Laserfiche WebLink
•0* Mayor and city Council■“»••• Mark E. Bernkardson, city Administratorate** January 31, 1990Tabiin, Applications at Applioant Re,nast-tachment: A. Ordinance Mo. 10.08 Subd. 5iSUE -nra!-e^JSt ‘iS^s^riail“ln7s''.^*“ -ed nepandinpaTr^In ”inc\“°" ^ ^ “^-er there is any need tor a cbenpe in' P'-°="da"Vrt3arliJg de\°urreso!utionJf" in[’RODaCTT OM - At hhc. y* <br />ren"/^u'’niT" °'he’’lifs? y“” that"’° <br />= « a=ro=Uer;r “c‘s^a!‘^^ ^‘?ri/nsr&°'„e^^^ <br />o7Vbree‘"„lJlf‘*^ O, applications have been done in <br />subsequent formal "?es<f/utio°^'^*'^ ^ meeting with athe Council. '•aaolBtion presented for ad^tlOT by <br />2. A motion to direct c-hafc a. <br />formal^resolution being brough°t <br />formal7esol«lin""beTng br°o"ughr“to'a"suVsVque"nt :eeuSS? <br />iraged by^the*cUy"Att ®rneys* VveV'a *>®®na procedure puts the Citv in year period <br />■lering the Ucts for denial; Position for <br />catlo^?.‘'’ThesV*inolud''e?“ »as tabled such <br />• «.1. Applicant Request - The applicant has been present at the meeting and requested a tabling either;a. Voluntarily on their ownb. At the encourgement of the Council2. App1leant being absent - For both approvals and denial's the city h"as ETbled applications when the individuals are not present unless it has been a series of absenses.3. Tabled on the consent agenda - This has been done both for approvals and denials even after an initial motion for denial has been made. In the review this was done as early as 1986 in conjunction with the Ferrell application and as late as this past September with the Ralph Burgess application.4. No^ listed on the agenda - In cases where the <br />appTreant Tias indicated in advance of the agenda that <br />they would like more time or are not be able to be <br />present they have just not been placed on the agenda. <br />There have not been instances when the applicant has asked for <br />tabling, that the item has not been tabled. In addition where <br />the applicant has indicated a possible change in plans in advance <br />of drafting a denial resolution staff has usually waited until <br />such time as any altered plans may be presented as the reasons <br />for denial may differ based on the application revision. <br />Instances of tabling after initial indication of denial include <br />the following applications. <br />Ferrell <br />Hall <br />Schall <br />Waldron <br />Peterson/Stodola <br />Pemberton <br />Gregory <br />Beldin/Meline <br />Curtis <br />Palm <br />Burgess <br />Pi1Isbury <br />The Ferrell application is "the grandfather" of all denials. The <br />original application started in 1986 and had subsequent tablings <br />and with modifications was finally adopted on the original <br />application number this past summer. <br />The essence of the issue as it relates to ordinance and practice <br />is whether they are in conflict. A review by the attorney <br />indicates that while not abundently clear that the policy and <br />practice are not out of sync, but could be improved. The second <br />question relates to the City's general policy of allowing <br />persons, particular jly where a denial is pending, to request a <br />tabling and the manner in which that is granted.