02/10/2003 Council Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

COUNCIL MINUTES FEBRUARY 10, 2003 APPROVED 1 • 2 Community Development Director Grochala indicated it becomes quasi -administrative then. He 3 stated we would be saying we might approve, but if we deny you have to go to the Planning and 4 Zoning Board. He indicated they are already hearing complaints that Staff is being subjective, and 5 this would intensify that impression. He stated there are timing issues, and applicants may think Staff 6 is randomly making them go through a longer process by denying. 7 8 Councilmember Reinert stated he thought this could be resolved with one sentence added to the end 9 of item b. He understands Staff's intent to expedite the process, indicating if we added 'in the event 10 of denial, applicant is informed of appeal options and City Council is informed of denial at next work 11 session', if would solve the concerns. 12 13 Councilmember Carlson stated she was thinking in the same direction. She indicated we did add 'as 14 they occur', and wonders if it could be added to invite the applicant to the work session following 15 denial. Councilmember Reinert stated it would be the applicant's option if they wanted to attend. 16 17 City Planner Smyser asked that they imagine how this would happen. He stated that Staff had 18 intended that when it came up, they would send a memo concerning the denial. Now he is hearing it 19 should be put on the work session agenda, where the Council would send it to the Planning and 20 Zoning Board to get their approval and then it would come back to City Council. He stated they were 21 trying to save the applicant and the City some time, now the process is fatter because it would come 22 to the City Council up front and in the back. He stated if Council is concerned about people not being 23 treated fairly, they should keep the process as it is. .24 25 Councilmember Reinert assured City Planner Smyser this was not an indictment on Staff, they just 26 wanted to make sure City Council was notified of denial and the applicant was notified of their 27 options. 28 29 Mayor Bergeson stated that the piece missing is when talking about appeal, it does not say when 30 denied, staff would be proactive of notifying the applicant of their rights. He stated they are not 31 talking about big, experienced developers, but small owners, and Council just wants to make sure 32 Staff is proactive in telling them their options. 33 34 Community Development Director Grochala stated he feels this is being set up to be a situation where 35 landowners can just say `I do not meet the requirements so I'll just go ask the Council'. 36 37 Councilmember Reinert stated he does not know if it is necessary to invite them to the work session, 38 his only concern is they are informed of their options, and City Council is informed of the denial. 39 40 Councilmember O'Donnell asked how applicants were notified of a denial. City Planner Smyser 41 indicated by letter. Councilmember O'Donnell asked if the appeal process could be added to the 42 letter, then they would know their options right away. 43 44 Community Development Director Grochala stated that the reality is if someone is denied because 45 they do not meet the ordinance, they need a variance, which should be identified at application. A 46 variance request would automatically go to Planning and Zoning and then on to City Council. • 47 17