1997-03-26 - CC Packet - (Admin.)

Home Browse Search

City of Centerville March 18, 1997 Page Three Additional areas for discussion include the CUP /SUP provisions. At a minimum, the ordinance requires editing to reference either a CUP or SUP process, not both. I would also like to present arguments why neither process may be necessary. There are often misunderstandings about the purpose and benefits of these permits, as well as limitations, which should be debated. The current ordinance does not appear to establish a Board of Appeals and Adjustments. The Planning Commission apparently acts in that capacity to hear variances, but the City Council actually approves the variances. It may be more efficient to grant authority to one rather than two bodies. There is an appeal process where the City Council hears alleged errors in an administrative ruling or Planning Commission action. This is a good provision for an ordinance; however, it is somewhat invalid because the Planning Commission is making recommendations under the current ordinance, not final authorizations. I would envision six or seven staff/Planning Commission meetings to generate a complete draft document for public review. Experience dictates that up to three public meetings/hearings are about average for formal review and adoption. The entire process will take nine to twelve months, if there are no major controversies or external issues affecting the project. The following budget identifies the major work categories and consultant roles. This cost estimate is firm and can be considered a cost not to exceed, provided the scope remains the same. I have also estimated expenses for the project. TASK Partner Associate Support Total I. Mobilization/Orientation $825 $270 $0 $1095 II. Background / Outlines $900 $360 $100 $1360 M. Working Drafts $2025 $360 $150 $2535 IV. Final Draft $900 $270 $150 $1320 V. Public Review / $1125 $360 $150 $1535 Revisions / Adoption TOTALS $5775 $1620 $550 $7945