pages: PlanningBoard/2008-12-08.pdf, 8
This data as json
body | date | page | text | path |
---|---|---|---|---|
PlanningBoard | 2008-12-08 | 8 | President Kohlstrand stated that since there are only four Board members in attendance decisions taken must be unanimous. Staff prepared a hybrid ordinance containing staff's recommendations as well as those proposed by AAPS for the Board's consideration. A Board discussion ensued on the hybrid ordinance presented by Staff. The Assistant City Attorney stated the easiest enforcement option is to issue citations for non-compliance. President Kohlstrand referred to AAPS' request to include language stating that the second unit ordinance does not preempt the demolition controls in the historic preservation ordinance and AAPS's reference for clarification to section 9-R of the revised draft ordinance. If not all requirements of the second unit ordinance are met design review is required. Staff clarified that ministerial approval is granted only if all standards in the ordinance are met. If a use permit is required design review could be permitted. The Board concurs with the recommendations by AAPS being stated in the ordinance. President Kohlstrand asked if any member of the Board wanted changes to the minimum lot size or the 60% lot size requirement. No Board member requested changes to these aspects of the ordinance. Board member McNamara stated her hesitation to including specific reasons in the ordinance for a homeowners absence. She asked what options exist for a homeowner that has a legitimate reason that is not specifically stated in the ordinance. Staff stated that only the specific reasons stated in the ordinance would apply without exception. Board member McNamara asked if a homeowner in this situation could appeal? Staff stated a homeowner could appeal the interpretation that their reasons are not legitimate or apply for a use permit. Staff does not expect the findings could be made to grant a use permit to allow the homeowner not to live on the site. Board member McNamara asked if the State's ordinance has a requirement of owner occupancy. Staff responded that the State does not require owner occupancy to be an element of a city's ordinance nor is it prohibited. Page 8 of 17 | PlanningBoard/2008-12-08.pdf |