Agenda - 11-14-2017 - D.3 - Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) Amendments - Revisions to the Public Hearing Process

Browse Search

371 Approved 11/01/2017 Attachment 4 1 Excerpt of Minutes MINUTES 2 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 3 OCTOBER 4,2017 4 REGULAR MEETING 5 6 7 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lydia Wegman (Chair),At-Large Chapel Hill Township Representative; Tony Blake (Vice-Chair), 8 Bingham Township Representative; Patricia Roberts, Cheeks Township Representative; Paul Guthrie, At-Large 9 Chapel Hill Township; Buddy Hartley, Little River Township Representative; Kim Piracci, At-Large; Township; 10 Alexander Gregory, Chapel Hill Township Representative; David Blankfard, Hillsborough Township Representative; 11 12 MEMBERS ABSENT: Laura Nicholson, Eno Township Representative; Andrea Rohrbacher, At-Large Chapel Hill 13 Township; Donna Coffey, Cedar Grove Township Representative; 14 15 STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor; Tom Altieri, 16 Comprehensive Planning Supervisor; Ashley Moncado, Planner II; Patrick Mallett, Planner II; Meredith Kern, 17 Administrative Assistant II; 18 19 ***** 20 21 AGENDA ITEM 10: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS — PUBLIC HEARING 22 REVISIONS-To make a recommendation to the BOCC on government-initiated amendments 23 to the UDO pertaining to public hearings. This item is scheduled for the November 2017 24 quarterly public hearing. 25 PRESENTER: Craig Benedict, Planning Director 26 27 Craig Benedict reviewed the abstract. He said that this amendment covers revisions to the public hearing process. In 28 conversations with the BOCC on September 7, 2017, members thought that there could be a better way to streamline 29 the process for development proposals to be heard and for additional public input that would move away from the 30 structure of quarterly public hearings. They recommended that the quarterly public hearing dates be removed from 31 future calendars and that land use related items be placed on regular meeting agenda. This new process has the 32 potential for 12 to 15 meetings a year where items could be heard. The BOCC instructed the Planning Department to 33 remove references in the UDO of "quarterly public hearing" and change the text to "public hearing." As Michael 34 Harvey was saying earlier, if someone was not able to meet the requirements for a quarterly public hearing, the 35 applicant will have another opportunity at the next public hearing. This will streamline and make the process quicker. 36 Staff has gone through the UDO and removed the word "quarterly" from "quarterly public hearing." This text 37 amendment item is up for a vote tonight. Additionally, Mr. Benedict went over updated Rules of Procedure for the 38 Planning Board. In the Rules of Procedure outline, there is reference to quarterly public hearings and attendance at 39 quarterly public hearings. He asked for the Board's input into this topic tonight and that the issue be considered for a 40 vote at the Planning Board's meeting next month. He reiterated that the primary topic of the discussion tonight is still 41 the proposed ordinance change. In regards to quarterly public hearings in the Planning Board's Rules of Procedure, 42 Staff recommends that Planning Board members now be expected to attend BOCC meetings that related to Planning 43 Board responsibilities. Does that mean that members need to attend all of the meetings? No, it does not. There is 44 also a line in this section that says failure to attend quarterly public hearings could result in removal from the Board, 45 but since there will be more meetings, what would be the recommended change here, since there are more public 46 hearings than before? He looked to members for guidance. How many minimum BOCC meetings would members 47 like attend a year? There does not have to be as much language emphasizing mandatory attendance. The point is 48 that there be some mechanism so that members do not divest themselves of ever attending a public hearing with the 49 BOCC. 50 51 Lydia Wegman asked if this only references government-initiated amendments to the UDO. For example, Board 52 members would not have to attend a meeting on Settler's Point. 53 1