Minutes 09-08-2014 QPH - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Commissioner porosin said a lot of time has just been spent talking about how to engage people earlier in the process, and he thinks that engaging them with the Planning Board early in the process is part of this. He asked if the public hearing could be left open and could include the Planning Board's recommendation, as well as any public input. He said this is more honest and sincere. He asked the attorney if this could be done. James Bryan said the Board has broad discretion over legislative decisions. Commissioner Rich asked why the Board closes the public hearing to comments. Perdita Holtz said she is not sure why this is done. She said this is how it is written, and it predates anyone on the staff. She said this would be a policy change with some minor text amendments, and staff would need to work with the attorney's office regarding those items with a re-zoning and a special use permit. She said this needs to be looked at closely. Commissioner Rich said she understands not having the public hearing all over again, but that's the part that doesn't make sense. Perdita Holtz said the problem arose in the mid-2000's. She said it used to be that the public hearing was just open and there was always a requirement for written comments only after the oral public hearing. She said the UDO would have to be re-written to state that this is no longer a requirement. Commissioner Price said she likes to go home at a reasonable hour, but she also likes to hear what people say. She said she was on the Planning Board for an extended period of time, and people would come to meetings and express their opinions. She said quorum was rarely an issue. She said there were times when the board disagreed with the Commissioners, and she would support the Planning Board hearing from the public before making a decision. She said if it is the pleasure of the Board to hear other comments on the day that the public hearing is closed, she is for this as well. Commissioner Pelissier said she would like to hear the Planning Board recommendation after the public comments. She said when she was on the Planning Board, no one really thought about what the Commissioners thought. She said the Planning Board was there to give advice, and as a Commissioner she looks to this advice when making land use decisions. She asked planning staff if they have been able to predict which will be the difficult decisions and which will not. Planning Board member James Lea left at 9:42 p.m. Perdita Holtz said no, not necessarily. She said staff would have to toss a coin. She said obviously text amendments take longer to discuss. Commissioner Pelissier said the legislative decisions are easier to incorporate into the meetings, but the quasi-judicial decisions are more of an issue. She is not sure how to address it, but she would like some consideration to not having these boxed in to so few dates. She would like to see more than a quarterly option. Commissioner McKee said he wishes he could say if it isn't broke, don't fix it, but this is broken. He agreed with Commissioner porosin's comment about taking public comment at the later meeting. He also agrees with Chair Jacobs' comments about time management and trying to figure out how long these meetings are going to be. He said he is confused, and he thinks all of what he has heard is reasonable. He suggested that the current framework should be maintained, and the Board can tweak it to make it more public friendly. He suggested maintaining the quarterly public hearings due to the necessity of quasi-judicial decisions. He said maybe there will be other controversial items that don't belong in a regular meeting. He said the Board should just tweak the things that need to change, and if those tweaks don't work, they can be changed back. Perdita Holtz said planning staff often does not know that an application is coming until right at application deadlines, which are based on the public hearing process. She thinks that the attorney would disagree that it is okay to have two different processes for judicial and legislative processes, but not for quasi-judicial items or legislative items.