02/12/2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

• Proposed Changes Five sections of the LDRs are proposed to be changed. These sections relate to appeals in general (section 902.07), appeals involving site plans (section 914.06(6) and section 914.13), appeals involving preliminary plats (section 913.07(4)(G)), and appeals of PZC decisions to deny rezoning applications One proposed change involves the use of a standard timeframe for submission of appeals. The change proposed would create a standard "21 days" timeframe to replace and standardize the variety of existing general appeal and development application appeal timeframes which currently include "15 day", "30 day', and ` 10 working day' timeframes. No change is proposed to the existing 45 day timeframe allowed for appeals or rLL aecisions to aeny rezoning applications. Those types of appeals are regulated in LDR section 902.12(4) and should have the longer timeframe (45 days) which is consistent with other rezoning timeframes. Another section of proposed changes relates to the appeal review criteria of LDR section 902.07(4). Such criteria are used by the body that is reviewing an appeal (the PZC and Board) and forms the basis for the appeal decision. The proposed changes will result in review criteria that focus on determining whether or not existing regulations have been properly applied to a given application/request and whether or not the application/request complies with those regulations. The appeal review criteria of LDR section 902 07(4) contain the four types of findings that the reviewing body (PZC or Board) is to make in regard to the decision being appealed. The main problem with the existing appeal review criteria is item 902 07(4)(c) [see pg. 3 of attachment #4]. That item, as currently written, improperly provides broad "legislative' discretion to a "quasi-judicial ' matter. In essence, that item can lead the reviewing body to try to decide what might be a better way to regulate development in a general area, rather than deciding whether or not existing regulations have been properly applied to a specific request. Deciding what is best for an area is an important and a high level decision that is made at the Comprehensive Plan and LDR level. However, such broad policy decisions cannot be properly applied to a specific application/request made under a given set of regulations. Therefore, item 4c needs to be changed to narrow the finding criterion to address whether or not specific LDRs were properly applied to the subject request. Such a change is proposed in the revised ordinance. Also, the revised wording of 4c now references the fact that there are specific LDRs that address effects on surrounding properties, traffic circulation, and public health, safety and welfare. At its December 13`h meeting, the PZC discussed its role in exercising judgement on matters that it considers, including general appeals. The proposed appeal review criteria of section 902.07(4) do leave room for judgement in each of the four types of findings proposed. Such judgements have been part of appeals heard by the PZC over the last 3 years. Various types of judgements are appropriate and even required under the proposed criteria. In regard to following proper procedures (existing and proposed criterion "a") such a criterion was critical in the Pyc fence and Collins/O'Haire dock appeals. In regard to deteiinining whether or not an applicant had demonstrated compliance with the LDRs (proposed criterion "c"), such a judgement was central to the PZC s decision on the O'Haire dock and the 2P Century (communication tower) appeals. The proposed cnteria also require that the reviewing body judge whether or not the proper use regulations were applied to a particular decision (proposed criterion "b '), and whether or not a decision was based upon an error (proposed criterion "d"). Thus, the proposed modifications will require judgements to be made and will afford opportunities for new infonuation and con-ections, all within the context of the applicable LDRs. February 12, 2002 32 v�5 ITA 3e