OCPB agenda 060618 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

111 AGENDA ITEM 9: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS – SUBDIVISION REVIEW 112 PROCESS - To make a recommendation to the BOCC on government-initiated amendments to the 113 text of the UDO that will modify subdivision review processes, in accordance with Session Law 114 2017-10. This item is scheduled for public hearing on June 5, 2018. 115 116 PRESENTER: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor 117 118 Michael Harvey noted that this item is found in the agenda packet on Pages 48-59. He explained that state law has 119 changed, so the county has to modify its (subdivision review) processes to reflect State regulations. A new category 120 of exempt subdivisions has been created, establishing that a will settling an estate can create a subdivision, which 121 will be exempt from formal county review. Specifically, this applies when a will dictates that the land is to be 122 subdivided for the heirs. This means the Planning Department is not looking at the subdivision for open space, road 123 access, etc. Also, the session law established an expedited subdivision review for tracts of land 5 acres and larger 124 that creates no more than three lots. The Planning Department can only compel the property owner to submit a final 125 plat. The final plat has to meet all the submittal requirements as detailed within Article 7 of the UDO . There are 126 several qualifiers outlining how a property owner can go through the expedited process. Michael Harvey reviewed 127 that the State legislation dictating this removes the concept plan stage that helps a property owner develop a plan 128 that will work before spending money on a surveyor. A lot may be created legally but a home may not be built on it if 129 it does not meet the county’s regulations. He informed the board that these text amendments had received legal 130 sufficiency from the county’s attorney office. 131 132 Planning Director Craig Benedict said in other states, planning staff are asked to testify in court on subdividing 133 property when it is dictated in a will to be sure there is proper road access and space for septic. 134 135 MOTION by Kim Piracci to approve the statement of consistency. Seconded Hunter Spitzer. 136 VOTE: Unanimous 137 138 MOTION by Hunter Spitzer to recommend approval of the amendment as stated in Attachment 4. Seconded Kim 139 Piracci 140 VOTE: Unanimous 141 142 AGENDA ITEM 10: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS – NIM CLARIFICATIONS - 143 To make a recommendation to the BOCC government-initiated amendments to the text of the UDO 144 that will clarify requirements for Neighborhood Information Meetings (NIM). This item is scheduled 145 for public hearing on June 5, 2018. 146 147 PRESENTER: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor 148 149 Michael Harvey reviewed that this information begins on Page 65 in the agenda packet. He noted that the intention of 150 these text amendments is to establish uniformity and to better fit the current approval process. This increases the 151 time that neighboring residents have to prepare for a Planning Board meeting after hearing about a project. He said 152 the Planning Department believes these text amendments address all of the concerns that have been expressed 153 about the shortness of time (from the holding of a neighborhood information meeting to the review of an item at the 154 Planning Board or the Board of Adjustment). He noted there are two exceptions to the proposal. There will be a 155 longer time for Class A permits for telecommunication towers 200 feet and taller, as well as for Class B permits for 156 telecommunication towers, which go before the Board of Adjustment and will now have 45 days instead of 42. 157 Neighborhood information meetings for telecommunication towers would continue to take place on a Saturday and 158 the telecommunications company would still have to launch a balloon at the height that the tower would be. 159 160 The county’s attorney’s office has determined legal sufficiency. Staff recommends approving the statement of 161 consistency and the proposed UDO text amendment, which begins on Page 73 in the agenda packet. 162 163 Chair Lydia Wegman asked about the requirement of a neighborhood meeting at least 14 days before the Planning 164 Board meeting. She asked whether that was sufficient for neighbors, thinking of the Settler’s Point development that 165 9