10.5.22 Planning Board Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Approved 12.7.22 166 Lamar Proctor: That's one concern but I still have the overarching concern of now you've taken any government 167 presence out of the NIM meeting and so allowing the developers or the applicant to unilaterally convey information 168 however they see fit whether correct or not correct,whether they are misstating the UDO and the Comprehensive Land 169 Use Plan. Whether they are misstating the process,there is no representative from government that can correct any 170 misstatement by applicants whether intentional or not at the Neighborhood Information Meeting. Then what is reported 171 by the applicant in the NIM report,who knows, its accuracy. We have no idea. 172 173 Charity Kirk: How do other governmental bodies do this similar thing,validate that things were done as deemed? 174 175 Tyler Sliger: I reached out to Chapel Hill about how they do theirs because I could not find it in their ordinance and 1 176 have not heard back from them. Carrboro just states that they have to have one there is no requirement like we do in 177 having ours. It just says people in a 500 ft. radius have to be notified and that's it. It doesn't tell when they have to have 178 it or anything like that. Basically, Chatham County is a lot like this where they put the responsibility on the applicant to 179 do this process and they check what they do. 180 181 Charity Kirk: So how do you plan on checking what they do? 182 183 Tyler Sliger: Basically, confirming their report. If no one comes to a Neighborhood Information Meeting, that is a little bit 184 skeptical and if it is in a 1,000 ft. radius they are going to get a Planning Board notification letter. If they come and we 185 have a report of someone not getting or they weren't notified about a NIM then we would say that they didn't follow 186 procedure. They have to have it somewhere. If they don't go to,for instance, the Library or they say they are going to 187 have it that's a red flag. 188 189 Lamar Proctor: I love the system we have. I think it is a boon to our citizens. I think it keeps people very well informed 190 about the changes that are going on. Frankly, I think 1,000 ft. in the County is too short of a distance. I think it should be 191 2,500 ft. I think when you are talking about large projects that occur in the County that sometimes encapsulates 10, 192 scores, 100s of acres, involves millions of sq.ft.of impervious surface, 1,000 ft. is kind of way too small because those 193 sorts of projects are going to have effects for miles around. I think 1,000 ft. is ridiculously short for County projects 194 especially ones that are larger and involve larger acreage and sq.ft. I love the fact that Planning is there. I know it's a 195 lot of work for Planning but I feel like it assures me that applicants and developers aren't taking advantage of the 196 process. 197 198 David Blankfard: Can we just have a member of staff be required to go to the NIM? 199 200 Charity Kirk: Yea.. 201 202 Cy Stober: We can do that. I would be more comfortable coming back to you with language rather than coming up with 203 a clause on the fly. We will consult with the Attorney's Office on a simple clause. Hopefully, 10 words or less. 204 205 Charity Kirk:Another thing is that rather than a written report, you could ask for a recording of the meeting. If the concern 206 is a lack of validation of a developer,you can validate what happened. 207 208 Cy Stober: My only concern is I would like to have leeway to have a recording or to have staff go to observe. The 209 concern from Planning staff and the reason that Planning staff often don't present at NIMs is that our opportunity to 210 provide findings of fact is this meeting. When we present at a Neighborhood Information Meeting, it gives the 211 appearance that we are representing the project which is not our role. Our role is to find the facts, disclose them to the 212 appointed and elected officials and the public at open meetings. Neighborhood Information Meetings are a courtesy 213 extended through our ordinance and through many ordinances, including most of our neighbors and most of our 214 municipalities, but not all of them, and the responsibility for leading that discussion is appropriately the applicant or the 215 developer. Having Planning staff also has the effect of chilling the opportunity for a robust and productive discussion 216 between the applicant and concerned neighbors to find solutions to their concerns. If we are always there saying no, no, 217 no,you can't do that it stifles some creativity that may result from a discussion between the applicant and those who are 218 most affected by what they are proposing to do. Those are the concerns that we have,the Planning staff. I hear your 219 concern about verifying the proceeding of the NIM. I think that we can come up with some basic very simple language to 220 address that.