|
This proposed text amendment is principally designed to
specify procedures for processing rezoning applications in
order to address problems that have been consistently
encountered by the staff and applicants. The proposed
changes are summarized below.
Pre-Application Meeting
The language is amended to require a pre-application meeting
at least 90 days before submission of an application. An
additional on-site meeting between staff and the applicant
is also required to be held prior to submission. Staff can
waive the site meetings for cases that will not benefit from
early on-site collaboration about site features and
environmental resources.
Review Process and Timing
The amendment proposes a refinement to the initial staff
review process, providing for a complete review, report, and
coordination with the applicant on issues prior to
scheduling the application for Planning Commission public
hearing. It provides the applicant with an opportunity to
make substantive revisions in response to County and
referral agency staff comments and recommended project
changes. The objective is to have a complete application
subject to Planning Commission public hearing with minimal
revisions required.
It gives the Planning Commission 90 days to consider an
amendment, unless the applicant requests a deferral. If the
applicant submits additional information or makes a change
in the application, the Planning Commission can also take up
to 90 days to make a recommendation depending upon the
complexities of the revisions.
Consistent with State Code, the Board continues to have one
year to act on a rezoning. The proposed text amendment
clarifies, however, that time lost because of deferrals by
the applicant does not count toward the one year period. In
addition, where an applicant changes an application while it
is being processed, this shall constitute a re-application
and the 12-month-review period will begin anew.
Submission Requirements
The proposed amendment also clarifies and adds submission
requirements. Clarification is provided on traffic
studies. Submission requirements for map amendments are
expanded to proof of application to the Army Corps of
Engineers for a wetlands determination, existing floodplain
limits, and a soil survey map. The proposed amendment also
specifies the detail required in a Concept Development Plan,
where such plan is voluntarily proffered, to include
proposed land uses and their
locations and residential density and commercial square
footage tabulations, road and pedestrian networks,
conceptual public facilities and utilities plan,
stormwater/BMP concept plan consistent with Section 203.2(1)
of the DSM, anticipated floodplain boundaries where proposed
change to FEMA floodplain, character, size, type and
location of open space, with tabulations showing compliance
with open space requirements of Article 2, additional
information as may be required by specific special district
regulations in Article 5, and architectural renderings or
other illustrative sketches and graphics when necessary to
illustrate or define a proffer condition.
This proposed text amendment was initiated by the Planning
Commission on September 28, 2006. A public hearing was
conducted on October 26, 2006. The public hearing was kept
open and the matter continued until the November meeting of
the Planning Commission. Because of comments received from
Carson-Ashley and Piedmont Environmental Council, the
Planning Commission continued the public hearing until
January but asked to be briefed on the public comments
during a work session at the December meeting. An analysis
of the comments was presented to the Planning Commission on
December 19, 2006 and various amendments proposed by staff
to accommodate the comments and concerns raised by Carson
and Ashley and Piedmont Environmental Council. The comments
of Carson-Ashley and Piedmont Environmental Council are
attached, as are staff’s comments in response. The attached
proposed text contains the original proposed changes in
red. On January 25, 2007, the Planning Commission
unanimously recommended approval.
|