HomeMy WebLinkAboutORC minutes 080515Approved 9/2/15
1
SUMMARY NOTES 1
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING BOARD 2
AUGUST 5, 2015 3
ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE 4
5
NOTE: A quorum is not required for Ordinance Review Committee meetings. 6
7
MEMBERS PRESENT: Peter Hallenbeck (Chair), Cheeks Township Representative; Lydia Wegman-At-Large Chapel 8
Hill Township (Vice Chair); Tony Blake, Bingham Township Representative; Paul Guthrie, At-Large Chapel Hill 9
Township; Buddy Hartley, Little River Township Representative; Laura Nicholson, Eno Township Representative; 10
Herman Staats, At-Large, Cedar Grove Township; James Lea, Cedar Grove Township Representative; 11
12
STAFF PRESENT: Michael Harvey, Current Planning Supervisor; Perdita Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator; Ashley 13
Moncado, Special Projects Planner; 14
15
AGENDA ITEM 1: CALL TO ORDER 16
UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE (UDO) TEXT AMENDMENTS 17
PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS REVISIONS 18
To continue review and comment upon proposed amendments to the UDO to revise the 19
public hearing process. 20
21
Presenter: Perdita Holtz, Planning Systems Coordinator 22
23
Perdita Holtz: Reviewed abstract and presentation. 24
25
James Lea: When you say generally are you speaking of Section 2.3.7, is that the word you are talking about? 26
27
Perdita Holtz: Yes, we are suggesting that A, B, and C be deleted, and this is what I would like your input on, but if 28
they are not to be deleted then it would need to be amended as shown. We are suggesting any amendment to the 29
comprehensive plan can be heard at any of the four quarterly public hearings. How does the ORC feel about that? 30
31
Lydia Wegman: Where does it say four times a year? 32
33
Perdita Holtz: The language would say proposed amendments shall be considered at the quarterly public hearings. 34
35
Lydia Wegman: I think that makes sense 36
37
Pete Hallenbeck: It sounds good to me. 38
39
Tony Blake: I am not opposed to the intent; I’m just trying to think of things that could go wrong. 40
41
Pete Hallenbeck: We have also had concerns in the past that the county moves too slowly. Making this four times a 42
year is a good deal. 43
44
Perdita Holtz: Ok, it sounds like you are good with changing that. 45
46
Perdita Holtz continued presentation. 47
48
Perdita Holtz: Would it be acceptable to combine the Planning Board meeting notice and the quarterly public hearing 49
notice into one? Or should we stick to having two separate ones? 50
51
Pete Hallenbeck: You schedule the two at the same time? 52
53
Perdita Holtz: Yes, we schedule both at the same time. 54
Approved 9/2/15
2
55
Lydia Wegman: This it just for comprehensive plan amendments? 56
57
Perdita Holtz: For comprehensive plan map amendments. 58
59
Lydia Wegman: How does this relate to Section 2.3.5? 60
61
Perdita Holtz: Section 2.3.5 says that before the BOCC can adopt any comprehensive plan amendment there shall 62
be a public hearing. Right now the public hearing is a joint public hearing with the BOCC and Planning Board. Part of 63
this proposal is to not require a quorum of Planning Board members in order to hold the public hearing, so technically 64
it would no longer be a joint public hearing. 65
66
Tony Blake: It doesn’t mean we aren’t invited? 67
68
Perdita Holtz: You are encouraged to attend. 69
70
Lydia Wegman: The Planning Board would still be making recommendations? 71
72
Perdita Holtz: Yes. 73
74
Lydia Wegman: Is this a legal issue not to have a quorum? 75
76
Perdita Holtz: We are still reviewing this with the county attorney, but they believe it would not be an issue. 77
78
Perdita Holtz: So it sounds like you all are ok with combining two notices into one? 79
80
Lydia Wegman: Yes 81
82
Tony Blake: A concern I see is that the tighter we make it the less opportunity there is for parties to discuss outside of 83
the process and settle somethings. 84
85
Perdita Holtz: The applicants and neighbors can discuss outside of the hearing, it’s just the decision makers need to 86
hear the evidence in a hearing setting. 87
88
Lydia Wegman: If there is the public hearing and the applicant and neighbors come up with a new plan then would 89
there have to be another public hearing? 90
91
Perdita Holtz: Following the quasi-judicial hearing, the hearing would either be closed or would be continued at 92
another hearing date. I believe in that scenario it’s going to be continued to another hearing date and at that new 93
hearing the compromises would be presented. 94
95
Tony Blake: If there are material changes to the plan, they would have to go through the application process again? 96
97
Perdita Holtz: Once your application is in, you can amend it. 98
99
Michael Harvey: Those changes would need to be presented at a public hearing. 100
101
Meeting postponed for Planning Board meeting at 7:07 102
103
Perdita Holtz continued presentation following Planning Board meeting. 104
105
Lydia Wegman: Planning Board would not necessarily be involved in Class A Special Use Permits? 106
107
Perdita Holtz: Correct, it would be at the discretion of the BOCC. 108
Approved 9/2/15
3
109
Tony Blake: In the materials provided, it seemed to indicate that the quasi-judicial or ex parte communication began 110
when the application was complete, but I don’t see an application complete milestone on the chart. 111
112
Pete Hallenbeck: You want a box that says ex parte starts here? 113
114
Tony Blake: Yes 115
116
Pete Hallenbeck: If I understand the DAC does not include Planning Board, just staff and is just a process of the 117
application? 118
119
Perdita Holtz: Staff reviews all the applications and does not accept applications that are not complete, so when its 120
application submittal time, it’s considered complete. 121
122
Tony Blake: So at that point there needs to be some indication that ex parte begins. 123
124
Perdita Holtz: That may not be something we put in the chart, but is something that we have to discuss in training to 125
understand when the process starts. 126
127
Michael Harvey: Once an application is determined to be complete, we send out notifications for the neighborhood 128
information meeting noting that we have received the application. I have noted before that once an application is 129
deemed complete by staff, that’s when Board members cannot have ex parte communication. You will all find out 130
about the application when the notifications are sent for the neighborhood information meeting. 131
132
Tony Blake: Don’t you think that’s late notice? 133
134
Michael Harvey: No, because that goes out 60 days before the public hearing and is sent the day after an application 135
is determined complete. 136
137
Tony Blake: This negates the Planning Board function because when someone gets the notice, they call Planning 138
Board members and start asking questions and if we are bound by ex parte by not discussing it. 139
140
Perdita Holtz: That is true, but that is the nature of quasi-judicial hearings and why many jurisdictions do not have 141
their Planning Board look at these items. 142
143
Michael Harvey: Why not recommend to the public to call staff? Since staff is processing the application we can 144
divulge information since we are not bound by ex parte communication and we are not making a recommendation to 145
a governing body. 146
147
Pete Hallenbeck: I think that’s the answer if someone calls you. 148
149
Tony Blake: Why can staff talk about the details, but not us? 150
151
Michael Harvey: Because that’s why we are here. You make recommendations to the BOCC. 152
153
Pete Hallenbeck: This is how this process is set up and defined. Those are the rules if you will. 154
155
Tony Blake: It doesn’t make sense. 156
157
Pete Hallenbeck: I think you can go on record and say I don’t like the rules, but… 158
159
Lydia Wegman: To me, I wouldn’t have the kind of information staff would have, I think that if you want to help 160
someone that is upset you… 161
162
Approved 9/2/15
4
Tony Blake: We are billed as township representatives. Are we township representatives or not? And since we aren’t 163
making the decision I do not understand why we can’t discuss it. 164
165
Pete Hallenbeck: We have the ability to provide our input to the BOCC. 166
167
Lydia Wegman: I think we have the ability to provide our input and recommendation to the BOCC and that would be 168
the point when representation of your township would be very relevant. 169
170
Tony Blake: But how can we get a feel for what the township we represent is feeling if we can’t discuss it? 171
172
Lydia Wegman: Wouldn’t we hear it at the quarterly public hearing? 173
174
Michael Harvey: Or the neighborhood meeting. 175
176
Perdita Holtz: We are still discussing with the attorney how much Planning Board members can participate at the 177
neighborhood meeting. 178
179
Pete Hallenbeck: That’s something we need guidance with. 180
181
Tony Blake: I am just trying to understand when and what I can say. And I would like to know a little bit more why. 182
183
Pete Hallenbeck: As a result of this conversation we need clarification from the attorney regarding ex parte 184
communication. 185
186
Tony Blake: I would agree. 187
188
Pete Hallenbeck: What happens when a Planning Board member has specific skills that would make them the 189
equivalent of an expert witness and has questions or comments about the evidence provided? 190
191
Perdita Holtz: I will bring that up to the county attorney. My feeling with that is that would need to be brought up at the 192
quasi-judicial meeting. 193
194
Lydia Wegman: Or at least to ask questions? 195
196
Perdita Holtz: You are definitely able to ask questions. 197
198
Paul Guthrie: On a number of occasions and presentations to this body, provided evidence of a proposal was weak 199
and incomplete, and with raising questions with the context the applicant basically blows off an answer and you feel 200
as a member here do you really want to go down the road and cross examine them on where their information is 201
from. Yet we are here to provide citizen representation and assistance based our experience. You may need to be 202
careful how you frame that issue. 203
204
Perdita Holtz continued presentation. 205
206
Perdita Holtz: New language will be added to the Planning Board policies and procedures that would require the chair 207
or vice chair to attend the quarterly public hearing and BOCC meetings where a decision is scheduled on items 208
Planning Board made a recommendation on. 209
210
Paul Guthrie: Shouldn’t it be noted that the chair or vice chair be prepared to discuss with this Board what went on at 211
that session? 212
213
Perdita Holtz: Hopefully you all will attend the public hearing. 214
215
Approved 9/2/15
5
Pete Hallenbeck: The meetings are available for viewing and notes are provided following the meeting. If I went to 216
this meeting I provide subjective viewpoints to the Board. 217
218
Perdita Holtz continued presentation. 219
220
Pete Hallenbeck: The commissioners will choose if they want door A or door B? And when that happens then some 221
of this timing will get better nailed down? 222
223
Perdita Holtz: Yes, both options are going to be presented for comment at the public hearing and depending on how 224
that goes, we will decide how to move forward. This is planned to be on the October Planning Board meeting for a 225
recommendation. 226
227
Pete Hallenbeck: Any other comments? 228
229
Lydia Wegman: Thank you for your patience in going through this. 230
231
AGENDA ITEM 2: ADJOURNMENT 232