2024-10-04 Planning Director Pre-Hearing Brief (PL-BOA-2024-000104 & 105)

Home

Even as the Director provided the above collective response, 1250 contends the Director abused his discretion by failing to rule upon"each of these Requests."ROA#105, at 478. Nothing in the law dictates the format the Director must employ to issue his declaratory rulings.PRPP Rule 3-1(a) allows that "the Director may issue a declaratory order as to the applicability of any statutory provision, ordinance, or of any rule or order of the Director or the Department." PRPP Rule 3-1(c) further provides that"the Director shall either deny the petition in writing, stating the reasons for such denial or issue a declaratory order on the matters contained in the petition..." As evidenced in the Director's above-quoted response, the Director did provide a collective Declaratory Ruling on the matters contained in the petition. The Director denied certain of 1250's requests and explained the reasons for denial, namely jurisdictional and scope of authority. The Director answered the remainder of 1250's requests, albeit in a format differing from the format the requests were posed. Addressing requests in a format chosen for purposes of clarity, consistency and efficiency is squarely within the discretion of the Director and compliant with law. Even as 1250 argues the Director refused to answer its requests, it contends the Director's responses to the above requests were in error because the Director did not provide specific responses to matters including but not limited to whether the Ordinances contain certain express language regarding dedication of the roadways in question, construction standards for the roadways, and how the Ordinances correspond to the variance process. As demonstrated above, the Director provided thorough Declaratory Rulings explaining each of these issues. Although the Director may not have responded to the exact level of detail 1250 wanted, the Director's Declaratory Rulings provide a suitable and complete response to the 12