Laserfiche WebLink
151 <br /> <br />situation like 1985 when there was a recession and nothing was <br />going to be built. Then, we had a lot of catch up and the <br />perception in the community was that somehow we had opened the <br />flood gate. In fact, we had a couple of years with a zero growth <br />rate and then we had a couple of years at four percent, and it all <br />averaged out. The City can't straight line a growth and predicate <br />everything based on its number of units in each given year. The <br />fact is the economy gets in the way of that. She felt that the <br />City wouldn't be gaining a lot by denying the extension, other than <br />the issue of public perception in a year or two when the recession <br />goes away. She supported a 12 month extension. <br /> <br /> Mayor Mercer commented that he wanted to see people build <br />houses but a lot of people have been given growth management and <br />then three years later they haven't even filed a map. He felt that <br />Westbrook Housing is in a different situation. <br /> <br /> Mr. Butler stated that Council has considered more than once <br />whether or not there should be some different procedures concerning <br />lapsing and every time it's been decided that there would be no <br />changes. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver commented his intent was never to overturn a PUD; <br />it was only to balance the growth rate and to level it out. The <br />issue is growth management lapsing, not the PUD. <br /> <br /> Mr. Inderbitzen commented that this isn't a situation where <br />the builder isn't trying to build. To deny growth management for <br />those 50 units will really set the builder back not just to 1992, <br />but beyond that. This is a very severe impact. There are 149 <br />people in a residential neighborhood who now potentially have a <br />developer with no incentive or ability to build the rest of the <br />project, which will help fund local assessments, the common area <br />improvements, and the recreation center. He stated that Mr. Brooks <br />was there if Council wanted to know of other serious things that <br />may come in terms of harm. <br /> <br /> Mr. Tarver stated that one of his concerns is that in terms of <br />the final map filing, the City benefits from that process which the <br />builders here haven't done. So where the City might get <br />infrastructure and get some of the improvements done, that hasn't <br />happened here because the final map hasn't been filed. <br /> <br /> Mr. Inderbitzen responded that this project, in advance of any <br />final map, spent $1.6 on the Bernal Avenue extension and nearly a <br />million dollars on a water tank, and put in a lot of off site flood <br />control improvements. It is incredibly unfair to the developer to <br />say now the City has all those benefits and you are two-thirds the <br />way through, you need to now get back in line. <br /> <br />12/10/91 25 <br /> <br /> <br />