Laserfiche WebLink
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS AT COUNCIL BRIEFING ON ZLAB REZONE <br /> 1. Question from Councilmember Gipson: Why are we recommending elimination of the <br /> Development Agreement? <br /> Answer: The Development Agreement was for a specific building and design on a <br /> specific property. There are a few changed circumstances since the rezone was <br /> originally approved with a development agreement. <br /> a) The plan approved in 2005 and modified in 2006 is not financially viable in light of <br /> changed market conditions due to the recession. The approved plan will probably <br /> never be built because it would be difficult to get financing for that specific project. <br /> b) The adoption of new design standards for the core residential area in 2008, which <br /> provide a better set of design requirements than existed in 2005 when the rezone <br /> and development agreement was adopted. The development agreement was for a <br /> specific building design. Eliminating the development agreement will result in any <br /> future buildings having to comply with the standards that apply to the entire core <br /> residential area. <br /> c) The applicant has acquired additional property in the block (shown in red below) <br /> and the development agreement was for a smaller property (2611—2619 <br /> Rockefeller) than is currently owned by the applicant. <br /> 2 - 5 <br /> ✓ I 26TH ST <br /> r I <br /> i 02 01 <br /> -- .: - <br /> � <br /> Li 2604 i <br /> : <br /> 1806 ," If <br /> 1 IQ ,L_ 2602 <br /> 2605 42 so I LJ 1 <br /> 2607 I 2607 L2608 <br /> 2609 _L� <br /> F E-i2609�_ - rr l/-� <br /> 2611 �,{ _� ' 10/� fC` <br /> -ecen • I i tions(Lots 5 11.12 I I:261,9 <br /> ‘,, Inn I 618 W <br /> ri i aw ‘ MUM X12620 w <br /> w <br /> i <br /> 2623 I 2624 I _ <br /> 2625 It k mam <br /> 1 w - L _ <br /> 1 U I 1811 <br /> 2631Re me Area(12-4 o R-5) <br /> i 80J7 <br /> { 1 "__ <br /> i J,1 \- <br /> .I —�J <br /> EVERETTAVE i EVERETTAVE <br />