HomeMy WebLinkAboutA020 - Legal Opinion dated October 18, 1983 - improvements outside the platted areea c ,
M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Steve Schainker, City Manager
Arnold Chantland, Public Works Director
Dean Brennan, Senior Planner
FROM: John R. Klaus, City Attorney
DATE: October 18, 1983
SUBJECT: Requirements for Street Paving in Industrial Subdivisions
In view of the discussions which attended the Dayton Road plat and the
September 22 letter of the attorney for Earl Thies on paving Bell
Avenue, it occurred to me that a review of the basic legalities could be
useful at this point.
The statute is 409. 14 The Code which provides in relevant part:
". . .The City Council may require as a condition of
approval of such plat that the owner of the land
bring all streets to a grade acceptable to the
Council and comply with such other reasonable
requirements in regard to installation of public
utilities, or other improvements, as the Council may
deem requisite for the protection of the public
interest." (Emphasis supplied)
Section 23.28(1) of the Ames Municipal Code provides as follows:
"(1) The owner of land being platted shall, at the owner' s
expense, provide the grading of the entire street
right-of-way, alley or public place, and provide appro-
priate paving including curb and gutter on all streets.
The street improvement shall be constructed in accordance
with the plans and specifications of the city, and shall
adequately reflect the classification of the street, its
location and anticipated volume of traffic. The install-
ation of the streets is tinder the supervision of the
director of public works and the owner may be required to
pay a reasonable charge for the engineering and inspec-
tion service. All streets or roads shall be of such
width and shall be so constructed as to meet the stan-
dards of the public body responsible for the maintenance
thereof."
Neither the state statute or the city's ordinance limit improvement
requirements to land within the bounds of the plat.
The one and only Iowa Supreme Court case to address the issue of
improvements required as a condition for approval of a plat is that of
• �' Oakes Construction Company vs City of Iowa City 304 N.W.2d 797 (Iowa
�! 1981) . In this case the city refused to approve a plat on the grounds
that the single street leading to the area proposed to be platted was
inadequate. The court upheld the city's decision as valid, ruling that
the city could consider the adequacy of a street outside the area to be
subdivided when the street would be impacted by the proposed development.
In reaching its decision the court quoted from an article in the Iowa
Law Review of some years ago on subdivision regulation which contained
this passage:
"The layout and construction of streets should be
capable of handling present and anticipated
traffic. . ." Note: Subdivision Regulation in Iowa
54 Iowa L. Rev. 1121, 1123.
There is good legal basis therefore to require a subdivider to make
improvements pertaining to a street that will be the sole means of
access to the subdivision and which will certainly be impacted by
development in the subdivision.
On the other hand, a council decision to require the developer to
improve the access street as a condition for approval of the plat will
be subject to judicial review. In Oakes the court held that the council
has the discretion to deal with needs and problems associated with
proposed plats on a case by case basis. The court said:
". . .on balance, we incline toward a reasonably
liberal reading of subdivision legislation, subject
to the watchful eyes of the courts under their de
novo review. At the same time, we hold that
councils must not approve or disapprove on whim."
Oakes vs. Iowa City Supra. p. 806.
It is significant that the court also ruled that"
". . .City Councils act in an administrative capacity
in carrying out statutes such as Chapter 409 (sub-
divisions) of the Code." Id. p. 799.
The importance of this dictum is that when the City Council acts
"administratively" as distinguished from "legislatively", the council's
decision may not be based only what the council can "reasonably believe";
but rather, must be based on what are found to be the facts from the
evidence presented.
2