OCPB minutes 100814 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 11/5/14 11 be written comments only and at the conclusion of that meeting the Planning Board would make a recommendation 539 on whether they thought the application should be approved or not, on legislative items. Craig is a little bit mixing 540 legislative and quasi-judicial together. Then the item would go to public hearing with the Planning Board 541 recommendation. At the public hearing the BOCC could decide, man there’s so many people here that maybe didn’t 542 talk at the Planning Board meeting; we really should kick it back to the Planning Board for them to consider this other 543 information that came out at the public hearing. Or, the BOCC could decide this is one of those no-brainers, the 544 people who have been on the Planning Board before will remember the discussion about no-brainers, this is a no-545 brainer, we can close the public hearing tonight and we can just vote on it, or they can say, well, you know the 546 Planning Board gave us a recommendation, nothing major has come out but I want to mull this over more and the 547 BOCC can say let’s schedule it for a later meeting. 548 549 Loss of recording device/full memory- approximate 7 to 9 minutes lost. 550 [There was some discussion about how notices about the Planning Board meeting would be sent via first class mail 551 to adjacent property owners and a sign would be posted on the affected property, in the case of map amendments]. 552 553 Pete Hallenbeck: It is important that the notifications be a blend of the dry legal requirements of notification and a 554 nice human readable, ok guys here’s how it’s going to work- we’re going to have to this meeting here’s what you can 555 do, this is an opportunity for you, so it explains the process and people know what is going on. 556 557 Tony Blake: I have a couple of comments; I don’t know how much power we really have. I think we’re maybe 558 assuming that we have more power than we do here. We are really looking at the UDO and deciding whether or not 559 a project meets the criteria of the UDO, we can’t just all of a sudden say, no we don’t like that, and the second part of 560 it is, I think we’re all here to represent some part of the County. I represent Bingham because I live there and 561 because I have other contacts in the community and it seems to me that we should be part of the notification list for 562 any public information session in our area of representation. We should be at least as strongly encouraged to attend 563 that public information meeting on behalf of the Planning Board and all the Planning Board members be encouraged 564 to attend any public information meeting as that somewhat cloudy crystal because I think you can tell from a public 565 information meeting how many people show up as to what kind of a response you’re going to get and what the real 566 concerns and questions are that need to be addressed up front. I don’t really understand the quasi-judicial role we 567 have, I understand that we stand up there and give testimony but if our power is limited to interpreting the UDO and 568 trying make whatever changes proposed fits within the UDO and it either does or it doesn’t and staff is far more 569 versed in the UDO than I am. I find their recommendations are pretty bang on. All of what I have to say in a quasi-570 judicial way is hearsay, right? 571 572 Pete Hallenbeck: The role of the Planning Board is this oversight, are we meeting the requirements of the UDO. 573 Yes, you’re right, but that’s a level of detail you have to have. I would point out, though, that there’s also a document 574 called the Comprehensive Plan. If the UDO is the rules, the left brain, the Comprehensive Plan is the heart and soul, 575 it’s the right brain part of it. There are times when we’ve reviewed things and it’s met all of the requirements but then 576 you’ll find something in the Comprehensive Plan that’s not right and I think it’s not power per say but it’s a very valid 577 role of the Board is to point this out. An example of that is the Comprehensive Plan encourages that all subdivisions 578 have sidewalks and yet every time we run into it there is no money for sidewalks and DOT doesn’t want it. There is a 579 conflict there and we don’t have power over that but we can certainly point it out and I think that’s also true with 580 representing the areas you’re from. 581 582 Tony Blake: Yeah, but I don’t find that to be quasi-judicial in essence. You can point it out in a quasi-judicial hearing 583 but it’s not some... 584 585 Pete Hallenbeck: Quasi-judicial is such a different beast because people get sworn in and there’s testimony. It really 586 changes the game a lot and our role in quasi-judicial is very strict. 587 588 Lisa Stuckey: We’re supposed to be the judge in a quasi-judicial, aren’t we? 589 590 James Bryan: In quasi-judicial, it’s the governing board- the deciding body that is the judge. From a legal 591 perspective, for planning boards’ involvement, it’s dangerous. Especially, how we have it where you close the public 592