| | | | | | | |  | Committee Assignments - C4 T
COMMISSION MEMORANDUM |
| | | |
| | | | | | | | | TO: | Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Commission | | | FROM: | Alina T. Hudak, City Manager | | | DATE: | December 8, 2021 | | | |
| | SUBJECT: | REFERRAL TO THE PLANNING BOARD – AN AMENDMENT TO CHAPTER 118 OF THE CITY CODE PERTAINING TO ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS AND APPLICATIONS. |
| | | |
| | | | | | | | RECOMMENDATION
| | The Administration recommends that the City Commission refer the proposed Amendment to the Planning Board. |
| | | |
| | | | | | | | BACKGROUND/HISTORY
| | Recently, independent evaluations were conducted regarding the administrative review procedures pertaining to apartment hotels. One of the recommendations resulting from these evaluations was to clarify what type of form is required for certificates of appropriateness that are eligible to be reviewed at staff level. Another issue that arose as part of the independent evaluations is the appeal process for administrative reviews. |
| | | |
| | | | | | | | ANALYSIS
| The attached draft text proposes to amend Chapter 118 of the Land Development Regulations (LDR’s) of the City Code. There are two areas proposed to be amended, for clarification purposes, as more specifically summarized hereto:
Administrative Application Form Clarification
Subsection 118-562(b) is proposed to be amended to clarify that the building permit application will suffice as the application for administrative level certificates of appropriateness filed in accordance with section 118-563(d). This clarifies and confirms standard practice, as the information contained in the building permit application is identical to that information that would be required on a separate certificate of appropriateness application.
Administrative Appeal Clarification
In 2015, Section 118-9 of the LDR’s was created (Ordinance 2015-3977) to consolidate all procedures regarding appeals and re-hearings of land use matters into one section of the City Code. At this time, appeals of administrative decisions related to Subsection 118-563 (pertaining to administrative level certificates of appropriateness) were under the jurisdiction of the Historic Preservation Board (HPB). Additionally, the general appeal of administrative decisions to the Board of Adjustment (BOA) was specific to formal administrative determinations, and not to appeals of administrative decisions made regarding certificate of appropriateness matters. Also, under Ordinance 2015-3977 the appeal period for administrative appeals pursuant to Subsection 118-563 increased from 5 days to 15 days.
In 2017, Section 118-9 was amended to address a separate conflict with the related special acts (Ordinance 2017-4083). Specifically, appeals of administrative decisions related to Subsection 118-563 (administrative level certificates of appropriateness) were moved from the jurisdiction of the HPB to the jurisdiction of the Board of Adjustment. Additionally, the appeal timeframe was increased from 15 days to 30 days. However, this transfer of appeal jurisdiction did not adequately clarify or establish publishing requirements or appeal dates for administrative level certificate of appropriateness decisions. As such, the date of issuance of the building permit has been used as the date by which the 30 day appeal period commences.
The proposed amendment to Section 118-9 provides much needed clarity, as well as a clear distinction between appeals of formal administrative determinations and those approvals issued pursuant to Subsection 118-563. The proposed modifications to Section 118-9 also corrects the unintended lack of clarity currently existing due to the significant modifications made in 2017.
It is important to note that due to the sheer volume of administrative level certificate of appropriateness applications, as well as the limited nature of the work that is eligible for administrative review, the date of the issuance of the building permit has always been used as the timeframe for which an appeal of an administrative decision can be filed. Typically, the applicant or the property owner is the aggrieved party, and this allows adequate time for an appeal to be considered. In most instances, however, if the scope of work cannot be approved by staff, the applicant will file an application to the Historic Preservation Board.
|
| | | |
| | | | | | | | SUPPORTING SURVEY DATA
| | Improve Administrative Processes and Efficiencies |
| | | |
| | | | | | | | CONCLUSION
| | The Administration recommends that the City Commission refer the proposed Amendment to the Planning Board. |
| | | |
| | | | | | | | | Is this a "Residents Right to Know" item, pursuant to City Code Section 2-14? | | Does this item utilize G.O. Bond Funds? | | | Yes | | No | |
| | | |
| | | | | | | | Legislative Tracking
Planning |
| | | |
|