08-25-1982 Council Agenda - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

PLANNING COMMISSION August 5, 1982 Ordinance Amendments The City Planner indicated that he has received from the City Attorney a list ordinance amendments which would simplify the variance procedure. Variances would go directly to the City Council and rather than property owners having to obtain an abstractor's certificate, mailing lists could be obtained from the City Hall. The Planner stated that the amendments are quite lengthy as there are numerous references in the ordinance. Mr. LeMay commented that he thought it was the intent of the Planning Commission in their discussion of this subject that rather than eliminating the Planning Commission in variances, people could appear before the Planning Commission without having to pay a fee, and then if the Planning Commission feels the variance may be O.K.'d, the formal procedure could be followed. The Planner stated that the idea was to simplify the procedure and lower the cost to the consumer by eliminating the necessity for an abstractor's certificate. Mr. LeMay commented that he does not want to take work away from the Planning Commission, but felt that the Planning Commission could review variance requests at no cost and indicate to the requester whether or not it felt a variance would be approved. Mrs. Nardini commented that it was her understanding from the Planning Commission minutes that the Planning Commission did not want to hear variance requests. Mrs. Scalze stated that it was her understanding that there was a problem with the delay between Planning Commission meetings and City Council meetings. The Planner stated that currently application for a variance must be made and the fee paid before it goes before the Planning Commission. Mr. LeMay asked if the fee were refundable. The Planner replied that part of it is. Mr. LeMay replied that after the Building Inspector and Planner have spent time on the request there would not be much fee left. The Planner commented that the delay for action on a variance request would be much greater with the proposal outlined by Mr. LeMay. Mrs. Nardini commented that the Planner must review variance requests as they relate to City Code. The Planner felt that people could follow the procedure outlined by Mt. LeMay right now. Mrs. Nardini commented that this is not conveyed to people and perhaps the City staff should be informed about it. The Planner pointed out that if the Planning Commission decided to reject a proposal, this does not mean that the requester could not follow through with the procedure. The Planner also pointed out that when people verbally explain what they are requesting it is difficult to imagine. The Commission would have no materials to base their decision on. page -4-