CCMIN041712 - Laserfiche WebLink

Councilmember Sullivan disagreed, stating that this is a very important process and he was very interested in hearing the appeal. Mr. Dolan presented the staff report, stating that the applicants/appellants received approval for a second story addition to their single-family residence. The Council's approval contained a condition requiring the applicant to provide $2,500 for the purchase and installation of a skylight to the neighbors immediately to the east who were most impacted by the project. Staff interpreted this condition to mean that the Lopez family would provide funding in the amount of $2,500 and, while the original intent was to add a skylight, it was not necessarily required that the money be used for purpose. Given that the underlying intent was to provide some sort of mitigation, staff took the approach that it would be acceptable for the Perry family to use the funds for an alternate form of mitigation. Mr. Dolan conceded that, as written, it is understandable that different interpretations of the condition's intent exist, which is the crux of the issue before the Council. The Lopez family currently contends that it should not be required to put forth the specified funds until the Perry's actually purchase and install the skylight. Councilmember McGovern asked and Mr. Dolan confirmed that, at the time the condition was written, staff believed $2,500 would be sufficient to cover the purchase and installation of a skylight. Ultimately, the bids received by the Perry's came in higher than anticipated. Mayor Hosterman opened the public hearing. Rodney Lopez stated that throughout this process, he has offered and the Perry family has rejected any number of mitigations. After several appeals by the Perry family, they chose to enter mediation to address any outstanding concerns in good faith. It was at this time that he offered the skylight as a potential mitigation, which the Perry family also rejected. The application finally came before the Council, who ultimately approved the project with Condition of Approval No. 8 for the purchase and installation of a skylight to mitigate shading issues on the Perry's home. The Perry's currently contend that the funds may be used for other purposes, which he maintains was not the purpose of the offer or the intent of the Council. Ms. Lopez stated that funds were offered in good faith for the specific purpose of mitigating the shading impacts on the Perry's home. There was never any discussion in mediation or at the City Council that the payment would allow for personal usage. Mr. Lopez presented several excerpts from the City Council meeting, demonstrating that the offer was intended specifically to mitigate the light issue. He cautioned against setting a precedent that supports bribes and payouts, which is exactly what allowing the Perry to receive the funds under the present circumstances would do. The condition currently states that the applicants shall provide payment for the cost to purchase and install one skylight in the front room of the Perry's residence. Unfortunately, the remainder of the condition provides no enforcement regarding actual installation of the skylight. He noted that the Council's motion at the time included verbiage stating that the actual details could be determined at a later date, which is what he attempted to do upon identifying the discrepancy in the current language. He referenced an email from the City Attorney dated November 19, 2011, in which Mr. Lowell conceded that the condition was vague in its execution but not its intent. The email indicated that Mr. Lowell was prepared to remind the Perry's of the expectation that the money paid would go towards the installation of a skylight and also that he would allow the Lopez family the opportunity to open up the appeals process. He confirmed that the Council received a written from the mediator and said he supported her statements. Ms. Lopez asked that the Council modify the condition to specify that the Lopez would not release the funds until after the purchase and installation of the skylight and that the Lopez have the right to issue payment directly to the contractor. City Council Minutes Page 10 of 13 April 17,2012