REP PC 110 09/19/2006 2004-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Communication 1005 Bill 322 Page 2 of 3 7. On March 3, 2006 applicant Samson LLC, requests for time extension to comply with Condition B (Plan Approval) and Condition C (commence construction), as the project concept changed to delete the commercial component and instead propose development of 146 multiple-family residential units. 8. All essential utilities and services are available to the site and compliance with all other conditions of Ordinance No. 90-010 is still required. The Planning Director recommended favorably on this request for an Amendment to Change of Zone Ordinance No. 90-010 based on the following: • The non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or were beyond the control of applicant and are not the result of applicant's fault or negligence. Final Plan Approval was secured and construction did commence on the original project, but the project was abandoned by the prior owner. • Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the General Plan or the Zoning Code. The General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map designates the azea Medium Density Urban. The property is zoned Village Commercial (CV -7.5) that allows for multiple family residential uses (1,250 square feet of land area per unit) and the CV zoning is consistent with the General Plan designation for the area. • The proposed amendment to Conditions B and C of Ordinance No. 90-010 is not contrary to the original reasons for approving the Change of Zone and, in addition, the Planning Director is recommending revisions to existing conditions in the ordinance to reflect current standard language for conditions of approval and fair share contributions. At the September 19, 2006 Committee on Planning Meeting Vice Chair Pete Hoffmann presided. Mr. J. Curtis Tyler presented testimony expressing concern over the deletion of Condition F that relates to an azchaeological mitigation plan and that the amendment was general in nature with regard to discoveries of historic sites and/or bones during development. Mr. Tyler also noted that the width of right-of--ways was not specifically stated as it was in previous conditions of approval. Committee Chair Pilago stated he will be voting no on this request, as it is a companion amendment to Bill No. 321. Mr. Pilago noted that it's been twenty (20) years since this change of zone was granted with nothing happening except continual transfers or rezoning. Mr. Pilago said this demonstrates a history of non-commitment and, although it provides for condition updates, it does not address current needs. Mr. Pilago said although he was very pleased that the administration and the department sees fit to update current language, he does see a shortcoming that even though the current language is updated, it fails to give a realistic assessment of current needs which must be integrated in any application in order for good developers and applications to result in good projects. Mr. Pilago stated that based on that rationale, he will be voting no to Bill 322. Council Member Jacobson stated this policy of extensions basically rewards perpetrators who have gotten rezonings and then taken the money and ran. PC Report No. 110