Laserfiche WebLink
• <br />TL BACKGROUND: <br />A. CITY COUNCIL QUESTIONS FROM FIRST READING <br />City Council asked the following questions and asked staff to address the following issues on <br />First Reading 2-20-96: <br />QUESTION # 1 — "CONDITIONAL USE"? <br />(Councilman Pomerance) <br />Is "conditional use" the correct approach given the complexity and amount of discretion <br />involved in each site evaluation? <br />(Councilwoman Feinberg) <br />The proposed standards are not standards -- too vague for conditional review -- do as site <br />review? <br />A F SPONSE: <br />Given the proposed revised wording of the ordinance , as described below, staff believes that <br />the level of complexity of the "conditions" or the potential vagueness in the language of several of <br />the proposed standards, is not different in degree from other conditional uses (such as accessory <br />dwelling units). Originally, conditional use was proposed, rather than Site or Use Review, as the <br />process was: a) basically administrative with a limited amount of discretion, b) not quasi-judicial <br />in nature, c)much less time consuming than discretionary review, and d) more responsive to this new <br />technology which is seen as a "service" by many citizens. When Planning Board considered this <br />issue, they specifically voted to not elevate this permitting process to the level of site or use review <br />1110 as they felt it would add unnecessarily to their work load in an area where they had no particular <br />technical expertise. <br />Staff, however, would have no fundamenral concerns if Council decides that a discretionary <br />review process is more appropriate. However, given the limited nature of this type of use category, <br />many of the use review and site review criteria would not seem to be applicable to these antennae <br />installations. - <br />(Councilman Pomerance) <br />If done as conditional use -- could the use be temporary; automatically sunset after some <br />period of time? <br />RESYQNSE: <br />Staff recommends review of the proposed ordinance after a one or two year period. <br />(Councilwoman Miller) <br />If not done as conditional use — could go to Board of Building Appeals model? <br />RESPONSE <br />Staff recommends site or use review as more appropriate alternatives that direct design and <br />aesthetic issues back to the Planning Board. <br />• <br />AGENDA ITEM # Page 2 <br />