CC_Minutes_2012_0709 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Regular City Council Meeting AND Board of Adjustments and Appeals Monday,July 09, 2012 Page 10 At the request of Member McGehee, Mr. Trudgeon advised that notice of the meetings had been provided in the usual manner, through the City's website and typical media sources, as well as notifying those having previously requested such notice on the City's Web list. City Manager Malinen noted that the City's on-line news update for community news had pro- vided information on the meetings as well. City Manager Malinen advised that staff, in con- junction with the City Attorney's Office would provide a basic outline for the Planning Com- mission and the Board of Adjustments and Appeals for their role and process in this quasi- judicial function, which can be followed at the discretion of the bodies. Mr. Malinen noted that the function of the bodies is to address two (2) appellants trying to make a case as to why the Administrative Ruling is inadequate or void, and those were technically the two (2) parties needing to be heard by both bodies. Mr. Malinen noted that, whether or not either or both bod- ies chose to open up testimony to a broader audience was up to those individual bodies to make that determination, with staff providing the basics for policies and procedures to be legally fol- lowed. Mr. Malinen noted that it was rare to have an appeal of an administrative decision, therefore, a set of rules had not been in place to address such an appeal in detail. Mr. Malinen noted the need to clarify that it was not a formal Public Hearing, and therefore, how much time either body allowed for testimony was at their discretion, but not a formal function of the pro- cess. Chair Roe reviewed and clarified the basics of the appeal process, as Mr. Trudgeon described, for the Planning Commission to hear the appeals at their July July 11 meeting and provide their recommendation and findings to the Board of Adjustments and Appeals for their July 16, 2012 meeting; and consideration by the Board for final adoption of those findings at their July 23, 2012 meeting. Chair Roe stated, in his review of City Code regarding the function of the Board of Adjust- ments and Appeals, that reference was made to some manner of hearing as part of those pro- ceedings, but not a Public Hearing, and sought to clarify the process for the Planning Commis- sion and/or Board of Adjustments and Appeals. City Manager Malinen advised that the process of both bodies and the basic outline of that pro- cedure would serve to develop recommendations of the bodies as well; and advised that staff would provide information to both bodies. At the request of Member McGehee, City Attorney Gaughan advised that the only time limita- tion in the process is that the Planning Commission must provide their report or recommenda- tion to the Board of Adjustment and Appeals within sixty(60) days. Mr. Trudgeon concurred, further clarifying that the Board of Adjustments and Appeals had to formally hear the appeals within thirty(30) days of their receipt. Member McGehee moved, Member Willmus seconded, receipt of appeals from Karen Schaffer and from Solidarity of West Area Roseville Neighbors (SWARN) regarding City Staffs ad-