Laserfiche WebLink
SUBJECT: <br />DATE: <br />BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT <br />JULY 21, 2015 <br />PAGE 5 OF 5 <br />members are also happy with the new administrative variance process, which reduced <br />the number of lot coverage variance requests the Board received. <br />WHAT DID NOT WORK WELL FOR YOUR BOARD THIS PAST YEAR? <br />The Board does not currently have an associate member, which would help ensure the <br />Board always has a quorum. <br />LIST PLANS /GOALS FOR NEXT YEAR: <br />The Board intends to continue to hear and decide the applications it receives. <br />IN WHAT AREAS DO YOU NEED CITY COUNCIL INPUT /FEEDBACK? <br />The administrative variance process has been successful in reducing the number of lot <br />coverage variance requests received by the Board, but it does not provide a permanent <br />fix to the underlying problem. The Board would like to see the City address the <br />discrepancies between Planned Unit Developments and underlying zoning. <br />KNOWING THAT FUNDING IS LIMITED AND NOT ALL PROGRAMS WILL BE A <br />PRIORITY IN ANY GIVEN BUDGET YEAR, WHAT PROJECTS/ <br />PROGRAMS /POSITIONS ETC. DOES THIS BOARD RECOMMEND THE CITY <br />COUNCIL FUND IN NEXT YEAR'S BUDGET? <br />The Board recommends Council fund the Neighborhood Plans which will address the <br />discrepancies between PUDs and underlying zoning. <br />ARE THERE LEGISLATIVE ISSUES (NEW LAWS, AMENDMENTS, CODES, ETC.) <br />THIS BOARD WOULD ENCOURAGE THE CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER? <br />The Board requests Council follow through with the recommendations of the <br />Neighborhood Plans when complete, and continue to make appropriate changes to the <br />zoning code when problems are identified. <br />DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL? <br />Not at this time. <br />RECOMMENDATION: <br />Discussion /Direction <br />ATTACHMENT(S): <br />1. None <br />CITY COUNCIL COMMUNICATION <br />6 <br />