|
7
<br /> 1
<br /> 2 Adam Beeman: I would say the timed outline, like you were speaking, it doesn't necessarily have to be like held to the minute, but
<br /> 3 1 feel like it would give the chair an opportunity to follow along and keep the meeting moving.This guy, he was only supposed to take
<br /> 4 5 minutes. He's been up there on for 25. Clearly, he is off the rails. Let's try to get him to move along and get to the next person. In
<br /> 5 that aspect, I could see it as just something to follow along, but not necessarily a requirement for them to speak. With the Planning
<br /> 6 Board,we actually declared a time and they have a certain amount of time. Because of the Lawrence Road project,we got into a lot
<br /> 7 of weeds,and everybody wanted to have their say. Talk about all sorts of things that were not relevant to zoning.After that meeting,
<br /> 8 we kind of railed it all back in. I think that's kind of where Beth is coming from because she's just trying get that lined up, but I don't
<br /> 9 think, in this aspect, that we could pin them down to a time other than an estimate as a benefit to us. I mean it's been 4 hours, and
<br /> 10 you guys said you were going be done in an hour. What's going on? Why are we taking so long?
<br /> 11
<br /> 12 Nathan Robinson: I just think it introduces consternation because if we think it's going to be an hour. It's like if I'm a contractor, and 1
<br /> 13 give a bad estimate of $100,000.00, and the real number should be 400, that just causes consternation because I gave a bad
<br /> 14 estimate, and then it just shades the whole project. If I should have said 400, there would have been no consternation at all.
<br /> 15
<br /> 16 Beth Bronson: The thing is you are required to give an estimate.
<br /> 17
<br /> 18 Nathan Robinson:Yeah,but if I suck at giving an estimate,then it causes frustration. In this case,if we don't require an estimate,and
<br /> 19 we say we want to hear your case and we want to be able to make a rational decision, here's your outline,and if they go off the track
<br /> 20 on the outline,all of a sudden,they present ten people,then we're on it,then we can step in and say you guys are off the tracks. And
<br /> 21 1 think it sounds like the goal is that you want to make sure people are on the tracks and not getting off track.
<br /> 22
<br /> 23 Beth Bronson: Correct. And I don't mind it if it's time limit or if it's outline or if it's predetermined presentation or within the
<br /> 24 application. I am very open to this. I just want to make sure that we are 1) provided with the adequate information of what we're
<br /> 25 about to receive from the applicant;and 2)that the public is aware of what they are about to receive from the applicant because that's
<br /> 26 a two-fold. We get the agenda a week at a time. The public, it's also available to them, however, I think it's important to make it
<br /> 27 known.
<br /> 28
<br /> 29 Cy Stober: A few things,and to get to James'point about what we can do in our administrative process. What Patrick referred
<br /> 30 to earlier, is we already have that clarification on the application about if you have a simple variance that you can't meet a setback, 1
<br /> 31 do think that those applications are likely to be less than a half hour, they will come to this body. You got a boulder on their side, or
<br /> 32 you already can't meet the setback. There are some cases that could be very brief before this Board. I do think that, particularly,
<br /> 33 attachment 2,which is the application and all of its materials, and I want to go to both the Nest and the Lawrence Road special use
<br /> 34 permits, as examples, the environmental assessments in those packages would not, there was no expert testimony to speak to
<br /> 35 those. The Nest did accommodate the request of the Wildlife Resources Commission for a larger buffer, as did Lawrence Road, but
<br /> 36 they didn't have an expert testimony to speak to that element of their application. What we could do, in our discussions with the
<br /> 37 applicants, and if it's in the Rules of Procedure,that may be a helpful backstop on this, is to require, but we could do it without a rule
<br /> 38 change, is to just require some sort of acknowledgment to staff that we could convey to the Board on which elements will be
<br /> 39 supported by expert testimony and we could also strongly encourage the applicants for the Planning Board or the Board of
<br /> 40 Adjustment to provide their presentations, in advance,to be included in the application package. And I don't know if we can require
<br /> 41 that, but we certainly can strongly encourage it. And then I do think, circling back around to the notification materials, for
<br /> 42 quasi-judicial evidentiary hearings, we can do better and the last two hearings we have, we've improved upon them both, even
<br /> 43 between the Nest and the Lawrence Road Project, but we will be including additional materials, including the standing application
<br /> 44 and an FAQ sheet about what is required for standing at a quasi-judicial hearing and that'll be happening administratively. We've
<br /> 45 gotten clear direction, both from the Manager's Office and from you all, that you'd like to see some changes there. So, we're
<br /> 46 responding to that and very gladly. We're always trying to be as transparent and accessible as we can. This is also something that
<br /> 47 Patrick and I have discussed at length. I think that all of that can be accomplished without a rule change. If you still wish to change
<br /> 48 the rules,we can, but I think that we can begin changing our process and putting some extra asks on the applicant in preparation of
<br /> 49 the hearing,so that you have more advanced notice of what to expect when they do arrive at this podium on the night of their hearing.
<br /> 50
<br /> 51 Leon Meyers: The consensus that I think I heard, on the Board, was to request the applicant to provide an outline of the
<br /> 52 presentation for the hearing. Not a timed outline, but an outline that would allow the Board to have some idea about what to expect.
<br /> 53 Did I get that right? Is everybody comfortable with that approach?
<br /> 54
<br />
|