Laserfiche WebLink
Planning Commission <br />Meeting Minutes <br />March 11, 2010 <br />Page 4 of 13 <br /> <br />Fleming stated the public might be surprised if they believe the code is going to <br />be followed, when in actuality, the applicant wants a taller building. <br />Loo questioned if something is approved on a GDP could it then be denied on <br />the PUD. <br />Light referenced the memo regarding GDPs. He stated a height waiver cannot be <br />done at the GDP, it is only available through a preliminary and final PUD. The <br />vested right agreement could provide an earlier assurance of what you are <br />getting. The language on the agreement would be very specific. <br />Loo asked if a vested right agreement could allow a developer to get around the <br />zoning requirements. <br />Light stated theoretically “yes”. However, the City Council has discretion on what <br />may be placed in the agreement. <br />Loo asked what the role of the Planning Commission would be during the vested <br />rights agreement process. <br />Fleming stated the vested rights agreement does not change the role or review <br />process of the Planning Commission. <br />Loo asked if the details would depend on the reviewers and what they are <br />looking for. <br />Fleming answered “yes”. <br />Russell sited the following: <br /> <br /> If an applicant makes a preliminary PUD application to build a 70’ building. <br /> <br /> The Planning Commission only has conceptual plans with no detail. <br /> <br /> City Council approves a vested rights agreement during the preliminary <br />review process. <br />Then what has basically happened is the City has created a building envelop for <br />the applicant. <br />Fleming replied it would similar but not as general because conditions would be <br />applied/required. <br />Lipton asked if the Planning Commission would still have the ability to review the <br />design of the development at the final PUD. <br />Light stated it would depend on the language of the vested rights agreement. <br />Fleming stated the agreement could have several conditions. <br />Loo inquired if a referendum would be possible. <br />Light confirmed a referendum would be possible but the timing of a referendum <br />would be critical. <br />O’Connell asked if the requested code amendments pass, then how many times <br />could a developer ask for vesting on a project if they are turned down. <br /> <br />