Agenda - 02-19-2015 - E1 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

70 Approved 11/5/14 325 MOTION by Bryant arre ement econded by Lisa Stuckey. 326 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 327 328 329 AGENDA ITEM 10: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENT: To either provide input or make 330 a recommendation to the BOCC on government- initiated amendments to the text of the UDO 331 to change the existing public hearing for Comprehensive Plan, UDO, and Zoning Atlas related 332 items/ amendments. This item was heard at the September 8, 2014 quarterly public hearing. 333 Presenter: Perdita Holts, Special Projects Coordinator 334 335 Perdita Holtz reviewed abstract 336 337 Craig Benedict: What I put on the Board here is what we presently have. We usually give the Planning Board a 338 briefing on what is coming up at the public hearings, this is kind of informal. We did have the joint public hearing here 339 and then this was referred back to the Planning Board and then back to the Commissioners for action. As you 340 answer these questions, we'll find out, does the Planning Board make recommendations here or do they make 341 recommendation somewhere else? We will draft it up, as you come to some sort of consensus, we'll try to sketch 342 something up for clarity. 343 344 Pete Hallenbeck: I am not going to read what is in attachment one, I'll just make a couple of quick comments. First 345 we are going through something different here, it's not a text amendment or something laid out for us. It's an 346 opportunity to say what we're thinking. With that comes the obligation to try to get our thoughts organized. I think the 347 main thing is the joint meetings were a problem just because of the quorum and I think you could move that so they 348 are not joint meetings. However, I think you can, somewhere between require and strongly urge, have the Planning 349 Board members attend. I think it is really important, since we are giving recommendations, to have as many people 350 as we can present to hear what is going on because there is such a difference between reading something and 351 hearing someone present it. There is talk in the meeting about holding the Planning Board either before or after. 1 352 think Planning Board before I like a lot, Planning Board after the decision is like closing the barn door after the horse 353 is gone. I'm not quite sure what we'd do, that was discussed. I think citizen notification which is in here is a good 354 deal and it would be nice if that notification includes a description of the process so people know what to do. Part of 355 what happened in the solar project is people were scrambling with the time they had and they weren't sure what the 356 next steps were and also the dates. I think when you combine what we just voted on with the 45 day and you add in 357 the changes we are looking at now and if that notification spells out what is going to happen, it should be a different 358 picture than what we had before. I like treating legislative quasi - judicial mixes as quasi - judicial and that led to those 359 recommendations. So you can sort of see what I am thinking from that attachment one. What we'll do here is just go 360 around the room and take input that anyone would like to pass on to the Commissioners. 361 362 Perdita Holtz: I forgot to mention that Lydia Wegman sent an email earlier today about her views. I wanted to make 363 sure it got into the minutes that I did distribute her email. 364 365 Pete Hallenbeck: Yes and we should put her comments into the minutes since she is not here. She also talked 366 about it the Planning Board should be at the public hearing and she talked about how they should be required to 367 attend the public hearing. We're seeing everybody wrestle with the same details. 368 369 Paul Guthrie: You took the first part of what I was going to acknowledge and suggest everybody read it carefully. 370 Lydia is a very smart person and has been in this business a long time. I must admit that I've thought a lot about this 371 issue and I really wasn't a 100% percent sure where I was going with it so I decided to make it simple. We are in 372 business for one reason and that is to work for the County Board of Commissioners, present them with our 373 understanding of issues and, where appropriate, make recommendations as we gather as citizens in the County. 1 374 would caution us as we shape this don't violate that particular rule and if you decide that it's necessary to change 375 that rule in a significant manner, then you need to decide whether the Planning Board is relevant. I would just say 376 that this is a very fundamental issue that needs to be carefully considered and I understand where the concern 377 comes and it is legitimate concern in terms of the quorum /non- quorum issue. It seems to me we ought to be able to 7