2011_0110_packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

w4AS,Fvq+-J� REQUEST FOR BOARD OF ADJUSTMENTS AND APPEALS ACTION I As Amended, 4-0QjL.m..,_1/07/1L(see Re uested Cowicil Actioii a ------------------- -- Department Approval ;00top, 17AS Date.- January 10, 2011 Board of Adjustments and Appeals Item.- A City Manager Approval Item Description.- Receive Appeal from Woods Edge Homeowners Association and Old Highway 8 Neighborhood residents regarding property rejection of petition requesting a comprehensive plan amendment to the land use guidance for 3253 and 3261 Old Highway 8; and referring the appeal to the Planning Commission I BACKGROUND 2 On November 16,, 2010,, a petition was submitted to the Community Development Department 3 requesting that the City Council "...amend the Roseville Comprehensive Plan to recommend "medium 4 density development with future Zoning to be of a density no greater than R-6 for 3253 and 3261 Old 5 Highway 8"'. On December 8,, 2010,, the Community Development Director forwarded Ms. Rita Mix, 6 petitioners' representative a memo from the City Attorney that stated that the petition should be "7 rejected on procedural grounds since neither state statutes nor city code allowed for abutting property owners to initiate a Comprehensive Plan Amendment. However, staff did include the petition as part of 9 the case material for the December 13,, 2010 City Council meeting where adoption of a new zoning map I ('-) was being considered. "I'll On December 20 2010 the City Manager received an appeal to the administrative decision to re ect the p p j 12 petition. The basis for the appeal regarding the decision to deny the appeal is as follows. - 1 3 1), The Petition was submitted to the Community Development Director on November 16, 2010. It 14 contains signatures of 50 of the 73 property owners (69%) surrounding/abutting the parcels I scheduled to be rezoned. 16 2), The City Attorney in a letter to the Director recommends that the Petition be "declined" stating I ��7 that only the Planning Commission or Council can initiate a change in the Comprehensive Plan. I However the Planning Commission did initiate the very same change named in the Petition on 19 October 6,, 2010. 20 3), The City Ordinance 101 .0 1 C that allows petitions by abutting property owners in matters of 2 1 zoning was intended to protect citizen stakeholder rights to influence zoning or development 22 that directly affects their property. The City has initiated this change in zoning, making it 23 dependent on and subsequent to the Comprehensive Plan. Thus by disallowing the Petition on 24 the basis that abutting property owners have no standing to petition a change in the 25 Comprehensive Plan, the abutting property owners are being denied the ability to exercise the Page I of 2