Agenda - 03-02-2010 - 4l - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

99 Issues Summary FORMALIZE THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE Several people interviewed at the expressed support for a Formalized Technical Review Committee (TRC). The TRC shout e of site Ian be a group of key town staff members from various departments such as pl~icant~onto the Planni gl Department FlIn cases review and comment on site plans submitted to the town. Depending upon the size of the proposed use or typ P kcant, there is the possibthty for inconsistency between comments from application, TRC members currently provide review comments directly to app where comments are provided directly to an app licant is often required to mediate between two or more different different departments. Under the current process, the aPP departments on conflicting review comments-which can add additional time and frustration to the review proce . We suggest the role and responsibilities of the TRC be formalized and codified in the new UDO to address these kinds o the TRC would be recognized aslannerd developments,l benefic aI kuse problems. Under the provisions in the new UDO, lications (e.g., vested rights, p body responsible for commenting on various app' determinations, etc.), as well as decision-making responsibilities for Type II Site Plans. In addition, it is recommended e TRC develop a regular meeting schedule and conduct all pre-application conferences (following submittal of apre-application request and required materials). REFINE CERTAIN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCEDURES hcation of some of the zoning Add aTwo-Tier Administrative Adjustment Procedure ordinance provisions as a means of encouraging development or redevelopment. The need for this kind of Flexibility is underscored by One of the recurring themes during the stakeholder interviews f accommodatngfdevelopmentPequestr. The intersection of the the town's customer-friendly culture and its desire to find way desire to facilitate development requests with the current code's lack of clarity and (lexibility have led to confusion on the part o dev darns ands eviewnprocedu~es) s to inOude mechan sm ~in the townes deve olpmen't redo e'w toolbox that p ov de for more Flexibil ty stan in the development review process. One tool many communities use to streamline develottmserves the ntentlof the zon'mg ordinalnce oTong range planni g document a method of allowing a minor departure from a dimensi°d"aand adar ove'deadministraOovelyebasedmupon and ersltabli hed set f clear required parking) in cases where such departure be These kinds of departures from standards are reviewe PP measurable criteria. They are accomplished outside of the variance process, and as such, do not rely on demonstration o . a "hardship". The administrative adjustment process provides a "safety valve" to address unintended consequences resulting from aPpldardsn ov des a higher developmentquahty overall, ohresults io aecondition th t s closer n alignmenttw th the goals of the CmAMA scan p Land Use Plan. We recommend the new UDO be supplemented with a formalized two-tier administrative adjustment processY a II Adm nistrative deviate or depart from a dimensional or numeric standaadrds b~moreDtOhany10 percentbut lesssthan 215 percentsand adre rreviewed by Administrative Adjustment" and would be reviewed and approved adminisvatively by the Planning Director. T p Adjustments" are requests to deviate from numerical sta Y the Planning Board; even in cases when the use is subject to Type I or Type II Site Plan review. Add a Beneficial Use Determination revious 15 years, many local governments have included a procedure in their land use regulations that allows any an owner Over the p to seek administrative relief from the local elected who believes the application of the regulations results in a °taking of their property o to court and offer relief if body. This procedure is called a beneficial use determination. The procedure is based on United States Supreme Court decisions at state local governments may establish procedures by which they can assess "takings" claims before they g the regulations are found toamount to ataking- that is, the regulations deny all economiQ Iedb a efVJe (recommend the town consider The current zoning regulations do not include a beneficial use determination p c aamgand provid o aeless onerousnmeans for property own s to eOcurecrelief than f ling a laws ~tY net against federal takings Page 9 Hillsbor h Carolina Unified Development Ordinance I DraftAnnotated Outline hiovember, 2009