pf_03800 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

2.2 Notification: Currently, the language in the City Code related to a variance appeal states that the notice requirements shall be consistent with the notice requirements for public hearings. In addition to staf� s conclusion that the consideration of the appeal should not be required as a Public Hearing, another problem results from the language related to the timing of consideration of the appeal being in conflict with noticing requirements legally required of public hearings. The Code requires that an appeal be filed within ten (10) days of the Variance Board's ruling and subsequently heard by the City Council at its "next regular meeting." This results in a case where the elapsed time between the filing of the appeal and the designated City Council meeting can be as few as five business days. The public hearing notice requirements, however, state that notice of the hearing be published in the newspaper at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing — which would be an impossibility under current requirements. Additionally, it would be difficult for staff to create, print and mail a mailed notice in a manner that would provide neighbors with sufficient notice in the time between the filing of an appeal and the City Council consideration. Based on the discussions held by members of the Variance Board, Planning Commission and City Council, staff has concluded that the desired policy would provide for notification of a City Council consideration of an appeal in a manner that is not in conflict with either the variance appeal process or with notification requirements. Based on this conclusion, staff is recommending that two amendments be made to the process: first, that the City Council consider an appeal within 30 days of the filing of an appeal (rather than at its "next meeting") and; secondly, that mailed notification be provided to members of the Variance Board and to those adjacent property owners who were initially notified of the Variance Board public hearing at which the action in question was made (rather than notification under the strict guidelines of a public hearing). 2.3 Items to be considered in the appeal process: The ordinance regarding the appeal process is silent as to whether the intent of the appeal process is for the City Council to examine the exiting record of the Variance Board's decision or whether the City Council is to reconsider to variance anew. Based on staffls discussions with City Council members, there is some desire among the City Council that they only consider evidence that was provided to the Variance Board rather than considering new evidence. Staff concurs with this position and is recommending that the appeal process be amended to state that the City Council (acting as the Board of Adjustments and Appeals) will reconsider only the evidence that had previously been considered at the Public Hearing at which the action that is the subject of the appeal was taken. 2.4 Application fee: The ordinance establishing the variance appeal process includes the following language: "The written appeal... shall be accompanied by a fee established by resolution of the City Council." In practice, however, no such fee has been established by the City Council. Clearly, the intent was that a fee be charged for an appeal of a Variance Board ruling. PF3800_RPCA_Variance_Appeal.doc Page 2 of 2