05/09/1977 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

where both the Planning staff and the Hearings Official are em- ployees of the City. He did not know that citizens would be able to accept a process where decisions were made by the staff. He noted that timing and planning were very critical with PUD developments, saying that these three members felt the PUD process should remain with the Planning Commission at least in the first diagrammatic stage. e Mr. Bernhard opposed the split of the diagrammatic and preliminary stages from one body to another, saying that some continuity would be lost, and it would probably not save much staff time. He noted both should be together, whether under the Planning Commission or a Hearings Official. Ms. Smith asked who would be responsible for hiring the Hearings Official. The City Attorney advised that the Charter made it the City Manager's responsibility. In subsequent discussion, it was determined that probably half of the extra meetings which had been required for the Planning Commission could have been eliminated had a Hearings Official been used. The appeal process, under the Hearings Official proposal, would go directly to the Planning Commission and then to the court system. It was noted by Mr. Bernhard that the Planning Commission had unanimously voted to review the new process again in nine months so that the City Coun- cil, neighborhood groups, and the public would be able to evaluate whatever is adopted. Mr. Delay noted he had trouble with the proposed change because citizens would lose recourse to their elected officials. He also noted it might be of some value for the Planning Commission to have some input in regard to the diagrammatic approval so that it could stay in contact with what was developing in the City. He expressed his opposition to the change. e Mr. Haws said he felt more inclined to favor Mr. Maxwell's pos1t10n, but that he would be willing to try one step at a time if the first step was kept before the Planning Commission. Mr. Lieuallen said he would like to see the Hearings Official change tried, noting that if it were only for a nine-month period, he was not convinced that a compromise of the Planning Commission retaining the diagrammatic approval and a Hearings Official being used for the preliminary approval would be effective or tell anything. He would like to try the new change and have it reviewed to see what its impact would be over the nine-month period of time and noted his satisfaction with the appeal process in the change. Mr. Obie said he felt it was a judgmental process, the issue being whether the Planning Commission should make the judgment or an individual. He said he felt the basic issue revolved around the citizen's right to access to the elected officials regarding the scope of something of this nature. Mr. Williams felt the change ought to at least be tried. . 381 5/9/77-.-26