Minutes 03-19-2019 Regular Meeting

Browse Search

17 Commissioner Greene asked if there was an example of a project not receiving these points. Commissioner Dorosin said if it is a single lot built in the county and needs a private well. Commissioner Greene asked if it this was acceptable, and that type of project would have a hard time meeting many of the other requirements. Sherrill Hampton said a project would need to prove that the size or capacity of the system is adequate to support the development, which would involve talking to environmental organizations and the State. Commissioner Greene said that makes sense, but she thinks one would have to prove that any way and is unsure that points should be awarded. Bonnie Hammersley said she recalled that this came up in discussions about affordable housing being more in urban areas and not rural, and this was added to account for that. Commissioner Greene referred to section H-1, which states, "the experience of the applicant in carrying out projects of comparable scope and nature," and H-2, which states, "applicant has proposed a team with demonstrated development, managerial and financial management capabilities in prior projects," and asked what might happen if an applicant is a church or a community center that is proposing a cluster of small houses or tiny homes. She said that applicant may have no prior experience, but may bring in partners with such experience. She suggested those points should be equal at 10 or possibly 5. Sherrill Hampton said normally an applicant with some experience will carry a weighted score, but the weight can be changed. She said if the applicant does not have direct experience, but their team or partners do this would be of equal value if the point assignments were the same amount. Commissioner Greene said she would change H-3 to, "the applicant and team members collectively have a successful record of meeting proposed budgets and timetables." The Board agreed by consensus. Commissioner Price said she agreed. Commissioner Price referred to transit, and said she would caution limiting projects to where transit is now as staff can work together to create new, or adjust existing, bus routes as development appears. Commissioner Dorosin echoed Commissioner Greene's point of transit being environmental, but he would like them to be separate. He said the other environmental impacts are worth highlighting, and he would not want people to get points twice. Commissioner Dorosin said this is a good revision. Chair Rich referred to the extensions, and asked if there is a limit to the number of times one can come for an extension. Sherrill Hampton said if it is three years, there can be a one-year extension, and it is 5 years, there can be a one-year extension. Sherrill Hampton referred to Commissioner Greene's points about experience, and said experience is really the key and she would hate to cut H-1 to just 5 points. She asked if it would be acceptable to keep H-1 at 10 points, and increase H-2 up to 10 points. She said experience is key to the success of the projects. Chair Rich said a lot of changes were made, and asked if the Board was comfortable voting tonight. Commissioner Dorosin suggested bringing it back as a consent agenda item so that the Board can see it one more time. The Board agreed by consensus. Sherrill Hampton said she would like to add in the suggestions about the monitoring, with there being interval monitoring every 5 years, after the completion of the project.