Steering Group III:  Policies and Ordinances

February 10, 2004

Meeting Notes

 

I.          Welcome and Introductions

 

The meeting was called to order at 5:45 pm by Chairperson Tom Frutchey.

 

II.        Review and approve notes from last meeting

 

Notes from the January 27, 2004 meeting were reviewed and approved by the group.  It was clarified that there is currently available a County Big House Guidelines paper.

 

III.       Subcommittee Work Updates

 

Grading: Lisa Hosale

·        A revised draft was passed out and Lisa requested feedback, especially on how to make it readable by the public.  Many comments were made by the group including:  inclusion of graphics and diagrams; add intro that highlights differences from existing; the need for definitions. 

·        Shane coined the moniker “RapCon” for Group III’s product.

·        John W was concerned that the standards might become maximums for all projects and the need to explain their appropriate application as “lowest common denominators”.

·        Product is seen as interpretive guidelines.

·        Next steps for the Grading Subcommittee are:  Meet with Group 2 (possibly at Feb 18^th?); meet with other Group III subcommittees; do public outreach with future customers; go to BOS for their approval; do staff training and public education.

·        Group discussed need to go to the BOS with our products and concluded that it was useful to have BOS “ratify” the products so their relationship to the ordinances is made clear.

 

Big House: Don Nolte and John Watson

·        An outline for a revised policy was handed out.

·        Jackie and Tom clarified for the group that this subcomittee’s task differed from the others in that it was charged with proposing a replacement for the existing Big House Guidelines.

·        Issues debated by the group included privacy and proportionality and the use of F.A.R., a logarithmic curve or something similar to trigger application of the guideline.

·        Jackie cautioned that the policy not require a review process for houses in areas that don’t currently have one; nor changes in ordinance requirements.  Rather than requirements, she suggested that the guideline offer “rewards” for compliance.

·        The definition of “big house” is the highest priority.

·        John K suggested need to include standards for fuel management.

 

 

Creeks:  Brian Baca

·        An expanded draft paper was passed out.

·        Of the 3 charts included in this draft, RapCon would only possibly apply to the third as the first two (for flood control and septic set backs) are fixed requirements mandated by the State.

·        Diane pointed out that Chart 3 doesn’t give the 5 factors that would be evaluated for increasing or decreasing the required setbacks.

·        John W suggested that the paper, which he sees as a big improvement, should just be provided as an informational handout to prospective applicants.

 

IV.       February 18 Steering Group Coordination Meeting

 

·        Presentations will not be given from the different Steering Groups.  It has not been set yet what the breakout sessions will address.

·        There will be three “showcase” items presented.  Suggestions for these items include:  update on the zoning ordinance reformat; the PIT website; how the changes coming out of the PIT process should be institutionalized and publicly launched?

 

V.        Zoning Ordinance Update

 

Catherine Lee, John Watson and Brent Muchow will make presentation along with Dan Klemann at the February 18^th meeting.

Shane explained that the reformatting will improve consistency and make the ordinances more rational, and thereby reduce their exposure to litigation.

 

VI.       Next Steps

 

None outlined at this meeting.

 

VII.     Adjourn

 

Meeting adjourned at 7:55pm.

 Next meeting scheduled for March 9, 2004, same time and place.