01/16/2018 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

He also suggested the possibility of having some small level residential projects approved at a staff level instead of the current requirement of having anything over 3 units automatically go to the Planning and Zoning Commission for approval. Chairperson Robinson agreed there was clearly an understaffing issue; however, the new position approved by the Commissioners, was expected to bring current development planning to an adequate level to meet the requirements of the Code. She agreed with Mr. Boling's suggestion to provide another week in the planning process before proceeding to the TRC, when staff would meet together to ensure before going to the TRC, that staffs comments and position were solid, eliminating extra back and forth time in the overall process for staff, as well as the applicant. Mr. Chuck Mechling, District 5 Representative suggested considering the submittal of a traffic study prior to or at the pre -application conference (pre -app), to provide the applicant details of what could or could not be done before the TRC meeting. Mr. John Blum, District 5 Representative stated until the applicant knew whether or not the project could be executed, there was no point in spending the money on the traffic study; therefore the traffic study should be incorporated and coordinated with the pre -app. Mr. Boling reminded the committee the purpose of the pre -app was to provide basic information such as the zoning, the level, the scope, and what were the basic traffic needs. He welcomed the engineers and architects of the committee to comment whether or not the applicant knew enough coming away from the pre -app. Mr. Blum mentioned differences between commercial and residential. He said in the pre -app there should be a clear indication of whether to move forward or not, whether the project was feasible. He continued, as far as the number of units, etc., it may vary with a residential project and a traffic study resulting in 3 or 4 fewer units, and that traffic study would be relevant and held true. He gave example of a commercial project with changing entitlements did not know details required for a traffic study before the TRC meeting. Mr. Joseph Paladin, District 2 Representative questioned how concurrency would be known without a Traffic Study. Mr. Blum stated a lot of the information would be provided at the pre -app before the Traffic Study was preformed, with the project going through traffic count, trips, reviewing link assignments, etc., wherein at that point, determination of whether the project would be impacted. He said he liked the idea of the "coordination meeting" proposed by staff and appreciated the current process of having pre -app comments before going through the major expense of a TRC submittal. He noted however, the dilemma was the level of details not submitted with the pre -app such as the location of utilities, drainage, etc. 3 C:\Users\sjohnson\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\INetCache\Content.Outlook\SEU7ML71\11.8.17 DRPP Minutes.doc 61