Laserfiche WebLink
The Planning Departmentpresently consists of <br /> its Director, Planning Commission, and Board. of Appeals. Each <br /> entity has its specific functionwithin the structural frame- <br /> work of the department and thus provide the necessary level of <br /> checks and balances which are so vital to the planning process. <br /> As such, I do not foresee any great need for any significant <br /> changes in the department' s structural organization save for <br /> those mentioned herein. <br /> In the past , I have noted that the Planning <br /> Commission has heard and acted upon a multitude of variance <br /> requests from the subdivision and zoning codes. Under the <br /> existing language, only the Planning Commission is empowered <br /> to perform this function, although many requests have involved <br /> rather minor deviations from the aforementioned codes and could <br /> conceivably be processed administratively. In that regard , I <br /> would like to suggest that appropriate language be inserted to <br /> allow the Planning Commission to delegate some of its variance <br /> functions to the Planning Director. As the bulk of the <br /> commission 's activity right now focuses on such requests , the <br /> amount of time to concentrate on broad planning policy matters <br /> is quite small. <br /> In the matter of the Planning Board of Appeals, <br /> there should be §neater clarity in the phrase "sustain the <br /> appeal. " For example, if a person ' s variance request were <br /> denied by the Planning Commission and the Board of Appeals <br /> "sustains the appeal , " does this mean that ( 1) the variance is <br /> granted or ( 2) the variance is remanded to the Planning Commission <br /> for reconsideration. If the variance is granted by the board, <br /> then there should be such language in the charter. Presently, <br /> only the Planning Commission, according to the charter, can grant <br /> variances. <br /> I would like to further suggest that the <br /> reference to item (e) of the Planning Commission 's functions <br /> relating to State Land Use Commission boundary changes be deleted. <br /> By state statute, the Planning Commission does not automatically <br /> provide recommendations. Perhaps, and to best accomodate any <br /> possible change to the State Land Use Law, it may be more <br /> appropriate to broadly reference the Planning Commission ' s role <br /> as may be required by that law. <br /> Subsection ( a) of the Planning Director' s <br /> function should be amended to reflect the director being the <br /> technical advisor to the Planning Commission as well ® Additionally, <br /> subsection (b) should be amended to make the director responsible <br /> in preparing not only the basic general plan, but any revisions <br /> thereof. Subsection (g) should also reflect the director ' s <br /> ability to assume some of the functions delegated by the <br /> Planning Commission. I would also like to suggest that a new <br /> section to clearly indicate the director' s role in formulating <br /> other plans, such as the county development plans ; or critical <br /> planning-related functional plans like tourism, as well as in <br /> assisting other agencies develop their functional plans such as <br /> sewer or water to ensure compliance with the general plan. <br /> - 6 - <br />