Laserfiche WebLink
Development Agreement <br />The Planning Commission had questions concerning whether the Development <br />Agreement (DA) between the City and the Chrismans needs to be amended if the City <br />Council approves a PUD amendment to change the project from production homes to <br />custom homes. <br />The City Attorney's Office has reviewed the Development Agreement and has <br />concluded that an amendment to the Development Agreement is not necessary. Staff <br />provides the following analysis: <br />Section IV, D states: "Nothing herein precludes the Property Owner and the <br />City from mutually agreeing to modify any existing or subsequent Project <br />approval, and no amendment to this Development Agreement shall be <br />required for such amendments." <br />Based on this language, the DA does not need to be amended to reflect the <br />PUD modification. <br />The only reference in the DA to the Centex development is in paragraph D of <br />the recitals. It states: "Property Owner, through its then optionee Centex <br />Homes, has proposed a development plan for ten new residential lots on the <br />Property and the existing residence." In sum, the types of homes to be built, <br />i.e., production versus custom, was not a central issue in this DA that would <br />require an amendment. <br />10. Conditions of Approval <br />The Planning Commission also requested that the conditions of approval be a <br />combination of the project specific guidelines and the existing approved conditions from <br />the original PUD-05, PUD-05-01 M, and Tentative Vesting Map7399. The Commission <br />made this request because there were too many "Exhibit B's" and the Commission was <br />having difficulty referring to the correct Exhibit B, whether it was for the current project <br />or a previously approved project. <br />The City has been undergoing a process to try to eliminate duplication of conditions <br />and, therefore, to eliminate the need to refer to those previous approvals. In an effort to <br />continue to streamline the conditions for the Commission's convenience and not include <br />conditions that have been revised by later Council action, staff has provided Exhibit'B', <br />which is a comprehensive list of conditions for the project and is easier to reference and <br />understand. However, the condition of PUD-05-02M only continue to be on Exhibit "B". <br />PUD DEVELOPMENT PLAN FINDINGS <br />Please refer to the PUD findings listed in Exhibit E. <br />Case No. PUD-OS-02M 19 Planning Commission <br />