Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Subdivision Text Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends administrative change to final plat process to comply with state law
Summary
The Planning Commission recommended City Council approve text amendment petition 25-50 AM to move final plat approval to an administrative process and to designate the city engineer as the decision authority, with minor editorial corrections noted.
The Venice Planning Commission voted 6-0 on Sept. 2 to recommend that City Council adopt text amendment petition 25-50 AM, which relocates the final plat approval process to the city’s administrative procedures to comply with a recent state law change.
Senior planner Nicole Tremblay told commissioners the text amendment was prompted by new state statutory language and requires the city to designate an administrative authority and official for final plats. The proposed change places the final plat and replat process into the administrative application table (new section 1.15.5 in the draft code text), gives the city engineer decision authority with the director retaining recommending power, and renumbers related sections accordingly.
Tremblay said the underlying submission requirements and decision criteria remain the same, but the code language was moved and edited for clarity on the city attorney’s recommendation. She noted one typographical error identified during the meeting and said staff would correct it before forwarding the amendment to City Council. Tremblay also reported recent communications from the county clerk’s office; the clerk’s office requested that the city consider returning the recording responsibility to developers because of administrative burdens the clerk’s office faces when recording plats in the county system. Tremblay said staff would explore that administrative change and, if appropriate, include it before the City Council hearing.
Commissioner Mr. Wilson moved to recommend approval of the text amendment, including the possible corrections noted by staff; the motion was seconded and the commission voted 6-0 (Young — yes; Jasper — yes; Sherberg — yes; Hale — yes; Wilson — yes; Chair Snyder — yes).
Tremblay said the new administrative process retains existing application requirements for preliminary and final plats and clarifies that replats are covered under the replat provisions. The commission’s recommendation will be forwarded to City Council for final action and staff indicated they may bring a minor edit to assign recording responsibility to developers if the county clerk’s office prefers that approach.
