Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Economic Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Developers and staff to reconcile incentive numbers after council clears first reading for Rutland Place deal
Summary
Council approved first reading of an ordinance offering fee-rebate economic incentives to VP Riverside LLC (Rutland Place) and a residential developer while the applicant and staff agreed to resolve discrepancies in the published numbers before second reading.
The Aiken City Council moved a first reading on an ordinance that would authorize economic development fee-rebate incentives for a residential project (VP Riverside LLC/Rutland Place) and a residential developer, while directing staff and the applicant to reconcile differing fee calculations before second reading.
City staff presented draft incentive figures that staff later said were updated after consulting building inspections, engineering and other departments. Developer representatives, including Charles Johnson, said the packet contained altered or incorrect numbers relative to the application they submitted and requested time to work with staff to correct the exhibits. Johnson told the council staff had changed application tables in the published packet and that a memo with corrected figures had been provided to council the same afternoon.
"When he mentions things changed we took the numbers and talked to relevant staff in building inspections and plan, and in engineering that calculates these," a staff member said, acknowledging the discrepancy and promising corrected documents before second reading. The developer argued that caps and the payout period (three vs. five years) were inconsistent in the packet and could be punitive if left as-is. Staff responded that the intent is to pass first reading and return with mutually agreed numbers and corrected exhibits for final action.
Council members urged the applicant and staff to "go back to the drawing board" and reach agreement on the numbers and the structure of the payout before second reading. The ordinance proceeded on first reading to allow staff and the applicant to resolve the calculation method and specific caps and to present corrected language on second reading.
Provenance: The discussion and public comments on this item were recorded during the ordinance presentation and extended public-comment period; the applicant supplied paper copies of their submitted application to council.
