My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2003-06-23
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009 partial
>
2003
>
AgdaPkt 2003-06-23
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2011 2:45:19 PM
Creation date
6/19/2003 1:23:43 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Agency Type
City Council
Date
6/23/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
196
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Public Hearing closed at 9 p.m. <br />DISCUSSION <br />Commissioner Garcia wanted clarification to Mr. Hoffman's comments as to what was <br />done, what was changed, and how does that conflict with State law. He said because <br />the Commission cannot do something that is in conflict with State law. <br />Mr. Passanisi said there was a memo from the Office of the City Attorney to the <br />Members of the City Council dated, May 31, 2002, whereby the City Attorney stated that <br />in review of the administrative record of February 2002, it is clear that a non - <br />discretionary permit process was the alternative choice the City Council unduly adopted. <br />Based on that, we are saying the intent of the Council, in preparing and adopting this <br />policy, was to create a non - discretionary permit, and that is why staff is recommending <br />approval to the City Council. <br />Commissioner Garcia asked Mr. Passanisi to explain what a non- discretionary permit is. <br />Mr. Passanisi said a non - discretionary permit is a permit that does not require any <br />discretion. It is approved as long as certain conditions are met (e.g., an applicant <br />applying for a permit at the counter would receive a list of conditions; you agree to meet <br />them; you sign it, and that is the permit.) <br />Commissioner Garcia asked if it mattered how small or how large it was? <br />Mr. Passanisi said that would pertain to child day care center of 7 to 14 children. If it is <br />six or less, it is automatically approved. He said the one thing you do need in all permits <br />or all applications for day care is Fire Marshal approval plus State licenses. <br />Commissioner Garcia said, so the non - discretionary permit, as far as the neighbors are <br />concerned, does not require notification to them. <br />Mr. Passanisi said based on what the Council's intent was in February, there should be <br />no notification. Currently the Ordinance says there is notification, which is contrary to <br />the State law that was also contrary to the policy established by the City Council. He <br />said right now the Ordinance is incorrect and does not follow the intent of the City <br />Council, and for that reason, we want to change it. <br />Commissioner Garcia asked if that means the neighbors will or will not be notified? <br />Mr. Passanisi said they will not be notified. <br />Commissioner Garcia asked what the State said on that level? <br />Mr. Passanisi said the State says you have three choices. (1) Cities can just grant them <br />outright; (2) Do a non - discretionary permit process, (3) The City can require something <br />like a Use Permit, where there would be a Public Hearing and notification. <br />Mr. Passanisi said the City of Redwood City, per the City Council and per the City <br />Attorney's memo, wherein it is suggested that we go the non - discretionary permit <br />process. He said the Planning Commission can make a recommendation for any of <br />those three alternatives. <br />Page 12 of 26 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.