Laserfiche WebLink
CLEAR & OBJECTIVE HOUSING: APPROVAL C RITERIA UPDATE <br />November 13, 2018 DRAFT Preferred Concepts Report: Significant Issues Page 39 of 59 <br />with the city finance officer in an amount sufficient to assure the completion of all <br />required public improvements; or <br />(b) A petition for public improvements and for the assessment of the real property for the <br />improvements has been signed by the property owner seeking the conditional use <br />permit, and the petition has been accepted by the city engineer. <br />Recommendation : Retain existing Type III process and add new compatibility criterion from COS-01. (Option <br />D) <br />Stakeholder support was mixed. Some supported eliminating the need for conditional use for all housing types, <br />some supported downsizing the process to a Type II (see below) site review, adding a compatibility criterion <br />received moderate support, and some preferred a combination of change to a site review requirement with the <br />new compatibility criterion . <br />The types of housing that require a conditional use permit are often coupled with an employment component. <br />For example, assisted care facilities are allowed in the low-density residential zone with an approved conditional <br />use permit. Assisted care facilities provide housing coupled with services like dining, medical care, recreational <br />programing, and administrative staff that may require employees 24 hours a day. No conditional use <br />applications have been processed using the clear and objective track. <br />The process a land use application follows is related to the amount of discretion required to render the decision. <br />Type I applications are administrative. Types II, III, and IV are quasi-judicial with increasing discretion from: <br />Planning Director decision (Type II) <br />Hearings Official decision, includes public hearing (Type III) <br />Planning Commission recommendation/City Council decision, includes two public hearings (Type III) <br />In the context of the State requirement for a clear and objective path to approval for housing applications, <br />discretion is consequently limited, making the Type II process appropriate. On the other hand, the more <br />A. No Change + + + + o o– <br />B. Eliminate conditional use requirement fo r the <br />limited housing types that require a conditional <br />use permit <br />+–+–o o+ <br />C. Change the requirement for housing that currently <br />requires a conditional use (Type III) to site review <br />(Type II) <br />+o+oo oo <br />D. Add criteria that address compatibility (related <br />issue # COS-01 Clear & Objective Compatibility) <br />o++++o+ <br />+ promotes o neutral –inhibits <br />Possible Concepts <br />November 26, 2018, Work Session – Item 2