HomeMy WebLinkAboutMARSEE PUD - PRELIMINARY & FINAL - 14-95 - REPORTS - CITY COUNCILThe Board did not fail to properly conduct a fair hearing in that the Board did not consider
evidence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or grossly misleading.
City Council determined to overturn the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board.
Michael Ludwig
June 28, 1995
SUBJECT:
Resolution 95-XX Making Findings of Fact Regarding the Appeal of the Planning and Zoning
Board's Approval of the Marsee Residential P.U.D., Conversion of a Single -Family Residence to
a Duplex Residence, #14-95 and Overturning the Decision of the Board.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On June 5, 1995, an appeal of the May 22, 1995 final decision of the Planning and Zoning Board
to approve the Marsee Residential P.U.D., Conversion of a Single -Family Residence to a Duplex
Residence, #14-95, was filed by Appellants R.W. and Arlene Anderson, et. al.
On June 27, 1995, City Council voted to overturn the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board.
In order to complete the record regarding this appeal, the Council should adopt a Resolution
making findings of fact and finalizing its decision on the appeal.
BACKGROUND:
The appellants' notice of appeal was based on allegations that:
"The Planning and Zoning Board failed to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the
Code and Charter;"
"The Planning and Zoning Board failed to conduct a fair hearing in that the Board substantially
ignored its previously established rules of procedure;"
"The Planning and Zoning Board failed to conduct a fair hearing in that the Board considered
evidence relevant to its findings which was substantially false or grossly misleading."
At the June 27, 1995 hearing on this matter, Council considered the testimony of City staff, the
appellant, and those who opposed the appeal. In a subsequent discussion at this hearing, Council
determined that:
The Board did fail to properly interpret and apply relevant provisions of the Code and
Charter;
2. The Board did not fail to properly conduct a fair hearing in that the Board did not
substantially ignore its previously established rules of procedure;