COM 0898.011 2020-2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Director and Maija but the language I think still is in the process of being worked out. And with that I wanted to make sure that you folks knew the intention and that the Director, we are all in the same space. If they should choose to revoke a positive recommendation based on the intention, they can do that. But basically, what we are seeing here is within different rezoning ordinances the Planning Department inserts language that grants and the authority to grant the applicant an administrative, we will call it an administrative extension. Usually, its towards the end of a rezoning bill. So, what I'm trying to do here is to remove that authority, or to remove that ability of the Department to insert that language. So, typically right now, if it's a simple rezoning they're saying five(5) years with the potential of another additional 5 years granted by the Planning Director with certain conditions needed to be met. What I would like to see however, is if we know that a rezoning process is going to take more than 5 years, let's give the applicant more than 5 years but upon expiration of that rezoning ordinance there is no ability of the Planning Department to grant an administrative extension outside the process. This process here before the Commissions and at the Council. So, really, it's a matter of transparency and ensuring that applicants will agree to complete conditions within a specific amount of time. So, it's 5 years right now, they are going get it done in those 5 years and they can't for a lack of a better words, offline just with the Department get an additional 5 years. So, with that I think that's why I really needed to be here because that's the intent of the bill and whether the language before truly represents that intent. Currently, I think that perhaps why the positive recommendation has come because I'm not sure that the Planning Department would actually support the intent of the bill but, the language needs to perhaps they'll be worked out. I have some recommendations for that but, that's truly the intention of the bill. It really is transparency and I do always want to go back to the expertise and professional experience of our Planning Department. ; So, if we know that things are taking longer now, let's give people more time to get that done. But, when we look back at a document as a Council and as, yeah, when we look back at the public record, and it says that an ordinance expires 5 years from today. We should be able to know that 5 years from today its done and we don't have to try and go to the Planning Department to see if someone got an extension for another 5 years. I do also want to state that anyone for example who got a rezoning ordinance passed yesterday at Council with that language inserted would still be entitled to that administrative extension. So, this would only be for rezoning ordinances that comes before the Council and you folks moving forward. But not for anyone who had that language and were granted that entitlement in the past. And I'm so happy to answer any questions that you folks might have. LIN: Thank you Councilman Inaba. Any questions or comments Commissioners? Director Kern? KERN: Thank you. Good morning. Good morning, Councilmember, good to see you. 5 EXHIBIT B (DRAFT)