pages: CityCouncil/2010-03-16.pdf, 3
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
CityCouncil | 2010-03-16 | 3 | (10-120A) Resolution No. 14430, "Upholding the Planning Board's Decision and Approving Modified Use Permit PLN09-0330 at 2201 Southshore Center (Kohl's). Adopted. Councilmember Tam stated that Councilmember Matarrese followed the protocol of submitting a written request within the time period after the Planning Board took action for the Call for Review for 1623 Park Street; that she does not see a written request from Vice Mayor deHaan; inquired whether a written request is required. The Interim City Manager responded a completed form was not received; that she has documented the events; no one mentioned any form to her; Vice Mayor deHaan sent an email but not the completed form; verbally, the request [Call for Review] was submitted within the timeframe, but the email was not. Vice Mayor deHaan stated that he was assured that a verbal request was fine; that he did not provide a written request by direction of the City Attorney. Councilmember Tam inquired whether a written request is required. The City Attorney responded the ordinance does not require a written request; stated written requests have been provided in the past; Vice Mayor deHaan made an administrative request to the Interim City Manager; Vice Mayor deHaan inquired whether the request needed to be in writing and was told the request would be followed up in writing; however, the matter dropped between the cracks. Councilmember Tam stated the purpose [of a written request from Council] is to give the community an opportunity to understand the reason and background; Kohl's should have been advised of the reason for the Call for Review; Kohl's is having to deal with a technical issue because of an application oversight on the City's part; the issue seems hypocritical, if the City cannot follow its own rules. Councilmember Matarrese concurred with Councilmember Tam; stated an appeal would not be accepted without documents in writing; requests [Call for Review] should be required to be in writing. Councilmember Gilmore concurred with Councilmember Tam and Councilmember Matarrese; stated Council has had many discussions regarding the City being business friendly; procedures need to be established and followed. Mayor Johnson stated requiring Calls for review to be in writing is a valid point; the same burden for filing a written request should be applied to an appeal filed using a Call for Review process. Councilmember Gilmore inquired why a written request was not provided. The Interim City Manager responded that she did not know a form was required; stated Regular Meeting Alameda City Council 3 March 16, 2010 | CityCouncil/2010-03-16.pdf |