Laserfiche WebLink
<br />00234(1 <br /> <br />72 <br /> <br />I 0 7 <br />See, e.g., Gordon v. Wayne, <br />(ultra vires); <br /> <br />IOSSee, the discussion of cases in Johnson, note 97 supra at 903- <br />924, e.g., Jordan v. Viilage Of Menomonee Falls, 28-Wis. 2d . <br />608, 13r-N.W.2d 442 (1965). <br /> <br />370 Mich. 329, 121 N.W.2d 823 (1963) <br /> <br />~~~ <br /> <br />I09See cases cited in ANDERSON ~19.32 at 466 (streets and highways);. <br />919.43 at 493 (water, drainage and sewers). <br /> <br />IIOSee, e;g., Lake Intervale Holnes,..I.nc. v. Parsippany-Troy Hills, <br />28 N.J. 423, 147 A.2d 28 (1958) (Court held that subdivider <br />should not bear total oost of extending water mains to sub- <br />division, only his proportionate share of costs.) <br /> <br />IIIE.g~, IND. ANN. STAT. 953-751 (1~64): <br /> <br />53-751. Bond for approval of plat before improvements <br />and installations are oompleted--Use of bond funds.-- <br />The conunission may approve a plat for a subdivision in <br />which the improvements and installations have not been <br />oomp1eted as required by the ordinanoe for the approval <br />of plats if the applicant provides a bond which shall: <br />1. Run to. the oity or county ,~hich established the <br />commission. <br />2. Be i~ a~ a~o~n~ dcte~.i~~a ~v ~h8 co~~issi~~ to' <br />be suffioient to complete the imp'roveme~ts and <br />installations in compliance h'i th the ordinance. <br />3. Be with surety satisfactory to the commission. <br />4; Specify the time for the completion of the <br />improvemehts and installations. <br />Any funds received from these bonds shall be used by the <br />legally oonsti tuted body charged ,.Ii th making public l.m- <br />provements for the city or oounty only for oompletion of <br />the improvements and installations for which they ,,'ere <br />provided, and without prior appropriation. The city or <br />county is authorized to make these improvements and <br />ins talla ti-ons . <br /> <br />112por a discussion of performanoe bonds see 3 ANDERSON 919.46 at <br />499;3 RATHKOPF 71-79; YOKLEY 959 at 149; American Society of <br />Planning Officials, PERFOm-JANCE BONDS FOR THE INSTl\LLl'.TION OF <br />SUBDIVISION I/1PROVE/.JENTS, Tech.' Bull. No. 48 (1953); American <br />Society of Planning OffTcials, FOPJ!S FOR PERFORM.l\NCE BO~lDS, <br />INF. REPT. No. 58 (1954); Yean~ood, Performance Bonding for <br />subdivision Improvements, 46 J. of URB. L. 67~68). <br /> <br />IISE.g., Countv Council for Mont.g. Court v. Lee, 219 Md. 209, <br />rrs-A.2d 568 (1959); see also the cases oited in the books <br />and articles contained l.n note 112, supra. <br /> <br />114The division of parcels into smaller lots to construct indus- <br /> <br />;~~~ir~~~~~;n~~d;~ ~~~h~~~~;l~fs~~~~c;r~~n:~~~;~iS~~~ plat ti~ <br /> <br />ordinances set out special provisions for industrial or <br />