Agenda - 10-07-2014 - 6a - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 10 Michael Harvey said this is one of the reasons that the timeline was not expanded and that he did not agree that conditional zoning was more problematic given the lack of requiring expert testimony as with all quasi judicial cases. Commissioner Gordon said the conditional re- zoning requires some negotiating between the applicant and the County, and a lot of it is up to the Commissioners to approve. She said some of the standards for uses permitted under the conditional zoning process are similar to those for uses permitted under the Class 6 special use permit process. She said it is her opinion that the range of negotiation and need for public knowledge is the same. Michael Harvey said conditional use involves a special use permit and will have to meet the 30 day meeting requirement. Commissioner Gordon said it is still her opinion that you need every bit as much time on a conditional re- zoning as you do on a conditional use. She said a special use permit does put the additional burden of expert testimony. Commissioner Gordon said she likes Commissioner Dorosin's idea of having three months of submitted applications available, with clarification that these have not gone through the process yet. She said one of the attached emails suggested the planning staff play a more prominent role in the meetings, and staff needs to think about this and about what their role should be. She said she is extremely pleased to see that this idea about the neighborhood information meetings and timing has been raised. She said it is important to allow transparency and time to react. Commissioner Pelissier said she appreciates Commissioner Dorosin's suggestion. She thinks there is a front end of the process, but there also needs to be consideration of having better communication when there are a lot of concerns. She said it is hard to predict public reaction. Michael Harvey said he feels that if staff can implement Commissioner Dorosin's suggestion of using the webpage and if staff takes greater steps to explain the process and educate residents, this will help things. Chair Jacobs referred to Commissioner Price's question about the scheduling of meetings at night. He said this may not work for everyone, but it is expected by most people, and the developer should have a profit motive to be there. Michael Harvey said staff gets requests and complaints both ways with respect to holding meetings during the day and the evening, and there is no one way to make everybody happy Chair Jacobs said it seems to be the default to hold public meetings at night Chair Jacobs said it would be easy to take the report that was received in their planning packets and place it on the web as Commissioner Dorosin suggested. Michael Harvey said this will be accommodated fairly easily. Chair Jacobs said one of the reasons for talking about having public information meetings for some of the applications was because government and quasi - governmental facilities had no notice requirements. Commissioner Price said she supports what Commissioner Dorosin said about the meeting. Commissioner Gordon said she wants to underscore Commissioner Pelissier's point about situations where there are a lot of concerns, and more time is needed. She said the goal is to identify categories where a meeting is needed and then to allow sufficient time. She thinks conditional rezoning should be included in this. She said something else that could be done when there is an issue that generates a lot of concern is to adjourn the public hearing to a date certain. She said this was done for the Unified Development Ordinance (UDO). She asked for an identification of situations where the public hearing could not be extended.