PB Agenda Packet 6-3-26 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

34 DRAFT 1538 1539 Cy Stober: NIM. 1540 1541 Beth Bronson: And what? NIM. 1542 1543 Cy Stober: Neighborhood meeting,at least one planning board meeting, and the public hearing before the 1544 commissioners. 1545 1546 Beth Bronson: Correct. 1547 1548 Cy Stober: Yeah. 1549 1550 Beth Bronson: Correct. And then there is, sorry. I am getting back to this. There is a question about Section 1551 2.27, and I am trying to find that section. It's the very end of the procedures, and I do not know if it 1552 is a new section. Is it 2.2.7? Or 2.27? Because we get down to 2.26, and I apologize, but it's 1553 basically sub phasing may not be allowed for proportional or partial provision of performance 1554 guarantees. Yeah. So,thinking about Section 2.27, and again,trying to get to that, I got as far as 1555 2.26, and then I think because I don't have my mouse out, I maybe just be going past it. 1556 1557 Cy Stober: I think it is 2.7. 1558 1559 Beth Bronson: So, it gets down to 2.2, 2.26.5,which is why it is, confused me. 1560 1561 Perdita Holtz: 2.27 is not in the amendment package. 1562 1563 Beth Bronson: Thank you. Okay. Then I might have a question later. But that makes sense, and again, 1564 Section 2 being procedural and as long as 2.27 does not have to be amended. The other concern 1565 or question that I would like to pose to the board is that this time last year or so,we amended the 1566 LIDO procedures to reduce the amount of time for the neighborhood information meeting. 1567 Because I am in agreement on principle for this amendment, I would like to think about maybe 1568 reverting back or looking at increasing the calendar days that the applicant has to provide 1569 notification to the neighbors. So right now it stands at 14 calendar days, and it says that it should 1570 be posted at least 14 calendar days or be mailed by first class mail at least 14 calendar days prior 1571 to the date of the meeting,and since the time that we amended that from 30, 1 believe or 45 to 14 1572 calendar days, the mail has changed, and I would like to consider maybe increasing that 1573 notification threshold, and that is up,that is just,so now I am thinking about just in the sense of if 1574 the neighborhood information meeting becomes that opportunity for the affected public, right,to be 1575 notified to find information to make an assessment and to discuss with the applicant who is 1576 proposing the subdivision, I think maybe there should be more calendar days available to those 1577 neighbors within 1,000 feet. So that was another, like, question that I had or comment that I had 1578 that I want to depose. The development advisory committee is retained and is a very important 1579 part of the staff and interdepartmental discussions about looking at an application, correct?And 1580 there is this idea that if you incorporated an additional appointment of a planning board member 1581 even if it was rotating. Just one planning board member could be present for a DAC meeting. 1582 That might be a way to include the publicly, like,this appointed advisory board into that early 1583 phase planning so that not only is staff and other departments aware of plans coming through but 1584 they are also satisfying the ability for us to feel informed. That would be a suggestion. And then 1585 the only other thing I said, I would think is that any staff review for a major or minor subdivision 1586 that would not go to us as part of this amendment,just be included as an informational item in 1587 planning board agendas. 1588 1589 Charity Kirk: We have never had the minor ones. 1590 1591 Beth Bronson: In subdivision, I mean, no. No,we do not have the expedited or the exempt that do not come 1592 before the planning board now, I mean.