Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1996 0904 CC REG ITEM 10C`��� Meeflng AGENDA REPORT CITY OF MOORPARK TO: The Honorable City Council FROM: Nelson Miller, Director of Community Developmen DATE: August 27, 1996 (CC Meeting on September 4, 1996) SUBJECT: Consider Refund Request from Anna Bell Sessler and Luis Martinez, Appellants for Appeal 96 -3, Relating to Determination of Pawnshops as an Equivalent Use. Attached is a request from the appellants for Appeal 96 -3 for a refund of the fees paid for this appeal based on the reasons indicated in their letter. A deposit of $336 was paid to initiate this appeal. Community Development staff costs are charged based on real -time cost accounting. For this application, staff charged 1.5 hours, not including the time spent at the City Council hearing. City Council Resolution No. 95 -1157 establishes a rate of $84.00 per hour for Community Development staff time. Therefore, the costs for this application would be $126. Appellants would be eligible for a refund of $210, less any costs of processing a refund from the Administrative Services staff. Neither Section 17.44.040I of the Municipal Code relating to application fees, nor City Council Resolution No. 95 -1157 establishing fee deposits, provide criteria for refund or waiver of fees. Therefore, it is strictly a policy determination by the Council with respect to refund or waiver of any fees. Direct staff as deemed appropriate. C x \OF F S C E \WPW S N \WPDOC 3 \CA3 E S \APL9 6 3 RF . WPD uz -- RECEIVED - To the City Council: Honorable Members of the Council: City of moorpal As citizens of this community we wish to protest and appeal the recent decision to allow a pawn shop on High Street. Such a business does not reflect the plans constantly stated for the downtown area.. We are planning on depositing any required fees, in order to bring this to the council's attention but do feel that since that consideration is in the best interests of the entire business community, our deposit should be refunded. We will proceed in this manner since we cannot see what other method is available to allow the council to consider this poorly considered decision. Sincerely, 0\ C'. :5) rl 1J0 U13