My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Reso 2008-1222
SIBFL
>
City Clerk
>
Resolutions
>
Regular
>
2008
>
Reso 2008-1222
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/1/2010 9:42:32 AM
Creation date
2/29/2008 9:33:24 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CityClerk-Resolutions
Resolution Type
Resolution
Resolution Number
2008-1222
Date (mm/dd/yyyy)
02/21/2008
Description
Voluntary Time Extension for Development Approvals
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />If the City Commission is willing to grant extensions based on prepayment of outstanding <br />building permit fees, the developer must waive the right to claim vested rights and equitable <br />estoppel. The waiver is necessary to ensure that the City has the right to terminate the <br />development approval if the developer does not pull a building permit upon the expiration of an <br />extension request. <br /> <br />D. Modification of the Land Development Regulations & Length of Extension <br /> <br />Section 265-3(B)(4) of the City Code provides that "an amendment to these LDRs shall <br />not affect, or be enforceable against, any development for which a development order was issued <br />prior to the effective date of said amendment." Essentially, a development order is exempt from <br />any new amendments which are passed subsequent to the approval of the development order. As <br />such, the City Commission must determine whether it is willing to exempt existing development <br />orders from any code modification in addressing the issue of extension of development approvals <br />for economic reasons. For example, the bonus payment provision was amended recently to <br />increase the bonus payment requirement from $35,000 to $72,000. Thus, the City Commission <br />may require compliance with the new standards as a condition for extending a development <br />approval. <br /> <br />Under the City Code, the City Commission has the authority to establish the length of an <br />extension request. The City Commission has not granted an extension request for more than six <br />(6) months under the current standards. In granting any extension for development approvals, <br />the City Commission should evaluate the impact that an extension may have on future <br />amendments to the City Code. <br /> <br />III. CONCLUSION <br /> <br />While the City Commission is seeking ways to assist the development community to <br />address the problems caused by market conditions, the City Commission cannot require the pre- <br />payment of building permit fees as a condition to grant an extension for a development approval <br />under the City Code. Under the City Code, a developer must establish good cause. Economic <br />reasons alone are not sufficient to establish good cause. If the City Commission wishes to seek <br />ways to help provide relief to the development community, I recommend the City Commission <br />create a voluntary program which provides developers with an opportunity to apply for an <br />extension at the administrative level if certain requirements are satisfied. These requirements <br />must include a waiver of the right to claim vested rights and equitable estoppel. This voluntary <br />program should not preclude a developer from applying for a good cause extensions under the <br />City Code. <br /> <br />cc: Fernando Amuchastegui, Assistant City Attorney <br />Jorge Vera, Assistant City Manager/Services <br />Doug Haag, Assistant City Manager/Finance <br />Robert Solera, Community Development Director <br /> <br />5 <br /> <br />31 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.