Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-19-17 City Commission Packet Materials - A6. Reclaim Black Olive II Commission Memorandum REPORT TO: Mayor and City Commission FROM: Brian Krueger, Development Review Manager Martin Matsen Director of Community Development SUBJECT: Reclaim Review Authority of Applications for Development located at 202 South Black Avenue; Application 17265. MEETING DATE: June 19, 2017 AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action (Quasi Judicial) RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Pursuant to Section 38.34.010.B(2), I move that the City Commission reclaim original review authority for the Black Olive II Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness application; Application 17265. BACKGROUND/SUMMARY: BACKGROUND/SUMMARY: A new application for a Site Plan and Certificate of Appropriateness for the Black Olive II building was submitted on May 24, 2017 and was found to be incomplete. Revised application materials were received on June 6, 2017. On June 12, 2017 the application was deemed acceptable for initial review and scheduled before the Development Review Committee on June 21, 2016 and the Design Review Board on July 12, 2016. The proposed Black OliveII site plan is for the demolition of the existing office building at 202 South Black Avenue and the construction of a five story, 47 unit mixed use apartment building and related site improvements. The project proposes 28 one bedroom and 19 two bedroom apartments, 40 parking spaces and 1 carshare vehicle in one building. Eight hundred square feet of commercial space is proposed on the ground floor. Pursuant to Section 38.34.010.B(1), BMC the Director of Community Development is the review authority for Site Plans and Certificate of Appropriateness that do not include variances or deviation in excess of 20 percent. The proposed development does not require variances or deviations. The Design Review Board is the advisory board responsible for a recommendation on the Certificate of Appropriateness. Pursuant to Section 38.34.010.B(2), BMC the City Commission may reclaim review authority by a simple majority vote. The section is attached for your reference. Criteria: The municipal code has established no criteria for reclaiming review authority but leaves entirely to the Commission’s discretion the decision to reclaim or not reclaim an application. If the City Commission reclaims review authority, the project will follow the same process as a project under the review authority of the Director of Community Development. The reclaim 1477 process does not change any review criteria or development standard. Under City Commission authority, the final review and approval of the project will occur at a City Commission meeting as a quasi judicial action item. Public comment is taken by the City Commission for all action items per Commission rules and procedures. Staff recommends that the Commission not identify a fixed date for consideration of application 17265. The DRC is presently conducting its review of the project. The project will require a public notice to identify the Commission as the decision maker and the review date. UNRESOLVED ISSUES: None at this time. ALTERNATIVES: 1. Reclaim original review authority as authorized in Section 38.34.010.B.2, BMC; or 2. Leave application 17265 for review by the Director of Community Development with the Director’s administrative action subject to appeal per Section 38.35.030, BMC. An appeal of administrative action would go to the City Commission. FISCAL EFFECTS: It is anticipated that the requirement for a Commission review of this project will add eighteen hours of Planning staff time to the application. Report compiled on: October 24, 2016 1478