Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZTA201200009 Legacy Document 2012-12-19 (7)Site Plan/ "Subdivision 'Review Process- Public'Roundtable Comments 7/28/20'10 1. There needs to be a timeframe for presubmittal to actual submittal. Can't come back-2 years after-presubmittal. 2. One size fits all standards don't work 3. Concerns about ordinance requirements vs subjective design 4. Engineering standards need to be part of-the ordianance .5. Concerns about. public participation and public input- some thoughtthe.public shouldn't even be notified. Gives a-false sense of participation at a point where nothing can be changed. Not a valuable part of the process. 6. Site Review meeting- needs-to be better defined. Also, all reviewers that submitted comments must be available atthe meeting. 7. Concerns about subjective reviews- ARB, variations. 8. Some believed that if the site plan currently meets the criteria outlined and no waivers are needed, it should be administrative and no public input should be involved. .9. .Site review comments need to be given before the meeting, not at,the meeting or after. 10. _Some.believed a tiered system for waivers should be in place, similar tothe Tiered system for -Personal Wireless Facilities. 11..- During.SP and..ZMA process -all waivers identified are deemed approved when-the PC and BOS approve the plan, and won't need to be asked-for during.site_plan orsubdivision- review process. 12. 'Need-to outline process-timeline