OCPB minutes 100814 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 11/5/14 6 Bryant Warren: I noticed in the past when you get ready to do something there are signs put up all around the 271 neighborhood and area, even if we stick with the 500 feet that should be sufficient enough especially if you continue 272 putting the signs up. 273 274 Laura Nicholson: Not to belabor the point, but isn’t there a way to just conditionally make it 500 feet for an urban 275 area but as a rural area make it larger? That way it’s not changing the whole fabric, could you change it depending 276 on.. 277 278 Michael Harvey: I don’t know how comfortable I would be with that because that gives greater utility to a Class 2 279 Kennel for example locating in one area in the County versus another area in the County. I think that I’m going to err 280 on the side of caution and treat all applicants the same. 281 282 Pete Hallenbeck: Actually, I’ll comment on that, we seem to run into this problem a lot that we almost need a settled 283 density function. Something that tells you how dense is this and that is used as criteria for notification area. The 284 problem with that is you can argue over a number, you can argue over a function and whatever you come up with 285 people putting up kennels will gain the system to do what they want. It’s one of those difficult problems that never 286 have a right answer. 287 288 Craig Benedict: As part of our discussion more recently about the use of technology and how to get information out 289 to people different than the mailings, definitely the signs on the property so we are going to start putting our 290 application out there. Evidently there’ll be some mapping and that could be with that and people will see the signs 291 and be able to look on line to see what’s happening. I think we’ll use technology, even the statutes are saying that 292 how we advertise is being liberalized to include media. 293 294 Pete Hallenbeck: Tony you talked about a sample window. 295 296 Tony Blake: I was thinking more within a certain minimum distance from the project start and a maximum as well. 297 298 Lisa Stuckey: Are you worried they’ll do it like 60 days out? 299 300 Tony Blake: Yea, or six months and by then everybody has forgotten or then all of a sudden everybody says, I 301 remember but it was too long ago. 302 303 Michael Harvey: Let me try to address that point. Applications are typically submitted currently 60 days to 70 days 304 before a public hearing, depending on what public hearing. Class A is County Commissioners, four quarterly public 305 hearing and Class B is Board of Adjustment. So you have a window usually of 50 to 60 days before public hearing 306 when application becomes submitted, it is then scheduled for a public hearing. We basically have a five day window 307 according to our ordinance to ascertain whether or not the application is complete and either reject it or accept it and 308 then submit it for review. Essentially how this process is going to work now is basically once we determine the 309 application is viable, meaning all components have been submitted and its complete, we are submitting it for peer 310 review, not only to internal county departments but external planning partners. The Department of Transportation is 311 a key example. We then have to send out notices advertising the meeting because of the timeline and the window 312 before the public hearing so basically you’re getting a letter from the planning department 14 day minimum before the 313 neighborhood meeting. That’s when we have to send it out as the ordinance is currently proposed. The 314 neighborhood meeting has to be held 45 days prior to the public hearing is scheduled. So it is conceivable if an 315 applicant asks to withdraw from one hearing or postpone to a hearing they would have to then also potentially have a 316 second neighborhood meeting if the first one isn’t held. I don’t think you’re going to go 6, 8 months or a year with 317 people having a gap between the neighborhood meeting to a public hearing. With the amount of money involved. I 318 understand what you are saying but I think we’re better served by an ordinance amendment that says this has to 319 happen a minimum of days before the hearing which then gives everybody sufficient time to prepare for the hearing. 320 321 MOTION by Laura Nicholson to recommend approval of the UDO text amendments. Seconded by James Lea. 322 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 323 324