Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOCPB minutes 110514Approved 12/3/14 1 MINUTES 1 ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 2 NOVEMBER 5, 2014 3 REGULAR MEETING 4 5 6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Lisa Stuckey (Vice-Chair), Chapel Hill Township Representative; James Lea, Cedar Grove 7 Township Representative; Tony Blake, Bingham Township Representative; Laura Nicholson, Eno Township 8 Representative; Paul Guthrie, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; Andrea Rohrbacher, At-Large Chapel Hill Township; 9 Buddy Hartley, Little River Township Representative; Maxecine Mitchell, At-Large Bingham Township; Bryant 10 Warren, Hillsborough Township Representative; Lydia Wegman-At-Large Chapel Hill Township; 11 12 13 MEMBERS ABSENT: Peter Hallenbeck (Chair), Cheeks Township Representative; Herman Staats, At-Large, Cedar 14 Grove Township; 15 16 17 STAFF PRESENT: Craig Benedict, Planning Director; Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor, Perdita Holtz, 18 Special Projects Coordinator, Tina Love, Administrative Assistant II 19 20 21 OTHERS PRESENT: Bonnie Hammersley, County Manager; James Bryan, Staff Attorney; 22 23 24 AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL 25 26 27 AGENDA ITEM 2: INFORMATIONAL ITEMS 28 a) Planning Calendar for October and November 29 b) Dinner meeting with BOCC & quarterly public hearing on November 24, 2014 has been 30 cancelled 31 c) Chapel Hill ETJ Expansion Request 32 33 Craig Benedict gave an overview of the ETJ expansion request. Subject area JPA vs ETJ land use regulations and 34 financial investment representation future long term planning. 35 36 Craig Benedict: There is an area of the Joint Planning Area of Orange County, Chapel Hill and Carrboro in the 37 transition area. In order to fund certain infrastructure improvements, Chapel Hill would be able to contribute more if 38 it was part of their ETJ. That request will be going to the BOCC on November 18. 39 40 Lisa Stuckey: I was on a committee that worked to get the sidewalks in with DOT and there were 3 jurisdictions, 41 Chapel Hill, County and Carrboro as I recall and it was a mess. To me this seems to simplify things. 42 43 Tony Blake: This goes from the town operation center all the way south. 44 45 Craig Benedict: This is about a 1,000 acre area and would include the whole section of the Joint Planning area that 46 is north and west of Chapel Hill. 47 48 Tony Blake: Do those residents have a say in this? 49 50 Craig Benedict: There is a public notice requirement that the City has put out and they have come forward and said 51 they are in agreement with this proposal. 52 53 Approved 12/3/14 2 Paul Guthrie: I would encourage you that before the next one comes up that a standard process be created for this. 54 The communications from Chapel Hill for the County is minimal at best. I would say getting some sort of standing 55 policy about how these are dealt with and how it is communicated would be a very good idea. 56 57 Andrea Rohrbacher: I agree with Paul about the communications but because of other issues with this area, they 58 monitor very carefully and have been active participants, this has come up before. 59 60 Craig Benedict: The BOCC asked me to meet with ETJ and Joint Planning area representatives in Mebane, 61 Hillsborough, Carrboro and Chapel Hill to see if they understand the role of being a representative in an area that 62 does not vote. A meeting was held with Orange County representative on Tuesday, October 28, 2014. 63 64 65 AGENDA ITEM 3: APPROVAL OF MINUTES 66 October 8, 2014 Regular Meeting 67 68 MOTION by Bryant Warren to approve the minutes. Seconded by Tony Blake. 69 VOTE: UNANIMOUS 70 71 72 AGENDA ITEM 4: CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONS TO AGENDA 73 74 75 AGENDA ITEM 5: PUBLIC CHARGE 76 77 Introduction to the Public Charge 78 The Board of County Commissioners, under the authority of North Carolina General Statute, 79 appoints the Orange County Planning Board (OCPB) to uphold the written land development 80 laws of the County. The general purpose of OCPB is to guide and accomplish coordinated and 81 harmonious development. OCPB shall do so in a manner which considers the present and 82 future needs of its citizens and businesses through efficient and responsive process that 83 contributes to and promotes the health, safety, and welfare of the overall County. The OCPB 84 will make every effort to uphold a vision of responsive governance and quality public services 85 during our deliberations, decisions, and recommendations. 86 87 88 AGENDA ITEM 6: CHAIR COMMENTS 89 90 91 AGENDA ITEM 7: PLANNING BOARD ANNUAL REPORT AND WORK PLAN FOR COUNTY COMMISSIONERS’ ANNUAL 92 PLANNING RETREAT: To discuss the input form for the annual BOCC planning retreat in early 93 2015. The annual report informs the BOCC of past year’s activities of advisory 94 boards/commissions and assists in overall County work planning. 95 Presenter: Craig Benedict, Planning Director. 96 97 Craig Benedict reviewed the annual report/work plan 98 99 Paul Guthrie: What is the definition of negative land use? 100 101 Craig Benedict: It could be an adult entertainment establishment. We have been working with the attorney’s office to 102 develop what are also known as sexual oriented businesses. Regulations cannot be completely prohibited of such 103 uses but you can regulate them. 104 105 Paul Guthrie: I assume that terminology as defined will not encroach upon other things you don’t have jurisdiction 106 on. For instance, farming. 107 Approved 12/3/14 3 108 Craig Benedict: Farming will continue to be exempt from zoning law. 109 110 Lydia Wegman: The rural enterprise item, is this agricultural support enterprises already in the UDO? 111 112 Craig Benedict: It is in the UDO for areas in the rural part of the County outside the rural buffer. There is dialogue 113 with Chapel Hill and Carrboro about any uses such as ag support enterprises being allowed in the rural buffer. There 114 needs to be joint approval. 115 116 Lydia Wegman: Will that come to the Planning Board? 117 118 Craig Benedict: It has been to the Planning Board already as far as the abridged list of uses for the rural buffer. If 119 Chapel Hill or Carrboro suggest a shorter list, we will bring it back to this Board. 120 121 Lydia Wegman: Is there a way to get more information in writing about the list and what is being considered? 122 123 Perdita Holtz: It is on the February 2014 quarterly public hearing materials, the one about the rural buffer. 124 125 Tony Blake: The new zoning you are talking about, what specific areas? Would it be the Efland area and the Eno 126 area? 127 128 Craig Benedict: Our economic development zones. There are areas around Hillsborough and the 129 Efland/Buckhorn/Mebane corridor. 130 131 Paul Guthrie: Do you see this as a way to begin to bank potential sites that are quick to move or as a classification to 132 ease individual requests? 133 134 Craig Benedict: Both. You do want to ease the development process but the first part of your question was if there 135 are sites that would have a better retailability, you do need to preserve those sites for retail. 136 137 Tony Blake: I have been reading about form based codes and zoning. This sounds like you are leading up to that. 138 139 Craig Benedict: It is more of a mixed use with parameters of development. 140 141 Tony Blake: I would love to hear from Steve Brantley. To come and talk to us and give an overview. 142 143 Lisa Stuckey: When I came, we were talking about the implementation bridge. Have most of those things been 144 ticked off or no longer relevant? 145 146 Tony Blake: Transportation, not so much. 147 148 Craig Benedict: There are still items that need to be implemented and are step by step like the Efland Mebane Small 149 Area Plan. 150 151 Lisa Stuckey: This was a document that came out of the UDO process. Things they didn’t address. 152 153 Craig Benedict: We called it the bucket list. You can’t address all these things at once. 154 155 Perdita Holtz: The easy stuff has been done and now we have moved into the hard stuff like the public hearing 156 process changes. 157 158 Lisa Stuckey: Sometimes things become irrelevant and sometimes things get forgotten. 159 160 Approved 12/3/14 4 MOTION made to approve the report and work plan presented by Craig Benedict by Andrea Rohrbacher. Seconded 161 by Laura Nicholson. 162 VOTE: Unanimous 163 164 165 AGENDA ITEM 8: UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENT: To continue discussion and 166 provide input on government-initiated amendments to the text of the UDO to change the 167 existing public hearing process for Comprehensive Plan-, UDO-, and Zoning Atlas-related 168 items/amendments. This item was heard at the September 8, 2014 quarterly public hearing 169 and was discussed at the October 8 Planning Board meeting. Discussion is expected to focus 170 on the quasi-judicial process. 171 Presenter: Perdita Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator 172 173 Perdita Holtz reviewed PowerPoint Chart 174 175 Paul Guthrie: If there is a different presentation at the BOCC from what was given to this Board, what would 176 happen? 177 178 Perdita Holtz: If it were significant, we could say this is a significant difference, you may wish to send it back to the 179 Planning Board and the BOCC would decide. 180 181 Paul Guthrie: If you want to catch up to speed on what happened, where would you get that? 182 183 Perdita Holtz: It is on video and eventually minutes are done by the County Clerk’s office but they are not done 184 within two days. It usually takes a couple of weeks at least. 185 186 Lydia Wegman: The Planning Board meeting would occur first. Most of the public will probably blow off the Planning 187 Board meeting. If they come to the BOCC and make a presentation that the Planning Board didn’t see or consider, 188 how will the BOCC know they are seeing something the Planning Board didn’t see that might be significant and 189 change the recommendation? 190 191 Perdita Holtz: There would be a report that tells the BOCC who spoke at the Planning Board meeting. Also, staff 192 could let the BOCC know if something significant is being raised at the public hearing that wasn’t at the Planning 193 Board meeting. Then the BOCC could decide if it should go back to the Planning Board. 194 195 Paul Guthrie: Worst case scenario, would it be possible for this Planning Board de nova after that decision to say we 196 didn’t hear any of that? 197 198 Perdita Holtz: That would depend on if the BOCC made a decision the night of the hearing or not. 199 200 Paul Guthrie: There are 99 times out of 100 you would never have a problem but it is that one time it could be sticky. 201 202 Lydia Wegman: It says the public hearing will be closed at the conclusion and written comments would no longer be 203 required for making comments after the hearing. If the public hearing is closed, what would be the forum for making 204 comments? 205 206 Perdita Holtz: On a legislative items, anybody can comment anytime. The current process is that the public hearing 207 is left open for written comments. 208 209 Lydia Wegman: It the public hearing is closed then what does it mean to submit comments in any form? 210 211 Perdita Holtz: For legislative items, the public hearing is a statutory requirement that you hold a public hearing but 212 you can receive comments before and after that formal hearing. 213 214 Approved 12/3/14 5 Lydia Wegman: If the BOCC has already made the decision, there is no opportunity for anyone to make comments. 215 216 Perdita Holtz: They should comment before the public hearing at the Planning Board or at the public hearing. 217 218 Lydia Wegman: What is the purpose of having this additional opportunity for comment after the public hearing is 219 closed. 220 221 Perdita Holtz: There isn’t an additional opportunity via statutes, people can continue to comment. It is not like a 222 quasi-judicial process. 223 224 Craig Benedict: In the three cases the BOCC can decide, if they defer their decision, any input that comes from the 225 citizens can still be considered. If it gets referred back to the Planning Board, the citizen can still provide comment. 226 The only case it would not work is if the BOCC heard everything they thought they needed to decide that night. 227 228 Tony Blake: Where along this process line is the community information meeting? 229 230 Perdita Holtz: The information meeting 45 days ahead of time is associated with Special Use Permit applications 231 which are not legislative but are quasi-judicial. 232 233 Michael Harvey: Neighborhood meetings are also for major subdivision and fire stations. 234 235 Tony Blake: That is a localized place to make comments and the Planning Board rep should be notified and invited 236 to that meeting. This seems to cry out for a Neighborhood Information Meeting. 237 238 Perdita Holtz: We were kind of looking at it as the Planning Board meeting would be the prelude to the public 239 hearing. 240 241 Tony Blake: They are involved by the applicant. You are making the distinction that these are not text amendments. 242 The Neighborhood Information Meeting is more important for something like this that is not a text amendment than a 243 Special Use Permit. 244 245 Perdita Holtz: The whole point of having the Neighborhood Information Meeting for the Special Use Permit is so 246 people can understand that is a very special process and that you will have to hire experts to represent you. 247 248 Tony Blake: A concrete example is the Mountains to Sea Trail. I would think that sort of process would be valuable 249 there. 250 251 Perdita Holtz: I think that DEAPR is holding meetings on the Mountains to Sea Trail. 252 253 Tony Blake: I am getting pounded by this new gas pipeline. 254 255 Michael Harvey: The BOA held a public hearing on the gas line proposal which was advertised and notifications 256 were sent. We were on tenuous ground as to whether the hearing was required but we had the hearing and went 257 through the process. 258 259 Bonnie Hammersley: I met with PSNC’s representatives with the Chair and Vice Chair and how we can inform 260 people better about those issues. 261 262 Paul Guthrie: Having managed the acquisition of trails for snow mobiles and hiking, etc. in Wisconsin I can tell you 263 that it would be good to keep a master file of all communications that come in whether the are timely or not for 264 information. 265 266 Lisa Stuckey: Going back to the discussion of the suggestion to change our process, if it’s related to the change, 267 now is the time. Perdita, do you need a vote or consensus? 268 Approved 12/3/14 6 269 Perdita Holtz: For a consensus that says this flowchart captures the discussion at last month’s Planning Board 270 meeting. 271 272 Laura Nicholson: I like the flowchart and I think it does capture what we have been talking about. When you get to 273 the last bubble it gets wordy. It says Planning Board members would be encouraged to attend, could we say 274 expected to attend so it sounds more like we care about being there. 275 276 Lisa Stuckey: In the description of the Planning Board’s responsibilities and what people see when they are thinking 277 about applying to the Planning Board, it doesn’t mention the quarterly public hearings, it mentions only the monthly 278 meetings. 279 280 Laura Nicholson: I agree. If it is in there as an expectation then the idea is that you should know that upfront. 281 282 Lisa Stuckey: Now there is a quarterly public hearing, people have been making comments at our meeting, the 283 process hasn’t been explained to them, we are expanding the number of times a person can comment from only the 284 quarterly public hearing to our meeting in a more formalized way, the public hearing, they have another chance to 285 speak. We are expanding the number of times people can speak; do you think it will slow the process? 286 287 Perdita Holtz: On controversial items, possibly. 288 289 Buddy Hartley: I like the setup. It does do what we have talked about for years. 290 291 Lisa Stuckey: Is there a consensus? 292 293 Lydia Wegman: People need to understand if the BOCC makes a decision that night, it is over. People need to 294 understand upfront that is a possibility. 295 296 Tony Blake: I agree with the caveat that if you are changing zoning there should be a public information meeting. 297 298 Perdita Holtz: That would make the process longer. 299 300 Lisa Stuckey: In the letter that goes out, notifying the people of the Planning Board meeting, there could be a note of 301 encouragement that if you have questions or concerns, attend and make your feelings known. 302 303 Laura Nicholson: At the bottom bubble, it says the public hearing will be closed at the conclusion of the hearing and 304 written comments will no longer be made. You say hearing a lot and you are talking about written comments would 305 no longer be required, you might want to say solely written comments wouldn’t be required. 306 307 Perdita Holtz: This flowchart is for people who are somewhat familiar with the process, so they can make decisions 308 about changes from the existing process, it’s not to be distributed to lay people who know nothing about how the 309 process works. 310 311 Andrea Rohrbacher: From my experience, no matter how hard you try, you will have someone who says I didn’t 312 know. 313 314 Perdita Holtz: Moving on to the quasi-judicial process. Reviewed abstract. Three questions that may frame the 315 discussion. One, do you think the Planning Board should make recommendation on quasi-judicial. Two, if you 316 decide you want to continue to make a recommendation, when would that occur? Three, if the Planning Board is no 317 longer attending the public hearings as an official board, what would the Planning Board meeting be? 318 319 Paul Guthrie: Does the BOCC feel they need a buffer? 320 321 Perdita Holtz: I don’t know what the BOCC feels. 322 Approved 12/3/14 7 323 Paul Guthrie: It may be a little bit of a pain if we have to look at a million items but it could serve a useful purpose 324 and it could expedite the process. 325 326 Tony Blake: 99.99% of the time, staff is correct that it meets or doesn’t meet….but there are cases where there is 327 something they are not aware of. 328 329 Lisa Stuckey: But we can’t receive that information. 330 331 Tony Blake: If staff says it meets this checklist and you know otherwise, that is not testimony…. 332 333 Lisa Stuckey: When we go through the checklist, is that before or after the public hearing? 334 335 Perdita Holtz: After the public hearing. 336 337 Lisa Stuckey: The Planning Board is not allowed to take additional testimony so we can’t insert things we have 338 heard. 339 340 Craig Benedict: You can ask questions. You can ask the applicant to provide information. 341 342 Lisa Stuckey: Can you ask a member of the public who spoke? 343 344 Craig Benedict: You have the right to cross examine anyone at the hearing. 345 346 Lisa Stuckey: If we don’t have a quorum and we come back to our meeting, are we allowed to go forward with the 347 checklist? If a quorum of the Planning Board is not required at the public hearing, can we proceed? 348 349 Lydia Wegman: What would be the role of the Planning Board after the public hearing? 350 351 James Bryan: From a legal standpoint, the public hearing, as the trial, once that is closed, there will be no other 352 comments considered by the Board except for the Board talking among themselves and to their attorney. My belief 353 now is the current process, if we have a written comment after the hearing is closed, it should not be considered from 354 a legal perspective. 355 356 Lydia Wegman: The way it is set up now, any comment that comes in after the public hearing are a problem? 357 358 James Bryan: Yes. 359 360 Lydia Wegman: Your concern is whatever comments are coming in have to come in at the public hearing or before 361 the public hearing? 362 363 James Bryan: At the public hearing, at the trial because everything the Board hears, all the parties, which is a legal 364 term, anything the Board hears, I get to hear it being spoken to them, I get to question whoever speaks it to the 365 Board. 366 367 Paul Guthrie: Does that also preclude the BOCC in considering the trial of discussing it? You used the analogy of 368 the jury system. A jury can discuss in its own quarters. Who is the jury? 369 370 James Bryan: The BOCC. After the public hearing is closed, the only words they can hear are what they heard at 371 the hearing. As a practice, in some jurisdictions, there is no planning board meeting. Other jurisdictions have it set 372 up where it goes to the planning board first and they have a mock hearing. A dry run. 373 374 Lydia Wegman: Also an opportunity for citizenry to have information about what is required. 375 376 Approved 12/3/14 8 James Bryan: Every jurisdiction is different. This place has a lot of educated folks and a lot of money which is 377 different than others that don’t have those things. 378 379 Maxecine Mitchell: We are pretty much serving as a double check to the staff to make sure the applicant did 380 everything according to the rules and laws of the County who, if they meet them and let them move forward so if a 381 project happens in my area, I can know and prepare my neighbors. 382 383 Michael Harvey: Staff is preparing a script based on the evidence entered into the record and testimony at the 384 hearing. Some items are based soley on the testimony of the public hearing. 385 386 Bryant Warren: Being on the Hillsborough Planning Board, this is totally different. We met then the Planning Board 387 met and made recommendations. This sounds different and if we are not going to be in the public hearing, just the 388 BOCC, then they will have the final say then there is nothing we can do about it. We can have an information 389 meeting prior to that. I don’t really see any place for a Planning Board in this process. 390 391 Perdita Holtz: Special Use Permits applications will have a Neighborhood Information Meeting 45 days ahead of the 392 public hearing. 393 394 Bryant Warren: What about having that informational meeting at the Planning Board meeting and let them be there. 395 396 Perdita Holtz: We will look at that but sometimes the way the schedule works in quarters and having ORC Ordinance 397 Review meetings sometimes, we might not be able to do everything in one night. There can be a scheduling difficulty 398 when you have more than one meeting. 399 400 James Lea: It sounds like there is plus to making recommendations or just having quasi-judicial meetings. 401 402 Tony Blake: In this way our role is to inform more than represent. 403 404 Perdita Holtz: Should that pre-meeting with the Planning Board be the Neighborhood Information Meeting together? 405 406 Lisa Stuckey: In these cases, the folks are hiring lawyers so this is more expense to them. Maybe the lawyer is at 407 the neighborhood meeting and then to our meeting and then they will do the public hearing. 408 409 Lydia Wegman: In your list you say if the Planning Board continues to make a recommendation so are you assuming 410 there is a room as a legal matter to make a recommendation if the Planning Board meeting occurs before the 411 meeting of the BOCC? 412 413 James Lea: It sounds like we are not making recommendations. 414 415 James Bryan: You have the public hearing. The first person to speak is staff who introduces it, reviewing the packet, 416 and one item will be the Planning Board recommendation. 417 418 Lydia Wegman: The Planning Board could hear whatever we are hearing from the public from the applicant and 419 make a recommendation prior to the public hearing that would go into the record that the BOCC would consider? 420 421 James Bryan: Right. The BOCC can’t make a decision based on that recommendation. But it could prompt them to 422 ask the right questions. 423 424 Tony Blake: Wouldn’t staff do that anyway? 425 426 Paul Guthrie: Prior to the formal legal hearing, could this group discuss the project and appear as a witness for 427 information at the legal hearing? 428 429 James Bryan: It depends on the facts but in general, no. I would object. 430 Approved 12/3/14 9 431 Bryant Warren: You said if the Planning Board wanted to be at the informational meeting and they had questions 432 about it and they wanted staff to bring it to the BOCC during the quasi-judicial hearing, would that be a 433 recommendation? As long as it is presented to the BOCC. 434 435 James Bryan: There is a difference between hearing it and using it as a basis for the decision. 436 437 Lisa Stuckey: Do we clarify things or muddy the waters? They can hear it but not base anything on it. 438 439 James Bryan: Attorneys will do that. Give you background information, sort of context for it. 440 441 Tony Blake: Even presenting new facts that are not in evidence, that is not sufficient? 442 443 James Bryan: Right. 444 445 Lydia Wegman: A recommendation could be considered by the BOCC if I understand correctly. 446 447 Paul Guthrie: Are staff communications directly to the BOCC privileged? 448 449 James Bryan: No. 450 451 Paul Guthrie: So they are considered just another testifier? 452 453 James Bryan: Anytime that staff sends anything to the BOCC it is called a work product and under the public records 454 of law that is available. If it is quasi-judicial, staff isn’t supposed to be talking to the Board about the particular 455 question at hand. You deal with it by divulging the communication at the hearing so everyone knows. 456 457 Paul Guthrie: The recommendation of staff to the BOCC has to be done as a witness format? 458 459 James Bryan: Yes. Again, the statutes aren’t the best in the world. The conventional thinking is that you have a 460 board that acts as judges and anyone there has to be a party to it. 461 462 Maxecine Mitchell: My understanding from what I’ve heard, legally we really have no say but we can put information 463 out that would make the BOCC look more in depth at what they are presented. I am ok to say if the Planning Board 464 makes the recommendation. I guess I would go with before. If the Planning Board continues to make 465 recommendations, we don’t really need to be at the public hearing meeting. 466 467 Bryant Warren: If we get the information from the informational meeting, we make recommendations to staff and 468 they can give it to them. I don’t see the need for us to be at the public hearing. 469 470 Andrea Rohrbacher: For question one, I would say, yes, we still should make a recommendation and for question 471 two it should be before the public hearing and attendance at the official meeting where all the testimony is being 472 presented would be optional for the Planning Board. 473 474 Paul Guthrie: On one hand, I think one of the positive roles of this Board is that it can begin to articulate the 475 sentiment of both itself and people it deals with on issues of public concern. On the other hand, the way this system 476 is set up the way we have been talking about, the only way we can do it is at a very early stages of the process or 477 outside the confines of this Board and this Board’s responsibility. I don’t think that helps the public decision process 478 at all. I have great problems with the recommendation but I am not sure there is anything else to do. 479 480 Buddy Hartley: In the process where we haven’t got to the public hearing yet, we would have seen the application, 481 correct? 482 483 Approved 12/3/14 10 Perdita Holtz: You normally don’t see the application until it goes out in the quarterly public hearing materials now. 484 We are 99.99% sure we are adding the neighborhood informational meeting 45 days ahead of time. 485 486 Buddy Hartley: I think it is fine to make it before. Basically we see if everything meets the criteria and we make the 487 recommendation. 488 489 James Lea: Item one I would say I would say yes and item number two I would say before and item three I don’t 490 know. 491 492 Laura Nicholson: Yes on item one, before on item two, I just think we have a responsibility to our townships, the only 493 way we could influence or affect anything is before. 494 495 Tony Blake: We are not really making a recommendation but making a suggestion. I wouldn’t mind having the 496 opportunity of making a recommendation. I would also like to say that the Planning Board needs to know about this 497 stuff earlier in the process so that when someone puts a sign out there and we get a call from someone in the 498 community we don’t have to say we don’t know what you are talking about. 499 500 Perdita Holtz: One of the things we could institute as part of the neighborhood information process is to email you all 501 the notice that is going out to the public. 502 503 Tony Blake: Even some more background on the project. 504 505 Perdita Holtz: I think there will start being information on the website and we can provide a link. 506 507 Tony Blake: Question one, yes; question two before; question three I think we need more information earlier. 508 509 Lydia Wegman: I do think the Planning Board should be making recommendations on quasi-judicial matters and I do 510 think the recommendation should occur before the public hearing along the lines of what we are talking about. I am 511 concerned about having an informed recommendation. There needs to be a process between the Neighborhood 512 Information Meeting and the public hearing for the Planning Board to make a recommendation. The only concern I 513 have about the Planning Board not being at the public hearing is if the BOCC should want to take more time to 514 consider and continue the public hearing so if the BOCC wanted the Planning Board to offer more input subsequent, 515 there would need to be a way for the Planning Board members to hear what went on at the public hearing. 516 517 Perdita Holtz: There have always been issues where some people make it to the public hearing but the same people 518 don’t make it to the Planning Board meeting. 519 520 Lisa Stuckey: I don’t think we should make recommendations. I don’t think going through that process up until now 521 has been productive, we rely on staff if they meet all the requirements, we have to recommend it be approved. It 522 seems a very artificial process. The real thing happens at the public hearing. 523 524 Paul Guthrie: Could a member or members of this group that have discussed this prior to any of the formal legal 525 steps be subpoenaed by the applicant to testify at the hearing. 526 527 James Bryan: Yes. It is very rare but the chair gets to decide and you get to appeal that to the whole Board and they 528 have subpoena power and if you don’t show up, the Court of Justice can require you to get a contempt of court. 529 530 Tony Blake: Can we be deposed in the legal sense? 531 532 James Bryan: The subpoena will most likely require you to show up at the hearing and they you will be ask 533 questions. 534 535 Bonnie Hammersley: I wanted to say on behalf of the County Board of Commissioners that on the 24th there is not 536 going to be a quarterly public hearing because there aren’t any items and also no dinner because there is no 537 Approved 12/3/14 11 meeting. They wanted to extend to you that at any time you want to schedule a meeting like that in 2015, they would 538 love to spend that time with you. 539 540 541 AGENDA ITEM 8: COMMITTEE/ADVISORY BOARD REPORTS: 542 a. Board of Adjustment 543 544 Michael Harvey: The BOA approved the PSNC pipeline. We will have a meeting in December for an appeal. Local 545 residents are appealing a decision by the County to rescind a notice of violation involving a gun range. 546 547 548 AGENDA ITEM 12: ADJOURNMENT: 549 550 551 ________________________________________ Pete Hallenbeck, Chair