Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04 SR42B on Extension of DR Urgency Ordinance (10-5-05) 1 SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO. _____ AGENDA ITEM _________________ MEETING DATE: October 5, 2005 CITY MANAGER: _______________ ORIGINATING DEPT: City Attorney/ PREPARED BY: City Attorney Community Development ________________________________________________________________________ SUBJECT: Extension of Interim Moratorium on Uses Inconsistent with Prior Design Review Approval ________________________________________________________________________ RECOMMENDED ACTION: Accept public testimony, consider and adopt the extension to the Interim Urgency Ordinance. The ordinance prohibits uses that are inconsistent with prior design review approvals and currently expires on November 22, 2005. The ordinance would extend the term to November 20, 2006. STAFF REPORT: This item is a follow up to the City Council's actions on November 22, 2004 and January 5, 2005 to adopt and then extend Ordinance 233. That ordinance requires compliance with prior design review conditions for all properties in the City with a structure that was the subject of design review and that received final approval after January 1, 2004. Projects that deviate from approved design review conditions are allowed by Ordinance 233, but only upon approval by the entity that issued the design review approval. Thus, projects on property that have an administrative design review approval are reviewed by the Community Development Director and projects that on property that has been the subject of Planning Commission design review approval require approval by the Planning Commission. Staff is still the process of reviewing possible amendments to the zoning code to address the issues that led to adoption of the interim ordinance. Because that review is not yet complete, staff recommends adopting the attached ordinance to extend the term of the interim ordinance for one year. No further extensions are allowed under state law. 2 FISCAL IMPACTS: There are several costs associated with the ordinance. The first is the cost of checking over the counter permit requests to determine if the property is subject to the ordinance. Thus far, checking for ordinance compliance has remained at roughly 15 minutes of staff time per application. The second cost associated with the ordinance is the cost of administering the supplemental design review process for proposed changes. The Community Development Department operates on a cost recovery basis. Therefore these increased costs will be borne by project applicants. This will affect the applicant’s cost of project review. It will not affect overall costs of City operations. The third cost is associated with code enforcement. These costs are difficult to predict. Because many of the changes to property that would be prohibited by the ordinance do not require a permit, it is possible that some residents could complete the work without knowledge of the ordinance’s restrictions. This could lead to requests for code enforcement. Thus far there have been relatively few code enforcement requests under the ordinance. The likely extent of such complaints in the future is unknown. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: Notice for this meeting. A notice of public hearing was also published in the Saratoga News. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING ON RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): The interim urgency ordinance would expire on January 6, 2005. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Ordinance Extending Ordinance 233