10/18/2004

THE VESTED RIGHTS TASK FORCE IS SUBMITTING THE FOLLOWING PROGRESS REPORT AS OF 11/19/04:

The Vested Rights Task Force members agree on the following issues:

A) The definition of “permit” is clearly identified in Chapter 245.

B) A “utility contract” is a “permit” but not a “project”.

C) A "project" should be defined by information provided by an applicant on a "Project Affidavit".

D) A draft “Project Affidavit" will be created by the Task Force for review by 12/3/04. The draft “Project Affidavit” will be posted on the COSA website for public review and input.

E) Vested Rights is tied to a "project" and not a "permit". Vested Rights will be granted only after the "Project Affidavit" is completed and approved. A permit alone will not qualify for vested rights.

F) "Development Rights Permit (DRP) Analysis" will be posted on the COSA website.

G) “Change in Project”- a list of examples will be created by the Task Force to differentiate a “minor” from a “major” change in project.

- a % differential allowed for change in a project with a cap on the amount of acreage involved will be identified.

- Swapping mixed uses within a Master Development Plan (MDP) is not a change in project, thus not affecting vested rights.

H) Consent agreements are useful when dealing common law vested rights claims; evaluate use for statutory claims

- All consent agreements will go to the Planning Commission for approval. It will not be forwarded to City Council unless a CCR is completed by a Councilmember.

I) Any plat filed from 1997 until we change UDC is vested due to Development Rights Ordinance language

Outstanding issues:

A) Should all permit applications be revised to include:

1) a check box indicating whether or not a "Project Affidavit" is attached

2) notification language stating that a project needs to be identified by attaching a "Project Affidavit" at some point in order to receive vested rights

3) an expiration date.

B) Completion of a project:

- Should “completed project” be determined by the issuance of a "Certificate of Occupancy" (C of O), especially since a “C of O” is not issued for land in the ETJ area?

- Should “completed project” be tied to the permit expiration date?

- "Phases" are considered to be little projects within a one large project. A phase has to be completed to keep a master plan going. If one of the phases change, are vested rights lost for that phase? When one phase is complete, will vested rights expire for that phase or will it continue until the entire project is complete?

C) Vested Rights Prior to 1997

- 18 month opportunity to file Project Affidavit?

The next 2 meetings are scheduled as follows:

- December 3^rd in the Board Rm of the One Stop Bldg. 7:30-10AM

· Discussion of draft language for revised UDC, Project Affidavit form, and definitions related to Vested Rights.

- December 10^th in Training Rm "A" of the One Stop Bldg. 8:30-10:30AM

· Public input