HomeMy WebLinkAbout5.1 Planning Review Process Citl, of DUBCz
AGENDA STATEMENT
Meeting Date: October 11 , 1982
SUBJECT Planning Review Process
EXHIBITS ATTACHED : Memo from Planning Director dated September 3, 1982;
Survey of Planning Responsibilities in Other Cities
RECOMMENDATION Direct City Attorney and Staff to prepare appropriate ordinance
changes. j Ovo,
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None
DESCRIPTION : At the joint meeting between the Planning Commission and City Council
on July 26, 1982, the City Council requested Staff to survey the
planning review process in other cities. The Staff informed the
Planning Commission of the planning review process in the cities
of Livermore, San Mateo, _Palo Alto, and Pleasanton. On October 4,
1982, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the following
changes in the Dublin planning review process:
- Variances: To be heard by the Planning Commission on appeal ,
rather than going directly to the City Council on appeal (Approved,5-0)
- Conditional Use Permits: To be approved by the Planning Commission,
rather than the Zoning Administrator (Approved, 4-1 ).
- Site Development Review: Notices to be sent out and to be approved
by the Planning Commission, rather than the Planning Director
(Approved, 4-1).
- Parcel Maps: To be approved by the Planning Commission, rather than
the Planning Director (Approved, 3-2).
- Tentative Maps: To be approved by the Planning Commission, rather
than the Planning Director (Approved, 4-1 ).
In making its recommendations, the Planning Commission considered the
following factors:
- Availability to the public: The Planning Commission indicated that
its hearings would be held at a more convenient time and be more
conducive to public input than the Staff hearings.
- Staff time: The Planning Commission acknowledged that there would
COPIES TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
ITEM NO. 6. i
AGENDA STATEMENT: Planning Review Process Page 2
be an increase in Staff time requirements to prepare and present Staff reports at
Planning Commission hearings.
In order to accomplish the recommended changes in the planning review process, the City's
present Zoning Ordinance would have to be amended by the City Council .
RECOMMENDATION
Although the planning review process for applicants will be somewhat lengthened by having
the Planning Commission review those applications identified above, the opportunity for
greater public input will be enhanced. Therefore, it is Staff's recommendation that the
City Council approve those changes in the planning review process and direct the City
Attorney and Staff to make the appropriate amendments to the City's Zoning Ordinance for
City Council consideration at its next regular meeting.
(:0
THE CITY OF DUBLIN
P.O. Box 2340
Dublin,CA 94566 (415) 829-3543
MEMORANDUM
September 3, 1982
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Planning Director kr
SUBJECT: Survey of Planning Responsibilities in Other Cities
At the joint meeting between the Planning Commission and City Council on
July 26, 1982, the Council requested Staff to survey the planning responsi-
bilities in other cities. The Staff has obtained ordinances from the cities
of Livermore, San Mateo, Palo Alto, and Pleasanton. Staff reviewed the
various cities' ordinances to determine 1 ) which body takes action on an
application, and 2) which body hears appeals. Staff has prepared the attached
chart to help compare the assignment of Dublin's planning responsibilities
with those of the other cities. The following is a brief summary of the
survey:
VARIANCES: In most of the cities, the Staff acts on variances. Appeals
go to either the Planning Commission or City Council .
CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS: Either the Staff or Planning Commission act on
conditional use permits. Appeals go to either the Planning Commission or
City Council .
SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW: Either the Staff or Planning Commission act on site
development reviews. Appeals go to either the Planning Commission or City
Council.
PARCEL MAPS: In most of the cities, the Staff -acts on parcel maps. Appeals
go to either the Planning Commission or City Council .
TENTATIVE TRACT MAPS: In most of the cities, the Planning Commission acts
on tentative tract maps. Appeals go to the City Council .
REZONING & GENERAL PLAN: The Planning Commission makes recommendations on
rezoning and general plan issues. The City Council takes action on them.
The Staff has a copy of the various ordinances for Planning Commissioner's
review.
Attachment
•
URV€Y OF- P.ANNitr 6 R5( stB(LT���-S
D U B L t rs LI V N4 ORE 541J PALO PLEASAniTDNI
MATEo ALTO
VAAtZtANC STA F STAFF 'TAFF . 6TAF1-7- S-ri -/PG
G G Pc., c.c_ pc.1 cc_, Pc, cc. GG
_. 6oNDiT)0 NAccr :
STo+F F STAFF/PG STAFF/rc, STAFF PG
�C. CL PC�cc- - •
,
SITED LOP- : + GAFF: _: STS/Pc 57-AF
N ct- . REv(EW PG �G. .
r . . PG CC CG : CC, '
l- Pf�-c�L M,APs ,
7
- C c._ • • P
CL
5-Ps-FF. Pc_ : PG
T TAtI Ve NI4Ps 2
. - PG
GG. . ._ . Cc. LL
• REz.o wNG
«_ Pc. ,cc.. Pcicc - ft,Cc rt.,cc_.
•--6 L. FLAN) .. -
Pc; cc. rc,cc rctcc. PC_., cc PC_ , cL
• -
Key 1 _ PG _-- PLAK*4(N& C®MMtsccc, 4
_ - GG -:-CITY Go QIJk_[ _ - ----- _______________________________•__.
. : U?PEt2- f'0 -1-10(.1 = DOPY TErfrAT TAKCs It4IrTiA[... :ACTto
PPFL $�t7Y ors- :S�DY :Z"Hz
tii
' ; 7-i4t<Es : fi=t NIL PST t DN
i
.