PC 121416 - Laserfiche WebLink

Maybe it's fine, and I'm not trying to say it was dishonestly, so my comment to staff was —in the code on page 77, it outlines the Minor CUP process and in these A through G as required data and maps, that the requirement be added, and staff could craft the language, that basically says you cannot run a Minor CUP process concurrently with a Minor PUD process. And correct me if I'm wrong staff, but the Minor PUD process would have to run its course —I think there's a waiting period anyways built into that — and then the CUP process could start and there would just be a breath. That's all I'm trying to ask for —a breath, just so that an applicant doesn't get their zoning in through two administrative actions without a potential hearing. Chair Ritter: How close are we to getting that? Beaudin: So, Commissioner Balch is correct. This is an anomaly situation where you could imagine somebody coming in asking for a Minor PUD Modification and wanting to concurrently process a Minor CUP that they're asking for as a change to the project zoning. The purpose of the Minor CUP is to move with the speed of business. Scott Raty was here this evening and the push on the Minor CUP was really to take things that are more routine in nature and move them along. All that being said I understand the concern. There's a 10 -day notice period on a PUD Mod, then the actual decision on a PUD Mod, followed by a 20 -day appeal period. So if we're not processing concurrently, you're basically saying to someone that they take about 30 days or a month to process the PUD Mod and then they would start into the Minor CUP process. With Commissioner Balch's suggestion, there'd be two administrative decisions rather than one administrative decision that would allow this new use, which would essentially allow the Planning Commission and the Council and anyone from the community to appeal at either stage. Once stage one is done and the appeal period is over, they would have one more bite of the apple. But its two bites of the apple instead of one, and you're talking about a two- to two- and -a- half -month process rather than a one -month process. Commissioner O'Connor: If they were done concurrently, would the notification be clear there were two minor changes —one at the PUD level and one at the CUP level? Beaudin: They would be. And what we typically do is condition the CUP approval on the appeal period passing for the PUD Mod so you can't get your CUP unless the PUD Mod passed and it became effective. Commissioner O'Connor: To clarify, both would be noticed and people would have time to raise an issue? Beaudin: Yes, it's really whether it takes one month or two or more for that to happen. Commissioner Balch: If I may, Commissioner O'Connor, we actually debated this quite extensively because I didn't know if I had enough support up here on it or not. I do just want to mention that it's only for new.....so the items listed in the proposal by staff now list out the things that are Minor CUP now that they're proposing to add. All I'm trying to PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, December 14, 2016 Page 10 of 49