Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Planning and Zoning Commission - 9/7/2006 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION September 7, 2006 TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 NORTH LA CANADA DRIVE REGULAR SESSION AT 6:00 PM 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call PRESENT: Chair Pete Bistany Vice Chair Doug McKee Commissioner Bill Adler Commissioner Ray Paolino Commissioner Clark Reddin Commissioner Honey Pivirotto EXCUSED: Commissioner Teree Bergman OTHERS PRESENT: K.C. Carter, Council Member, Commission Liaison Sarah More, FAICP, Planning & Zoning Administrator Joe Andrews, Civil Attorney 3. Call to the Audience (Non Agenda Items Only) opened and closed at 6:03 p.m. There were no speakers. 4. Minutes MOTION: Commissioner Adler MOVED to approve the August 1 2006, Planning and Zoning Commission regular meeting minutes with the following correction: Page 2 under Commissioner McKee's comments, last bullet point the sentence should read, "This should include reference errors caused by the addition of the Minor Land Division Code." Vice Chair McKee seconded the motion. Motion carried 6 yes, 0 no. 5. Discussion of Planning and Zoning Commission Rules and Operating Procedures of June 1, 2005. Chair Bistany brought several areas of the rules to the Commissioner's attention: • 1.1.E - The term of a members whose appointment has expired shall be extended until the Town Council has reappointed that member or appointed a successor. • 1.1.H - Three missed meetings in any 12-month period is cause for dismissal from the Commission. "Excused" and "absent" effectively are the same. September 7, 2006 Approved Minutes PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 2 • 1.2.A - Elections are held in September. This time frame gives new members an opportunity to become acquainted with all the Commission before having to elect a new Chair and Vice-Chair. • 2.6.A - Placing items on an agenda can be accomplished at the request of two Commissioners. It can also be voted on at a meeting with an affirmative vote of a majority of the Commission. Commissioner Adler asked for clarification of"majority of the Commission versus majority of the members present". Attorney Andrews stated that he felt that "majority of the Commission" is all seven members, versus majority of those present is a majority of the quorum. Commissioner Adler felt this should be placed on an agenda and the language should be revised so future commissions will have a better guide, which would be important when making decisions of extremely important items such as general plan amendments. It should be consistent. Chair Bistany continued with items: • Appendix D, #6 - If an appointee is actively and publicly opposed to a decision of the Council, the appointee will resign. • Memorandum from Mayor Loomis dated March 13, 2006 —The continuing education hours have been changed from 8 hours per year to 16 hours every two years. If the hours are not completed, the commissioner is asked to complete them or will be asked to resign. Commissioner Adler said there is a Town Council policy that requires an evaluation to be done of members of boards and commissioner who are applying for reappointment. The evaluation is to be done by the Chair or Vice-Chair. That is not in the current practice and because we are not having that evaluation, we are in violation of Town policy. Ms. More said it is important to remember that Town Council policy overrides all of our rules. Planning and Zoning Commission rules don't need to be redundant. If the Council policy is that they will request an evaluation from the Chair, then they will do that and the Chair has to provide that information or analysis. Commissioner Adler said the reason for the evaluation is that the panel doing the interviewing has the evaluation of the recommendations from the panel going to the Council. That came about as a result of some candidates for reappointment going through the interviewing process and then being denied reappointment for reasons that were never explained. It subsequently turned out that people privately had reported to the Council that their performance was substandard and none of that became apparent to the members seeking reappointment. They did not have an opportunity to respond and that was plainly unfair. Ms. More said we will check to see if we can find the policy. September 7, 2006 Approved Minutes PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 3 6. Review and possible action on General Plan criteria for plan amendments. Commissioner Adler said there will be an initiation for a General Plan amendment for Ventana Medical on next month's agenda. There needs to be clarification of the word "consistency" and the use of"largely" or "substantially" consistent. There are a large number of Goals and Policies that will apply to any amendment. Rather than getting into weighting which policies are more important than others, the Commission needs to be free to make a recommendation of approval even though it isn't consistent. The applicant for the amendment shall have the burden of presenting facts, not staff. Ms. More agreed that it should be clarified. Staff and the applicant are not clear about what level of information and presentation the commission wants at the initial stage where they are requesting the initiation versus at the actual public hearing should it be initiated. Those are two separate things: One is requesting that it be initiated and how much of the actual merits do you want to go over during the first look. Commissioner Adler said we are discussing the criteria for plan amendments not the initiation. The applicant should have a checklist of all of the policies, goals, etc. The applicant can then go through the list for the ones that apply and address those. Chair Bistany agreed. There are a lot of applicants that are unprepared. The checklist should also go to the person doing the presentation. Ms. More said staff tries to advise the applicant and many times the applicant fails to do what they were told in addressing the criteria. Someone presenting on behalf of a client should be prepared to do all the things asked. Chair Bistany asked Ms. More if she would develop the list. Commissioners Adler and Reddin would like to see how consistency is interpreted and what values are set to the policies. Commissioner Adler said the Code requires compliance with the General Plan. Vice Chair McKee said the decision on what is and what is not consistent is an individual making process that will never be satisfactorily written down in a way that will be interpreted the same. There is too much subjectiveness in that term. Commissioner Adler read from the General Plan page 13 first paragraph, #3, regarding amendments. It is subjective, but gives the Commissioners a chance to declare to the applicant why they are voting the way they do. The Plan makes no determination that one section is more important than another. These are the merits referred to in the Zoning Code. Commissioner Reddin said a checklist is very important to the applicant and makes the process easier. September 7, 2006 Approved Minutes PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 4 Commissioner Pivirotto said if we are considering these are the merits and is that important, why wouldn't in addition to the checklist, the applicant begin by how would what they are proposing is meeting our test of the merits. It would provide some structure and a common framework. Commissioner Adler said part of the difficulty is that the applicant knows that staff is going to build a recommendation. They know staff is going to go through the same process that we are talking about them going through. The applicant then gets the staff report and says they agree, if it is favorable, with the staff report. We are not trying to get staff to stop making a recommendation, but we are trying to get the applicant to show that his work follows the guidelines so we judge based upon his presentation. Ms. More will develop a checklist and try to get it to the Commissioners before the next meeting. She would like the Commissioners to have all the information needed before being asked to initiate a request for amendment. Commissioner Adler said the initiation standard is listed in the preamble to the General Plan. Most General Plan language is subjective because that is what General Plans are. There is going to be interpretations involved. What needs to be addressed by the applicant is how conditions in the community have change to suggest that an initiation for an amendment is necessary. They don't have to give you the merits at this point. The applicant needs to understand that there needs to be a justification based on the conditions in the community. Ms. More said the Zoning Code only says based on the merits, and the General Plan is the merits. Vice Chair McKee pointed out that we need to make sure the applicant does not think if they cover all the items in the checklist they are automatically approved. Commissioner Adler felt the three points needs to be an addendum to the checklist to add definition of emphasis. Attorney Andrews said that the checklist needs to drafted up as these are the points that will be considered by the board in consideration of whether or not they are going to approve. 7. Discussion as to whether the Commission feels it is necessary to initiate, at the October 2006 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, an amendment to the Oro Valley Zoning Code dealing with Conditional Use Permit criteria as they relate to sexually oriented businesses. Chair Bistany said he has talked with the Town Attorney and he is satisfied that there is no need to reinstitute this. However, if the Commission or any two feel this should go on the October agenda, that is their right. Vice Chair McKee said the crux of the matter is the discretionary nature of this. While there may be Constitutional questions as to whether that power is too great, until such a September 7, 2006 Approved Minutes PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 5 time as a case comes up and gets tested, it may be just as well to let it be. On the other hand, if an item does come up, we have no guidelines on how to decide. He feels that what we have is good enough for the time being. Commissioner Adler said we only need one case to get us into a lawsuit. If we have an application for a conditional use permit (CUP) come before the Commission and three criteria routinely used for a CUP, traffic considerations, noise, glare, etc., don't apply to a SOB. What criteria will be used? Rather than letting sleeping dogs lie, you eliminate the CUP rather than confronting the applicant with a process in which there are no standards in which to judge the application. Suitability and appropriateness are not a subjective determination that can be imposed. The Code indicates that one SOB per 17 acres is allowed. The problem that exists is that we are requiring a process for an applicant to go through and the criteria does not apply to this kind of use. Commissioner Paolino stated that the licensing requirements are pretty rigid. Once those requirements are done, the Commission has no criteria on which to say no. Another criterion could be added that would apply to all CUP applications as well as SOB. He suggested possibly degradation of the social climate. Vice Chair McKee asked if the Commission has full discretion to turn down a CUP without meeting any of the other criteria that apply to other CUPs. Attorney Andrews stated that the issue is we have such an extensive code that if by the time they get to the CUP section, we deny them based on a non-existing criteria, we will end up in trouble. Further regulation on this that give us the ability to deny these types of permits could get up in trouble. If we take away any of the areas where an SOB could exist, we are in trouble. There is a large amount of burden placed on this board, but it is a CUP and if you put reasonable conditions on the use and then approve it, you are not going to be abusing your discretion. It is when the discretion is abused that problems arise. We have licensing provisions, development provisions and zoning code issues that have to be met. Further ability to deny SOB's creates a big problem. We have regulations above and beyond the ones in the California minutes Mr. Bistany provided. Chair Bistany said the key to control is in the licensing. Commissioner Adler asked why have the CUP at all. Ms. More said there is very little reason to have a CUP. You will not have a wide breadth of discretion as it relates to this kind of use because of the First Amendment protections. What is built into this ordinance is a lot of restrictive criteria. The ability to deny this use because you feel it is not appropriate for the community is not an opportunity the Commission is going to have. September 7, 2006 Approved Minutes PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 6 8. Discuss and review procedures to ensure that the Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes forwarded to the Town Council accurately and comprehensively reflect the Commission's recommendations. Chair Bistany said that he wants to make sure the recommendations that the Commission make gets to the Council. He thought that if a Commissioner makes a change to an exhibit they should write out the change so the recording secretary can be sure to include it accurately. He would like ideas from the Commissioners on how we can accurately and comprehensively reflect that to the Council. Commissioner Adler felt that part of the procedure is not with the minutes, but with the liaison. If the liaison carries forward a comprehensive idea of what was discussed and who the dissenters were and why, that will supplement the minutes. The liaisons haven't been doing that. Vice Chair McKee said recently a Council meeting took up an idea we had acted on only a few days after the Commission had acted upon it. There may not be a way to rectify this without putting more delay in when these things go to the Council. Sometime previously there was a lot more information transmitted to the Council about what went on in the meetings beyond what is in the form of minutes. Someone on the staff had done that. Ms. More was not familiar with that. Her past practice had been to work with the Chair in writing a separate memo. Maybe that is too convoluted. She could work with the Chair to provide more than just the vote and the motion, but a discussion of the meeting itself, the testimony and what the major points were. She would be glad to do that. Commissioner Adler said anytime there is a significant case, a Commissioner could be designated to go to the Council meeting and be available to supplement the information if there is a need. Chair Bistany thought that was a good idea, but the Council need information prior to the meeting. Rational for the Commissions decisions should go to the Council. Commissioner Reddin said our vote is one item the Council looks at. He thinks the minutes give an overview. We can't make the decision for the Council. If they are not reading the minutes and looking at the project in front of them and then taking our vote on top of that, then they are not doing their job. Adding another document is going to take more time for them. Commissioner Pivirotto asked are the minutes not getting to the Council timely. Commissioner Adler pointed out that there are two sets of minutes, the action minutes and the deliberation minutes. The action minutes go to the Council in a timely fashion. What they are missing is the rational behind the voting. Ms. More pointed out that the action minutes go out to the Council the next day after the meeting. Cases, applications, DRB minutes, and P&Z minutes are routinely processed September 7, 2006 Approved Minutes PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 7 as part of those materials that go to the council. Council members do get the minutes, which may be draft form because of not having had a chance to vote on the minutes. Attorney Andrews said one of the issues is that it may be hard to get the minutes ready any faster or approved any faster. Ms. More responded to Vice Chair McKee that we automatically include the portion of the minutes regarding a specific project with the packets that go to the Council. She had a conversation with Councilman Gillaspie who indicated that he would like a summary of the discussion and the key points to be provided to the Council. Vice Chair McKee has read through the packets the Council get and he did not recall the piece of Planning and Zoning's minutes that apply. Ms. More that if it is clear that we should do that we will make sure they are included. Commission Adler said it is disconcerting that the Council asks the same questions that the advisory board already did. Are the advisory boards doing their job. There is a role for the liaison that has not bee fully explored. Ms. More said we can make it a standard practice to send the minutes relating to the projects to the Council. 9. Election of Chairperson for the Planning and Zoning Commission MOTION: Commissioner Adler MOVED to re-elect Pete Bistany as Chairperson. Commissioner Pivirotto seconded the motion. Motion carried 6 yes, 0 no. 10. Election of Vice Chairperson for the Planning and Zoning Commission. MOTION: Commissioner Paolino MOVED to re-elect Doug McKee as Vice Chairperson. Commissioner Reddin seconded the motion. Motion carried 6 yes, 0 no. 11. Items for Next Agenda • Clarification of the process for initiation for a General Plan Amendment. • Confirmation of Town policy requiring an evaluation of members seeking reappointment. • Clarifying Planning and Zoning Commission's rules regarding majority or majority present. There needs to be consistency. • Determine the necessity of having a Conditional Use Permit for the Sexually Oriented Business ordinance. • Define the word clustering in the Zoning Code. Ms. More asked for leeway particularly the last item for bringing it back next month. If we are able to get to all the requested items, we will. If we have consideration of September 7, 2006 Approved Minutes PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 8 initiation of two or more PAD/General Plan amendments, the Commission might want to consider how many of these items you want on the agenda. Chair Bistany will look at the agenda prior to publishing. Items could be continued as well. Planning Update • The Arizona Planning Association 2006 Conference is September 27, 28, and 29 in Mesa. • The Arizona Department of Commerce 2006 Annual Boards and Commissions Conference is November 3 in Phoenix. • The Town Council will be holding a joint meeting with Pinal County Board of Supervisors on September 13, 2006, at 5:30 p.m. to discuss issues of regional concern, primarily the State Land Planning process and transportation issues. • The Town Council has invited the Planning and Zoning Commission hold a joint study session on September 27, 2006, at 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chamber primarily to go over the work plan. • The Citizen's Planning Institute starts October 5, 2006. • Neighborhood 3 in Rancho Vistoso application has been filed for a plan amendment which primarily involves moving land use classifications around. There may be a study session on this prior to the next meeting. • Neighborhood 5 application has not come in yet. It will include the relocation of the school site, transfer of the residential from the site where the school will go to the other site, and a reconfiguration of the Moore Road to a loop configuration to avoid wash crossings. Commissioner Adler handed out information on Prop. 207. Council Member K.C. Carter gave a brief summary on the Town and City Convention at Starr Pass that he attended. The topics discussed were politics, immigration, and water. Adjourn Regular Session MOTION: Commissioner Paolino MOVED to adjourn the September 7, 2006, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Vice Chair McKee seconded the motion. Motion carried 6 yes, 0 no. Meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m. Prepared by: Diane Chapman Office Specialist ACTION SUMMARY PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR SESSION September 7, 2006 TOWN COUNCIL CHAMBERS 11000 NORTH LA CANADA DRIVE REGULAR SESSION AT 6:00 PM 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call PRESENT: Chair Pete Bistany Vice Chair Doug McKee Commissioner Bill Adler Commissioner Ray Paolino Commissioner Clark Reddin Commissioner Honey Pivirotto EXCUSED: Commissioner Teree Bergman OTHERS PRESENT: K.C. Carter, Council Member, Commission Liaison Sarah More, FAICP, Planning & Zoning Administrator Joe Andrews, Civil Attorney 3. Call to the Audience (Non Agenda Items Only) 4. Minutes MOTION: Commissioner Adler MOVED to approve the August 1 2006, Planning and Zoning Commission regular meeting minutes with the following correction: Page 2 under Commissioner McKee's comments, last bullet point the sentence should read, "This should include reference errors caused by the addition of the Minor Land Division Code." Vice Chair McKee seconded the motion. Motion carried .6 yes, 0 no. 5. Discussion of Planning and Zoning Commission Rules and Operating Procedures of June 1, 2005. No action taken. 6. Review and possible action on General Plan criteria for plan amendments. No action taken. September 7, 2006 ACTION SUMMARY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION 2 7. Discussion as to whether the Commission feels it is necessary to initiate, at the October 2006 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting, an amendment to the Oro Valley Zoning Code dealing with Conditional Use Permit criteria as they relate to sexually oriented businesses. No action taken. 8. Discuss and review procedures to ensure that the Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes forwarded to the Town Council accurately and comprehensively reflect the Commission's recommendations. No action taken. 9. Election of Chairperson for the Planning and Zoning Commission MOTION: Commissioner Adler MOVED to re-elect Pete Bistany as Chairperson. Commissioner Pivirotto seconded the motion. Motion carried 6 yes, 0 no. 10. Election of Vice Chairperson for the Planning and Zoning Commission. MOTION: Commissioner Paolino MOVED to re-elect Doug McKee as Vice Chairperson. Commissioner Reddin seconded the motion. Motion carried 6 yes, 0 no. 11. Items for Next Agenda • Clarification of the process for initiation for a General Plan Amendment. • Confirmation of Town policy requiring an evaluation of members seeking reappointment. • Clarifying Planning and Zoning Commission's rules regarding majority or majority present. • Determine the necessity of having a Conditional Use Permit for the Sexually Oriented Business ordinance. • Define the word clustering in the Zoning Code. Planning Update Adjourn Regular Session MOTION: Commissioner Paolino MOVED to adjourn the September 7, 2006, Planning and Zoning Commission meeting. Vice Chair McKee seconded the motion. Motion carried 6 yes, 0 no. Meeting adjourned at 8:10 p.m.