Laserfiche WebLink
Section 3.1: Rights to develop are vested and development <br />remains subject to land use regulations and development <br />approvals. Should clarify that such regulations would preclude <br />alternative uses of the portion of the subdivided parcel being <br />conveyed to the museum. <br />***Section 3.3.1(d) provides that no "Development Exactions" <br />may be applied against developer to the development of the <br />property unless agreed to by owner. The problem with this <br />provision is that the definition of "Development Exaction" is <br />too broad and includes "...any requirement of City in <br />connection with or pursuant to any Land Use Regulation or <br />development approval for the dedication of land, the <br />construction of improvements or public facilities, or the <br />payment of fees in order to lessen, offset, mitigate or <br />compensate for the impacts of development on the <br />environment or other public interest." The definition should <br />provide greater specificity and reserve to the City the ability to <br />impose other exactions if additional impacts are indicated <br />during building plan review. <br />***Section IS: Provides timing for development and allows <br />the developer to build "at such times and in as many <br />development phases and sub -phases as Owner deems <br />appropriate in its sole business judgement." The problem this <br />creates is that the developer could demolish the Wells Fargo <br />site and leave a large landfill until the next phase. Greater <br />specificity on development phasing should be provided. <br />