|
the language, though, about discretion, I guess the question for the Commission right now is every
<br /> single time somebody comes for a rezoning, you folks are okay with the language automatically
<br /> being added in that grants the Planning Director the authority for an administrative extension.
<br /> And if so, that will assume that the Commission or a Commissioner or a Councilmember will have
<br /> to make a motion to have that authority stripped out of every bill every single time it comes
<br /> through the process.
<br /> VITOUSEK: Response, Deputy Director Darrow?
<br /> DARROW: Yeah. So, this, the same process would occur also at the Commissions, so if an
<br /> application or a set of conditions comes to the Planning Commission, before it comes to the
<br /> Council, they can amend the conditions, they can remove the conditions, before they forward up
<br /> whatever that particular bill may be. That currently can happen at this time.
<br /> I did want to bring up something that we might not have remembered or maybe some of us
<br /> weren't here at that time, but back in 2019—some of the members in the audience were present—
<br /> this
<br /> resentthis was a hot topic,time extensions, not only administrative time extensions but time extensions
<br /> coming before the Commissions and the Council. Same concerns, you know, these time
<br /> extensions just keep coming in and coming in and coming in, what can we do about it. And so, I
<br /> do have my notes from that, and I just like to briefly just summarize the options that we had set
<br /> back then just so that that's something else we can take into consideration, that this is what we
<br /> were looking at back then. It was funny because we had different, on the east side and the west
<br /> side, there were different thoughts on the matter. The east side was looking as if, regarding
<br /> ordinances, if you are going to allow the ordinance to be approved the zoning, then it must be
<br /> appropriate, and therefore, there should be no time on the ordinance, whereas on the west side they
<br /> wanted to make very clear timelines on the ordinance. And so, there was that that dynamic going
<br /> on. But when it came to options regarding timing, they were saying to try to, if it was a larger
<br /> project, to utilize phasing where this phase had a time, this phase, instead of a 20-year project or
<br /> something, it would phase out; there would be, again, no administrative time extension but add
<br /> reasonable time to complete, that was one of the options; do not grant an administrative time
<br /> extension unless there has been progress on the projects, such as securing plan approval,the
<br /> building permits, or beginning construction, and that could be a definition of substantial
<br /> commencement; lastly, the, condition ordinances to start the timeline after permitting has gone
<br /> through a particular process, such as plan approval or a building permit, so that would be when the
<br /> time starts, and this was even discussed at Council at the time. But the other option that was
<br /> brought forth that Barbara mentioned earlier from a member in the audience, was that a deadline
<br /> like what you were saying that once that time has passed, that particular permit or ordinance is
<br /> dead,there's no reversion, there's no, it's just dead,they got to come back in, go through the
<br /> whole process again—
<br /> VAN PERNIS [in the audience]: untrue!
<br /> VITOUSEK: Order, order.
<br /> 17
<br /> EXHIBIT G (DRAFT)
<br />
|