MEETING POSTPONEMENT

Meeting Notice/Agenda

Planning and Zoning Commission’s

Process Efficiency Subcommittee

The meeting has been RESCHEDULED from Wednesday, March. 7, 2018 to Wednesday, March 14, 2018 at 1:00 PM due to predicted weather conditions

Room 309 – Westport Town Hall

1-    Introduction by Chairman Greg Rutstein of the Purpose for the Process Efficiency Subcommittee:

• To review, and, where appropriate and lawful, revise, various processes carried out by the Planning and Zoning Commission, Staff and applicants for the purpose of making such processes less time consuming and resource intensive.

Objectives:

• Better align responsibility for various processes (e.g., commission vs staff) where lawfully permitted
• Revise zoning regulations and (as necessary) internal policies to carry out the mission of this subcommittee
• Preserve an appropriate level of review/oversight of relevant processes so as to minimize the risk of having unintended and undesired consequences resulting from any changes to such processes
• Ensure the public is afforded sufficient transparency and the ability to engage on whether and how relevant processes should be revised

2 – Bond Releases

• Summary: Discuss proposal to delegate bond releases to P&Z staff. The Town Attorney’s Office confirmed it IS within the authority of the Commission to delegate this responsibility, and the Commission may choose to delegate this authority to staff, see CGS §8-3(g)(2) and 8-25(d)(2).  This should result in a more efficient process for all concerned.
• Implementation: The Town Attorney’s Office advised a resolution should be prepared and voted upon by the Commission documenting their delegation of authority to staff to release bonds. No changes to the zoning regulations are required.
• Caveat: As not all bonds are the same, the Commission may want to retain authority to review some bonds prior to their release.  Going forward, the following should occur:
  • Existing Bonds: P&Z staff should be directed to prepare a list of existing bonds being held and this list should be reviewed by the Subcommittee to distinguish what bonds should be delegated to staff versus what should be brought to the Commission for a vote prior to release. The subcommittee’s recommendations should be reviewed and endorsed by the Commission at a future Work Session.
  • Future Bonds: If/when the Commission votes on a resolution that includes a requirement for a bond, the resolution should specify whether the bond release should be subject to staff or Commission action.  The resolution default should delegate this authority to staff.  Prior to any vote on the resolution the Commission can modify the language on a case by case basis to identify the bond release should be subject to Commission action.

3-        Reading Full Resolutions

• Problem:  The current practice is to recite out loud the contents of pre-prepared resolutions. Most of what is read out loud represents findings that are factual and have been previously listed in staff reports or in the circulated application materials. Alternative approaches should be explored that could be more efficient. Additionally resolutions are requested before testimony is received and without direction provided by anyone other than the Chair which can be inefficient if these resolutions are incomplete or irrelevant.

• Solution: The Town Attorney’s Office confirmed resolutions:
  • do not need to be prepared ahead of time;
  • do not need not be read out loud; and
  • any drafts should be available to the public under FOIA.
• Implementation:  Proposal - Eliminating resolution preparation (prior to voting on an application) and instead identifying verbally what if any conditions should be added to a resolution of approval or what if any reasons should be added to a resolution of denial followed by staff preparing these resolutions (following the vote) with oversight by the P&Z Commission Secretary.

4-      Reconsider decision rendered at 1/23/14 P&ZC Meeting regarding how to administer Change of Use regulations

• Problem: The existing definition in §5-2 for a Change of Use requires Site Plan approval provides no exemptions or waivers from Site Plan review in cases involving a conversion from a less intensive use to a more intensive use, that does not require expansion of a parking lot to support the change, but instead relies upon available excess parking located on site.
• Solution: The Planning and Zoning Director in 2013 sought a finding from the Planning and Zoning Commission that the standards in §5-2, Change of Use (that require an increase in parking demand by more than three (3) spaces be approved subject to Site Plan approval from the Planning and Zoning Commission), be interpreted as only requiring Site Plan approval in those cases where such increase in parking requires the designation or construction of more parking.  Such a finding would distinguish and exempt those cases where no additional parking is required due to available excess parking on site.
• A memorandum identifies the Planning and Zoning Commission denied the Director’s request at a Work Session held on 1/23/14. Subsequently and currently applicants who meet the parameters describe above are directed to file an application for review by the Planning and Zoning Commission.
• Implementation: The Commission should revisit their 1/23/14 decision at a future Work Session as is appears both reasonable and practical to exempt from public hearing review those proposed Changes of Use that will generate no need to designate or construct additional parking on site.

5-      Other potential future process efficiency enhancements:

Not require a public “hearing” for certain types (or specific) applications where permitted by CT state law and as confirmed by the Town Attorney:

          A.    CAM Site Plan Reviews

          B.    Site Plans (not accompanied by a Special Permit)

         C.    Subdivisions

         D.    8-24’s

6-    Summary

1. Identify what if any follow-up is needed with the Town Attorney to confirm process for making suggested changes, i.e. text amendment, change to bylaws, combination of both?

B. Receive any additional questions/comments from any meeting attendees.

Respectfully submitted by:

Mary Young, AICP, Planning and Zoning Director

Date:  March 6, 2018