Planning Board - 090121 REVISED - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8 DRAFT 53 54 Melissa Poole: I don't think 3 years is unreasonable. 55 56 David Blankfard: Ok 57 58 AGENDA ITEM 2: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS — CONCEPT PLANS FOR CONDITIONAL 59 DISTRICTS-To review proposed UDO amendments to require submittal and review of concept plans 60 for conditional district rezoning applications 61 PRESENTER: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor 62 63 Michael Harvey presented information and the history on proposed UDO text amendments to require submittal and 64 review of concept plans for conditional district rezoning applications 65 66 Melissa Poole: Rather than going to the Planning Board,this means it will go to the County Commissioners and then 67 come to the Planning Board? 68 69 Michael Harvey: What we're doing is adding a Concept Plan review to the existing process that will go to the BOCC at a 70 regular meeting; this will allow the applicant to solicit feedback from the elected officials and potentially members of the 71 community. After the conclusion of that meeting, applicants are still obligated to submit a formal Conditional District 72 rezoning application. That application goes to a Neighborhood Information Meeting (NIM), it then comes to the Planning 73 Board for recommendation and then ultimately goes to the Board of Commissioners for review and action. The Concept 74 Plan is really an opportunity for the applicant to gauge from the elected officials their interest for seeing the project go 75 through the process. 76 77 Melissa Poole: Do we anticipate that adding steps to the process will deter projects, particularly industrial development, 78 business development and economic development in Orange County. 79 80 Michael Harvey: I think any developer would say that any increase to a process represents time and money to them in 81 terms of investment and delay. But any insight into the project before they have spent a ton of money or lined up experts 82 or final engineering would probably be beneficial to them and might lead to a smoother review process. 83 84 David Blankfard:What do you think it's going to cost? 85 86 Michael Harvey: My recommendation to the Planning Director for a Concept Plan application fee would be a minimum 87 staff fee of$250 to$300 for our initial review and the advertising would be based on how many properties are within 88 1,000 feet. It is still being reviewed. 89 90 Alexandra Allman: After the Concept Plan meeting do you picture the applicant getting a recommendation or they go to a 91 meeting and that's that,will your staff provide recommendations? 92 93 Michael Harvey: My hope is that the applicant takes the constructive observations to heart and potentially modifies their 94 plans to address elected officials, community, and staff concerns. The applicant can choose to ignore them and say this 95 is the project we are proposing and we are going with what we perceive is the most beneficial project for the area it is 96 being located in. But they run a risk of a negative reaction to their proposal, especially if there are concerns brought to 97 their attention by the participates in the Concept Plan review. My hope is they will do their best to address any concerns 98 but staff cannot compel or require the applicant to alter their proposal to address initial community comment. We can 99 only strongly advise them and provide guidance on compliance with regulatory matters. Of course, if the concern is 100 directly related to complying with applicable land use regulations, staff has broader authority to compel changes. 101 102 AGENDA ITEM 4: ADJOURNMENT 103 The ORC/Training session was adjourned at 7:59 p.m. 104 2