Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPACKET Estes Valley Planning Commission 2018-08-21 The Estes Valley Planning Commission reserves the right to consider other appropriate items not available at the time the agenda was prepared. Prepared: August 14, 2018 AGENDA ESTES VALLEY PLANNING COMMISSION August 21, 2018 1:30 p.m. Board Room, Town Hall 1. OPEN MEETING Planning Commissioner Introductions 2. AGENDA APPROVAL 3. PUBLIC COMMENT The EVPC will accept public comments regarding items not on the agenda. Comments should not exceed three minutes. 4. CONSENT AGENDA Minutes: July 17, 2018 5. BLACK CANYON WEDDING DEVELOPMENT PLAN 800 Black Canyon Avenue: Continued to September 18, 2018 Planner Becker 6. WIND RIVER DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1041 South St. Vrain Avenue Senior Planner Woeber 7. SPECIAL REVIEW-WIND RIVER DAY CARE 1041 South St. Vrain Avenue Senior Planner Woeber 8. CODE AMENDMENT-ESTES PARK TROLLEYS Senior Planner Woeber Allow “Bus/Sightseeing” in A-Accommodations Zoning 9. SPECIAL REVIEW-ESTES PARK TROLLEYS 1340 Big Thompson Avenue Senior Planner Woeber 10. LOCATION AND EXTENT REVIEW 2200 Mall Road, Upper Thompson Sanitation District Senior Planner Woeber 11. CODE AMENDMENT Mandatory Neighborhood/Community Meetings for new development projects Planner Becker 12. REPORTS A. Staff-Level Reviews B. Pre Application Reviews C. Estes Valley Board of Adjustment D. Estes Park Town Board/Annexations E. Larimer County Board of County Commissioners F. Community Development Update G. Vacation Home Update H. Other 13. ADJOURN RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission July 17, 2018 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 1 Commission: Chair Bob Leavitt, Vice-Chair Sharry White, Commissioners Betty Hull, Russ Schneider, Robert Foster, Frank Theis, Steve Murphree Attending: Chair Leavitt, Commissioners Schneider, White, Foster, Murphree and Theis Also Attending: Director Randy Hunt, Town Attorney Greg White, Planner II Brittany Hathaway, Town Board Liaison Ron Norris, County Staff Liaison Michael Whitley, Larimer County Community Development Director Lesli Ellis, Recording Secretary Karin Swanlund Absent: Commissioner Hull Chair Leavitt called the meeting to order at 1:30 p.m. There were approximately 60 people in attendance. 1. OPEN MEETING Planning Commissioner Introductions including new member Frank Theis. 2. APPROVAL OF AGENDA It was moved and seconded (White/Leavitt) to approve the agenda as presented and the motion passed 6-0 3. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of May 15, 2018 Planning Commission meeting minutes. B. Large Vacation Home Review: 907 Prospect Park, Jason Brown, Owner It was moved and seconded (Schneider/Murphree) to approve the consent agenda as presented and the motion passed 5-0 with White abstaining. 4. RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN LOCATED AT 1041 SOUTH SAINT VRAIN AVE, KNOW AS WIND RIVER APARTMENTS. This item was continued to the next Planning Commission meeting to be held August 21, 2018. It was moved and seconded (Foster/Murphree) to continue the item and the motion passed 6-0. 5. EVDC TEXT AMENDMENT Permitted Uses in Residential Zonings Districts, EVDC §5.1: Specific Use Standards, and EVDC §13.2: Use Classifications/Specific Use Definitions and Examples. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission July 17, 2018 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 2 Planner Hathaway presented the proposal to amend the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) to revise Table 4-1 to extend Special Review Use (S2) in residential zoning districts to allow for review and approval procedures for Cultural Institutions. Also, to amend Section 5.1 to include use standards for cultural institutions in residential zoning districts, and to amend Section 13.2 to include a definition for “Museum”. The objective is to provide for a Special Review Use (S2) for Cultural Institutions in residential zoning districts subject to specific use standards. Public interest in this is medium. Staff recommended approval of the language in Exhibit A and Exhibit B. Staff and Commission Questions: Foster questioned the reason for the definition of Museum, which is limited to arts and sciences, and slightly narrower than the definition of Cultural Institutions. Hathaway answered that the definition used narrows the use to the property involved. Hunt stated that a broader list could encompass museum use. It was initially narrower because of the use in residential districts. Theis asked about the term “site” in the definition, stating concerns with moving a facility in a building to different site. Hathaway replied that it could be changed in Section 5.1 to Site and/or Structure/Building, or by special review. Foster raised further concerns with the definition of Museums/Cultural Institutions stating Colorado Statute CRS23-15-103, which would make it more parallel. Applicant Discussion: Steve Lane, Basis Architecture, supported Foster and Theis proposal changes to the Code Amendment with museum being a use in the definition and the addition of site and or building. It was moved and seconded (Theis/Schneider) to recommend approval of the Code Amendment request of the EVPC to the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and Larimer County Board of County Commissioners, replacing the word site with site and/or structure, and change the definition of museum to “A governmental/quasi governmental or nonprofit institution displaying or preserving objects of interest in one or more of the following areas: artistic, scientific, cultural, educational or intellectual” finding that the amendments are in accord with the Comprehensive Plan and with Section 3.3 of the EVDC. The motion passed 6-0. 6. Special Review Use, 415 W. Wonderview Avenue Planner Hathaway discussed the proposal of a Special Review Use (S2) for a historic house museum operation within the Town of Estes Park on a parcel zoned E-1 (Estate) Residential. Nine recommended conditions were reviewed. Public interest has been of medium concern. Staff recommended approval of this Special Review. Applicant discussion: Steve Lane, Basis Architecture, spoke on about property access, stating that the shuttle system would be used for summer months and off peak would be private vehicles, RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission July 17, 2018 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 3 pointing out that single family homes could generate up to 38 trips per day, while the museum would only have 10-12 trips per day. He also specified that the west side drive would be the access for property, aligning with Far View Drive and the east drive access would be removed. The northwest and south parcels will be put in conservation easement, preventing any future development. Randy Kampfe, Stanley Home Foundation board member, spoke on the history of the Stanley Home Foundation, and read the mission statement. He then reviewed the conditions set forth by the Community Development Department. Public Comments: Full comments can be found on the Town of Estes website at www.estes.gov/meetingvideos for 12 months from the date of meeting. Those speaking in favor to secure, protect and preserve historical treasures were the following town citizens: Dave Landers, Peggy Lynch, Bob Fulton, Ann Rogers, Dan Scace, Kelly Anderson, Charlie Dickey, David Batey, Tom Shamburg, Curtis Kelly, John Nicholas. The following people spoke in opposition due to concerns of operating hours and days, noise, large groups and an annual review request: Ross Maxwell, Connie Phipps, Sue Maxwell, John Meissner, Pete Maxwell. Director Hunt explained a process where a review can be done to make sure regulations are being followed by way of the Code Compliance Officer, through Municipal Court. The Planning Commission could also review in a Study Session, or a condition could be added for a Planning Commission annual review from the start date of operation. Steve Lane clarified that the fire department was not talked to again, that he made the determination of fire truck requirements based on his knowledge of fire truck turning radius. He then detailed a list of Condition updates requested by the applicant. Commissioner Discussion: Leavitt made a request of an annual review to make sure conditions are being met. Theis clarified that the review would not open up new conditions. Foster expressed support for project despite earlier thoughts against. White pointed out that this particular use for the property, with the restrictions, is a good alternative to other possible uses. The Commissioners all thanked those involved for their extraordinary sensitivity to eachother. It was moved and seconded (White/Foster) to recommend approval the Special Review Use Proposal to the Town Board of Trustees including findings and fact with the following conditions: 1) Maximum group size for tours shall be limited to 12 persons in any group. No more than one group tour shall be on property at any time, except occasional brief and incidental overlap. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission July 17, 2018 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 4 2) Operating hours shall be limited to 5.5 days per week with exception of operations on holidays that may fall on Monday A) Monday-closed B) Tuesday-Saturday 9:30 a.m.-4:45 p.m. C) Sunday 12:30 p.m. -4:45 p.m. 3) Special events hosted by museum may not extend past 8:00 p.m., shall be limited to 50 people, shall not be held outdoors, and maximum of 2 special events per month shall be enforced. 4) Use of property for private facility events, including weddings, shall not be permitted. 5) A conservation easement shall be placed on parcels numbered 3524300025, within one year following the S2 date of approval by Town Board. 6) Additional landscaping shall add 1 tree for every 35 feet concentrated along the adjacent eastern driveway. 7) Original fencing shall receive routine maintenance. 8) On-site food preparation shall not be permitted. 9) The eastern driveway shall be removed and reclaimed and shall not be used for property access. During time of re-seeding of pavement/road base, a blockade shall be placed at the entrance from Wonderview Avenue to prevent access. 10) Shuttle service shall be required May 1 – October 31. 11) Onsite parking shall be limited to 8 parking spaces for ADA parking and employee parking from May 1-October 31. 12) Dark Sky Compliant Lighting shall be required. 13) An annual report shall be given to the Planning Commission yearly on the anniversary of the opening of the Museum. The motion was approved 5-0 with Schneider recusing himself. 7. Dry Gulch Workforce Housing Rezone Withdrawn without Prejudice by owner: July 12, 2018 Can be refiled without penalty 8. Planning Commission Resolution No. 01-18: Director Hunt explained the proposed Resolution was to formally confirm the Planning Commission’s authorization in creating and updating the 22 year old Comprehensive Plan. He stated the importance of identifying a time frame, key stakeholders, public input and grant funding and appointment of a temporary Advisory Committee to oversee the pre-planning and rewrite during the rest of 2018. Staff is recommending that Planning Commission and the other two decision making bodies approve substantially identical versions of the Resolution. It was moved and seconded (White/Foster) to approve Planning Commission Resolution No. 01-18. The motion passed 6-0. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Estes Valley Planning Commission July 17, 2018 Board Room, Estes Park Town Hall 5 9. Estes Valley Comprehensive Plan: 2018 Advisory Committee Formation and Planning Commission Appointment: Director Hunt detailed the suggested five-member Advisory Committee (AC) to guide the pre-planning work in 2018 and the tasks that will be involved, noting that the consulting firm Ayres Associates would be available for Comprehensive Planning duties and RFP writing. Town Board has appointed Randy Hunt and Ron Norris (with Marie Cenac as alternate) to the committee, Larimer County will also appoint two members. It was moved and seconded (Theis/White ) to appoint Robert Foster to the Comprehensive Plan’s Advisory Committee, for a term to begin upon appointment and end on December 31, 2018. The motion passed 5-0 with Foster abstaining. 10. REPORTS Hunt reported that a future Code Amendment, requiring Community Meetings be held by applicants of Development Projects, is in the early stage of the process. There being no further business, Chair Leavitt adjourned the meeting at 4:05 p.m. _________________________________ Bob Leavitt, Chair __________________________________ Karin Swanlund, Recording Secretary COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Memo To: Estes Valley Planning Commission From: Robin Becker, Planner I Date: August 21, 2018 RE: Proposed Text Amendment to Estes Valley Development Code: EVDC §3.2 Standard Development Review Procedure B. Neighborhood and Community Meeting, §3.2. F Summary Table Standard Development Review Process by Application Type, Chapter 13 Definitions, and Appendix B Submittal Requirements Planning Commission Objective: Review and Recommendation on proposed text amendments to the Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) regarding the inclusion of Neighborhood and Community Meeting Code Amendment. Code Amendment Objectives: The objective of this proposed code amendment is to revise the EVDC to do the following: • Provide an opportunity for a current unsatisfied need in the Estes Valley for a voice for the local community to become aware of what projects are being proposed in their neighborhood and have input in the process with Developers and Consultants. • Provide a clear interpretation of how and where development applications and other board approved projects are occurring. • Update our plan to accommodate local neighborhood and community members so they are aware of local impacts while creating open communication between the Town and Community. Proposal: Amend EVDC section §3.2 Standard Development Review Procedure B. Neighborhood and Community Meeting , §3.2.F Summary Table Standard Development Review Process by Application Type, Chapter 13 Definitions, and Appendix B Submittal Requirements , as stated in Exhib it A [“PC Draft”], dated August 21, 2018, attached. Staff recommends that Planning Commission recommend approval of the language in Exhibit A to the Town Board of Trustees and the Board of County Commissioners. Planning Commission, August 21, 2018 Page 2 of 4 Discussion: Currently Development Review and projects that go to a governing body for approval are required by state law to provide legal notice and notification to surrounding neighbors. EVDC sets this as a 15- day minimum advanced notice for applications leading to a public hearing. It is common planning practice around the United States to provide a venue for a neighborhood and or community engagement meeting between the developer/applicant and the neighborhood. It is unknown why our Development code has no such method for this process. It is our time to adapt to meet the changing development patterns and accommodate neighborhood and community needs. A neighborhood and community meeting code amendment would allow property owners to become informed and involved in the Estes Valley Development Review Process; More so than they have in the past, which is incredibly important because the more involved on the front end the community becomes the more invested and supportive they will be in the process and development. In the past few years as larger and more complex development proposals have come forward, many community members have only been able to comment publicly after projects have gone through the review phase. This has caused confusion and concern about what is actually proposed to being built and further complicating the relationship between the owner/developer and the neighborhood. Staff has also observed over the years that the structure of a public hearing, while required by Code, does not necessarily lead to true dialog. By allowing a safe space for discussion for all those impacted and creating a circle of communication in the beginning of the process all voices can be heard and considered. It is staff’s recommendation that including this neighborhood and community meeting code amendment in the EVDC would meet a growing need for both current and future homeowners and all those wishing to devel op in the Estes Valley. Amend EVDC section §3.2 Standard Development Review Procedure B. Neighborhood and Community Meeting , §3.2. F Summary T able Standard Development Review Process by Application Type, Chapter 13 Definitions, and Appendix B Submittal Requirements , as stated in Exhib it A [“PC Draft”], dated August 21, 2018, attached. Staff Findings of Fact: The text amendment complies with EVDC §3.3.D (Code Amendments – Standards for Review). §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review “All rezonings and text amendments to the EVDC shall meet the following criteria:” Planning Commission, August 21, 2018 Page 3 of 4 1. “The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the area affected;” Staff Finding: The amendment is necessary to address changes in conditions in the Estes Valley. Changes in conditions as of late can be described as more complex development proposals are being proposed in the Estes Valley. This change in conditions has causes the community to become more involved in the process. This also allows for a more streamlined method to allow for community members to communicate with the developer/ applicant on projects that may occur in their neighborhood. 2. “The development plan, which the proposed amendment to this Code would allow, is compatible and consistent with the policies and intent of the Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in the Estes Valley;” Staff Finding: The proposed text amendment is compatible and consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan and with existing growth and development patterns in the Estes Valley. 3. “The Town, County or other relevant service providers shall have the ability to provide adequate services and facilities that might be required if the application were approved.” Staff Finding: Providers of public water, sewage disposal, electric services, fire protection, and transportation services have expressed no concerns with the proposed amendment in principle. Furthermore, this code amendment will not impact the provision of adequate services and or facilities. Advantages: • Provides a space for the open flow of communication and information between developers/applicants and neighborhood and community members. • Provides a larger venue for public involvement and engagement. • Less confusion between neighborhoods on what is permitted and not in local neighborhoods Planning Commission, August 21, 2018 Page 4 of 4 Disadvantages: • Applicant/consultant might have more financial impact in regards to development costs. Action Recommended: Review the amendment for compliance with Estes Valley Development Code (EVDC) §3.3.D Code Amendments, Standards for Review and forward a recommendation to The Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and Larimer County Board of County Commissioners for a final decision to approve, deny, or approve with conditions. Level of Public Interest High: Previous and current ongoing projects are involving more and more public engagement and neighborhood communication Low: This particular Code Amendment Sample Motions: APPROVAL I move to recommend that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and Board of Larimer County Commissioners approve the text amendment to the Estes Valley Development Code, according to findings of fact and as recommended by staff. CONTINUANCE I move to continue this agenda item to the next regularly schedules Planning Commission meeting because (state reason (s) for continuance –findings). DENIAL I move to recommend that the Estes Park Town Board of Trustees and Larimer County Board of County Commissioners deny the text amendment to the Estes Valley Development Code, finding that …(state reasons for denial). Attachments: 1. Exhibit A: (August 21, 2018). 1 Exhibit A [PC Draft] August 21, 2018 Chapter 3. Review Procedures and Standards §3.2 Standard Development Review Procedure ………………………………………………………3 -3 A. Step 1: Pre-Application Conference…………………………………………………………………………………………3-3 B. Step 2: Neighborhood & Community Meeting…………………………………………………………………………3-4 C. Step 3: Staff Review and Report………………………………………………………………………………………………3-4 D. Step 4: Estes Valley Planning Commission Action of Recommendation……………………………………3-4 E. Step 5: Board Review and Action…………………………………………………………………………………………….3-5 F. Summary Table-Standard Development Review Process by Application Type…………………………3-5 G. Flow Chart of Standard Development Approval Procedure …………………………………………………….3-6 2 § 3.2 - Standard Development Review Procedure All development applications are subject to the following five-step "standard" review procedure, unless variations or exceptions to the standard procedure are expressly provided for in the particular development application requirements set forth in this Chapter. Standard Development Review Process Step 1 Pre-Application Conference Step 2 Neighborhood and Community Meeting Step 3 Application/Completeness Certification Step 4 Staff Review and Report Step 5 Estes Valley Planning Commission Action or Recommendation Step 6 Board of Trustees/Board of County Commissioners Review and Action A. Step 1: Pre-Application Conference. 1. Purpose. The purposes of the pre-application conference are to provide an opportunity for the Applicant and the Staff to discuss the review process schedule and submittal requirements, the scope of the project and compliance with this Code. 2. Applicability. A pre-application conference is mandatory for the following applications: a. Special review uses; b. Development plans; c. Rezoning applications; d. Preliminary subdivision plat; e. Preliminary PUD plans; f. Variances; g. Minor subdivisions; and h. Annexations. Staff may waive the pre-application conference on the ground that the proposed development is not complex and will not have any significant impacts on services, roads, natural resources or adjacent property. (Ord. 18-02 #2) 3 3. Scheduling. The pre-application conference shall be scheduled by the Applicant with Staff at least fourteen (14) days prior to the date of submission of any related application. 4. Submittal Requirements. All Applicants shall submit a sketch plan to the Staff for review no later than five (5) days prior to the scheduled pre-application conference. See Appendix B to this Code for sketch plan submittal requirements. B. Step 2: B. Step 2: Neighborhood and Community Meeting . 1. The purpose of the neighborhood meeting is to educate occupants and owners of nearby lands about the proposed development and application, receive comments, address concerns about the development proposal, and resolve conflicts and outstanding issues, where possible. (A) Favored practice. Neighborhood meetings are encouraged as opportunities for informal communication between owners and occupants of nearby lands, applicants and other residents who may be affected by development proposals. (B) Applicability. Except as stated otherwise in this code Neighborhood meetings shall be mandatory for zoning and planning projects that require a public hearing as specified in this Code. (D) Procedure. If a neighborhood meeting is held by the applicant, it shall generally comply with the following procedures: (1) Time and place. The neighborhood meeting shall be held at a place that is generally accessible to neighbors that own and/ or reside in the notification area to the land subject to the application. It shall be scheduled after 5:00 p.m. on a weekday or at any time on a weekend day. (2) Notification. The applicant shall provide notification of the neighborhood meeting a minimum of ten business days in advance of the meeting by placing notice in a newspaper or display advertising of general circulation in the Estes Valley and by mailing notice to all owners and occupants within the notification boundary of the land subject to the application. The list of owners within the notification area of the affected property shall be obtained by the applicant from the most recent version of the property owners of record provided by The Town of Estes Park. The notification shall state the time and place of the meeting. (3) Conduct of meetings. At the neighborhood meeting, the applicant shall explain the development proposal and application, inform attendees of the character and nature of the process for review, and respond to comments and questions neighbors may have about the application and propose ways to resolve conflicts. (4) Staff attendance. Town staff may attend the neighborhood meeting for the purpose of advising the attendees regarding applicable provisions of the Development Code, but shall not serve as facilitators or become involved in negotiations at the neighborhood meeting. (5) Written summary of neighborhood record of meeting. The applicant shall provide the Planning Department a written summary of the neighborhood meeting. The written summary shall include a list of those in attendance, a summary of the issues related to the development proposal discussed, comments by those in attendance about the development proposal, and any other information the applicant deems appropriate. The written summary of the neighborhood meeting shall be included with the application materials, and be made available to the public for inspection. 4 (6) Response to summary. Any party in attendance at the neighborhood meeting may submit an additional written summary indicating their understanding of the issues related to the development proposal discussed, comments by those in attendance about the development proposal, and any other information they deem appropriate. This written summary may include a response to the applicant's written summary of the neighborhood meeting. Neighborhood meetings are optional for any other applications not requiring a public hearing. B. Step 2. C. Step 3: Application Timing and Certification of Completeness. 1. Except for variances, all development applications shall be submitted to Staff a minimum of fifty- five (55) days prior to the next regularly scheduled EVPC meeting at which the application will be reviewed. See §3.6 regarding variances. Staff shall have the discretion to shorten submittal time frames. (Ord. 8-05 #1) 2. Within eight (8) working days of submittal, the Staff shall either certify the application as complete and in compliance with all submittal requirements or reject it as incomplete and notify the Applicant of any deficiencies. See §3.1.C above. (Ord. 8-05 #1) C. Staff Review and Report. No later than fourteen (14) days prior to EVPC meeting, Staff shall refer the development application to the appropriate review agencies, review the development application and prepare a staff report. No changes to the development application or any accompanying plans or information shall be permitted after submittal, except for any changes or additional information requested by the Staff during their review. (Ord. 8-05 #1) D. Step 4: Estes Valley Planning Commission Action or Recommendation. 1. Public Hearings or Meetings Required. a. General Rule . Except as provided in subsection 1.b below, within forty-five (45) days from the date that a submitted application is certified as complete, the EVPC shall review the application at a public meeting or hearing as required by this Code or applicable law. b. Authority to Hold Application for Later EVPC Review . Notwithstanding the time for action requirements set forth in subsection 1.a above, whenever an extraordinary number of applications are submitted, such that the Staff is unable to complete their review adequately prior to the next regularly scheduled EVPC meeting, the Staff shall be authorized to hold an application until the next subsequent processing period for EVPC review. Once the application is placed on the official agenda for a public meeting or hearing before the EVPC, all other time requirements for review pursuant to this Section and Chapter shall apply. 2. Compliance with EVPC's Conditional Approvals. 5 a. EVPC Final Actions . When the EVPC is the Decision-Making Body, approval of an application shall not become final and appealable until all conditions of approval have been complied with. (See Chapter 2 above.) Acceptance of all conditions of approval and compliance, where feasible (e.g., required revisions to plans and drawings), shall be completed by the Applicant within thirty (30) days of the EVPC's action. b. EVPC Recommended Actions . When the EVPC is a reviewing body only, conditions of EVPC- recommended approval that require revisions to the submitted application, plans or drawings shall be completed by the Applicant within thirty (30) days of the EVPC's action. (See Chapter 2 above.) A revised application shall be a condition precedent to placing the application on the Board's agenda. (See Step 5 below.) E. Step 5: Board Review and Action. 1. Board Action Required. Within thirty (30) days from the date that the Board receives the application, including any revisions, the Board shall hold a public hearing and consider the development application, the staff report, the Planning Commission's recommendation and the evidence from any public meeting. The Board shall take final action by either approving, approving with conditions or denying the development or land use applications based on its compliance with the appropriate review standards. 2. Compliance with Board's Conditions. Board approval of an application shall not become final and appealable until the Applicant complies with or accepts all conditions of approval. Compliance with conditions of approval ( e.g. , required revisions to plans and drawings), shall be completed by the Applicant and submitted to the Staff within thirty (30) days of the Board's action, unless a longer time is requested by the Applicant and agreed to by Staff. 6 F. Summary Table—Standard Development Review Process by Application Type. Step 1 Pre- Application Conference Step 2 Neighborhood & Community Meeting Step 3 Application/ Completeness Certification Step 4 Staff Review & Report Step 5 EVPC Action Step 6 Board Action Code Amendments- Text/Map M M A A A A Preliminary Subdivision M M A A A A Final Subdivision V M A A N/A A PUD-Preliminary Plan M M A A A A PUD-Final Plan V M A A N/A A Special Review Use S1 M M A A N/A A Special Review Use S2 M M A A A A Variances (Ord. 18-01 #5) M V A A N/A BOA Minor Modifications V V A A-SR A-SR N/A 7 Development Plan Review M M A A-SR A-SR APP Use Classification (Ord. 8- 05 #1) V V A A N/A APP Separate Lot Determinations (Ord. 8-05 #1) V N/A A A N/A APP Temporary Use Permits V N/A A A A N/A Minor Subdivision (Ord. 18- 01 #5) M V A A N/A A Location and Extent Review (Ord. 21-10 §1) M V A A A A Conditional Use Permit (Ord. 21-10 §1) M N/A A A A A Annexations (Ord. 18-01 #5) M M A A N/A A "V" = Voluntary "M" = Mandatory "A" = Applicable "N/A" = Not Applicable "APP" = Appeals "BOA" = Board of Adjustment "SR" = Special Requirements (Refer to Text) 8 § 13.3 - DEFINITIONS OF WORDS, TERMS AND PHRASES 161. Neighborhood and Community Meeting: Informal meeting between the applicant and any interested citizens involving informal communication between owners and occupants of nearby lands, applicants, and other residents who may be affected by development proposals. 9 APPENDIX B. SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS II.SUBDIVISION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A. General Submittal Requirements 5. Neighborhood and Community Record of Meeting Record. E. Condominium Projects 2. Neighborhood and Community Meeting Record . III. DEVELOPMENT PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A. Development Plan Submittal Requirements 6. Development Plan Submittal Package Contents. e. Neighborhood and Community Meeting Record. IV.SPECIAL REVIEW USES—SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A. Submittal Requirements 5. Neighborhood and Community Meeting Record. V.CODE AMENDMENTS (REZONINGS)—SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A. Submittal Requirements 7. Neighborhood and Community Meeting Record. VI. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS—SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A. Preliminary PUD Applications —Submittal Requirements 4. Neighborhood and Community Meeting Record. B. Final PUD Applications —Submittal Requirements. 5. Neighborhood and Community Meeting Record.