat. A single phase must not span properties with different owners.

A phasing plan must promote a logical development pattern. This includes:
  • improvements, utilities, stormwater management, public facilities, and amenities in each phase; and
  • the relationship of phases to each other.
Phases that will have infrastructure or facilities that other phases are dependent on must be staged earlier. Each phase must be able to stand on its own, with all improvements and amenities in place in that phase, or earlier phases, to serve development. However, development of a phase must not depend on improvements in a different phase with a different property owner, unless an agreement is in place. Basically, phasing and improvement timing shouldn’t allow a landowner in the TND area to hold future development by another “hostage”.
 
I don't get to deal with them much, but our city does massive master planned communities all the time. Some things I remember:

  • Phasing of infrastructure has always been handled badly. Make it clear that parcel B can't develop until parcel A does OR parcel B is putting in everything and parcel A can pay them back later.
  • Make sure housing is clear. I had a community and the master developer laid it out between 7 home builders how many lots you get and making sure they don't get more than a couple lots in a row so the houses were scattered making a better design.
  • Make sure it's clear who does what. We're having a problem with developer A owning the street and developer B not wanting to play nice.
  • can you make a joint agreement (joint :p ) that declares how they will pay for the main road, water, sewer, etc. up front. That way you get a trunk line and the two can branch off that and not fight over who builds first.
 
I'd also add interim conditions plans as a required submission item - i.e., if X number of years is to elapse between the completions of Phase A and Phase B, a plan for how the undeveloped portions of the site can not only be made stable, safe, and functional during that period, but also add value to the surrounding neighborhood. Say, interim open space, or temporary, softscaped SW improvements that will later be supplanted by more robust SW measures for the entire site, etc.
 
Back
Top