Laserfiche WebLink
7A <br /> neighborhood, and other specific concerns. Refer to the attached staff report and Page 2 <br /> minutes dated May 19, 2009, for more information. <br /> Two appeals (one by the applicant and one by a group of opposing neighbors, i.e. the <br /> FingerAvenue Price Cvmmittee} have been filed. ln addition a procedural question has <br /> been raised by the applicant with regards to the appeal period stating that#he appeal <br /> submift�d by the neighbors is invafid. <br /> Specificai�y, the Finger Avenue Prid� Commififiee has appealed the Planning <br /> Commission's decisivn to approve the IS/MND. That Committee claims in adopting the <br /> 1S/MND, the Planning Commission failed to recognize#he facts and expert opinion that <br /> support a "fair argument" that the project could have a significant effect on the <br /> environment. Accord�ng �o #he California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA} if a fair <br /> argument can be made that the project can resu(t in a significant impact then an <br /> En�ironmen#al Impact Report(E1R}will have#o�e prepared forthe pro�ect. P�ease refer <br /> to the attached appeal �etter dated May 28, 2009. <br /> The applicant has appeafed the denial of the Planned Development Permit and Vesting <br /> Tentative Map to the City Council, and has also raised a procedural issue regarding the <br /> appeal period. Regarding the Planning Commission decision, the applicant claims that <br /> the Planning Commission did not fair[y act on the applicant's permi#request and failed to <br /> adop#proper findings. Regarding the procedura!question, fihe applicanf claims that the <br /> prvject op�anent filed an ��peal �f�er tF�e �ppeal period was a�er and as such the <br /> appeal is in�alid. The appeal deadline and both project appeals are discussed in more <br /> detail in the following sections. <br /> This repor�wil[discuss each issue in the fo[lowing order: Apea� Procedure; initial <br /> StudylMitigated Negati�e Declaration; Planned De�elopment Permi�;and Vesting <br /> Tenfiati�e Map. <br /> Appea! Procedure <br /> After each decision by either the Planning Commission or Zoning Administrator, the <br /> Planning Div�sion's past practice has been to prepare and distribute to interested par�ies <br /> a letter(commonly referred to as"Notice vf�fficial Acfiion", or"N4A") documenting the <br /> decision. The letter includes th� admor�ition: "Please note that any or afl of fihese <br /> decis[ons can be appealed to the Ci�l Councii within seven days from the date of#his <br /> notice." 3 With respect to �he Finger Avenue project, an NUA was prepared and <br /> distributed (copy attacned} on May 22, 2009. The statemen�in the N4A for the Finger <br /> Avenue project is consistent with the oral admonifiion made at the conclusion of the May <br /> 19, 2009 Planning Commission hearing; is consisfient with subsequent email <br /> transmissions made to the Finger Avenue Pride Committee and the projecf applicanfi; <br /> and is consistent with the language which has long appeared on the Ci#y's websife wi#h <br /> respect to appeals from decisions of the Planning Commission and Zoning <br /> Adminisfirafior. <br /> The project applican# has challenged the time[iness of the Finger Avenue Pride <br /> Committees' filing of their appeal as not being in compliance with sec�ion 48.2 of the <br /> 3 This clause is in the N�A in order to provide staff uvith sufficient time to prepare the Notice of Official <br /> Action and to make certain that all the conditions of approva!are carrect. Oth�rwise there would h�ve <br /> to be almost immediate preparation of the NOA following the date of the decisian. This procedure is <br /> based on many years of past practice by the Planning Division. <br />