Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Commission Direction Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach Commission Direction from the November 15, 2013 Public Hearing The item was continued because of uncertainty of the sufficiency of the economic data. Although other questions were raised during the discussion of the motion, it is clear that there was only one area where the applicant was asked for additional information; sufficiency of economic data. 3
Citation preview
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach
1
DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach
2
Commission Direction
Bay City Partners & City Of Seal BeachCommission Direction from the November 15, 2013 Public Hearing
The item was continued because of uncertainty of the sufficiency of the economic data. Although other questions were raised during the discussion of the motion, it is clear that there was only one area where the applicant was asked for additional information; sufficiency of economic data.
3
Commissioner Comments
Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach
4
• Need a peer review of how the study was constructed and what it means.
• The Commission doesn’t have enough information to reach a conclusion.
Commissioner Comments
Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach
• Statement that there is an interest to get something done.
• Was hopeful that the continuance will be short.
5
Commissioner Comments
Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach
• Clarification (not approval or action on) of the Exchange Agreement with the State Lands Commission was asked for.
• Statement that it is appropriate to bring the application forward as expeditiously as possible.
• A desire was expressed to consider Bike Camping as a use.
6
Commissioner Comments
Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach
• Recommendation was made to use Kosmont for the Peer Review Study.
• Hope to move application forward quickly.
7
INITIAL APPLICATION SUBMITTAL TIMELINE
Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach
8
APPLICATION RE-SUBMITTAL TIMELINE
Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach
9
Dispute Items
Bay City Partners & City Of Seal BeachDispute Issue No 1 - SLC Exchange Agreement
1. Applicant has reached agreement with the SLC Staff.2. Application submitted in 2013 was accepted as complete.3. Nothing has changed in the project since then.4. No Commission direction to obtain exchange Agreement
approval by SLC at the November 2013 Hearing.5. SLC has stated it has no objections to Coastal
Commission going first. 6. Does not make sense to go to SLC first.
10
Dispute Items
Bay City Partners & City Of Seal BeachDispute Issue No 2 - Peer review of Economic Data
1. Respected Commission’s desire for more detailed data.2. Commissioners requested a “Peer Review” which has
now been provided by Kosmont..4.. It is inappropriate to ask for specific project pro forma
data from an applicant as it is beyond Commission’s purview
11
Dispute Items
Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach
Dispute Issue No 3 - Project Mitigation1. This is to determine completeness of application,2. If Coastal Commission believes mitigation is appropriate
you can impose it as a condition of approval.
12
Conclusion
Bay City Partners & City Of Seal Beach1. During the November 2013 meeting, the sentiment
expressed to us by the Commissioners is that you wanted this brought back relatively expeditiously.
2. The Commission raised the economic data sufficiency issue and we responded to it. It is time to accept the application and then staff can make its recommendation.
3. That’s all we ask - for that opportunity.4. We Request acceptance of the application as complete
and a hearing for October 2014.
13
![How to comply with the ____ Transit Benefit Ordinance [City Seal]](https://img.pdfslide.us/doc/110x75/56649e9e5503460f94b9f90c/how-to-comply-with-the-transit-benefit-ordinance-city-seal.jpg)
