|
fair share. So, fair share in and of itself is a, is a tax on, it's the public recouping some part of
<br />the increase in value from the rezone.
<br />DARROW: My understanding it's like a community benefit assessment. It's to be able to help
<br />regionally with the impacts that are going to be generated by this specific project. So, they pay
<br />monies towards Parks & Rec., towards Police and Fire, towards wastewater, and towards roads,
<br />and it can be used in that region for specific improvements.
<br />On top of that, there are conditions specific to the impacts that this project is going to generate
<br />right there locally. But, yeah, you're right. On a zoning that wasn't in place, I mean, that was
<br />original zoning, they have no conditions. The only option that I see in regards to our discussion
<br />earlier that if you treated all zoning that same way where a zone has been changed, but you don't
<br />place conditions on it because you're looking towards other departments to be able to place these
<br />conditions on it through the process. The fair share could only be taken care of if there was an
<br />overall impact fee ordinance done, and that occurs usually when they come in for a Building
<br />Permit, and that's how that would apply across the board. But, if that were to happen, that would
<br />mean that Public Works, whenever a project comes in, regardless of conditions on a zoning
<br />ordinance, they would have to do these curb, gutter, sidewalk improvements if they are along a
<br />particular road. They would have to do drainage improvements if they came in and did a project.
<br />I mean, there would be a whole number of specific conditions that would have to be placed
<br />through the permitting process, I mean, through the whatever it isBuilding Permit or Plan
<br />Approval. But, it is, it's something to consider but I don't know if it's something we can do in
<br />this particular time frame. Right now, we just are trying to deal with getting applicants to
<br />understand that they have a limited time. If they don't meet that time, they are going to have
<br />some consequences to deal with, possibly having to come back into the Commission and Council
<br />if they don't meet that timeline.
<br />The—okay, so the other option is, besides no administrative time extension and we spoke about
<br />this before, is to not grant the administrative time extension unless there has been progress on the
<br />project, right? And, we would have to create this definition on what progress is, yeah,
<br />substantial commencement.
<br />The other option is put an expiration date on the permit. Once that date has passed, the permit is
<br />void, and the applicant will need to submit a new project. Now, this kind of was what I think
<br />was the focus here, was because normally the way both the ordinances and the permits read now
<br />is that if a condition is not met, and the deadline passes, there has to be another action. Either
<br />there has to be a revocation action by the Commission or there has to be a reversion by the
<br />Council, a reversion to the ordinance. This is a good idea, and in speaking to our colleagues, I
<br />think it can work legally because you just say, you just change the rules. You just say, okay,
<br />from now on, you have this much time. If you come in prior to that deadline, and you submit for
<br />an extension, you can go forward with an extension. If you come in five years later and ask for
<br />an extension, you can't do that. You gotta come in with a new permit. It may be the same
<br />project, but you're going to have to do like what we said. You're going to have to refresh all the
<br />reports. You're going to have to refresh the traffic study, and it can be expensive. And, so,
<br />maybe, you know, that will
<br />EXHIBIT D
<br />7
<br />
|