Loading...
6 - Proposal to Change Planning Board Minutes MEMORANDUM January 28, 2009 TO: Planning Board Members PROM: Ruth McHeyser, Executive Director of Community Planning Mary Ann Weideman, Administrative Services Manager Heidi Joyce, Administration Supervisor SUBJECT: Proposal to Change Planning Board Minutes I. Purpose The purpose of this memorandum is to request that Planning Board provide feedback for a change in format of board minutes from a detailed summary form to action minutes. The goal is to prepare a record of Planning Board meetings consistent with Robert's Rules of Order that will increase efficiencies and retain qualified personnel. The proposed action form of minutes will meet these goals, document the intent of the board's actions and include brief summary statements of board discussions. II. Analysis Robert's Rules of Order serves as the basis for Planning Board meeting procedures and emphasizes that the purpose of minutes is to record the actions of the board rather than a summary of what is said. According to Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised, 2000 Edition: "In the meetings of ordinary societies and of boards of managers and trustees, there is no object in reporting the debates; the duty of the secretary, in such cases, is mainly to record what is "done" by the assembly, and not what is said by the members." Additionally, experience has demonstrated that action minutes are much more efficient to prepare. During a period of city budget reductions in 2004 through 2006, increased efficiencies were implemented as action minutes were prepared for and approved by the Planning Board. That experience, as shown in Attachment A, demonstrates action minutes are 85% more efficient to prepare compared to detailed summary minutes. This results in an average cost savings of 89% annually, not including any overtime expense. This is equivalent to .18 FI`E (375 hours). Once again, as the city experiences a shortfall in revenue, it is imperative that we re- examine opportunities for efficiency as we experience reductions in the General Fund. Furthermore, it has become increasingly difficult to retain qualified personnel in large part due to the number of hours necessary to prepare more detailed minutes. The stress of falling behind and the difficulty of catching up results in extra pressure on the Planning Board Secretary position. Currently, four staff are working together to catch up minutes from 2008 and 2009. In 2008, we have spent approximately 26S overtime hours to prepare the minutes. As a result, there has been a high rate of turnover in this position (six secretaries in the past 10 years). Interestingly, there was no turnover during the time frame when action minutes were prepared. More recently, we have experienced one secretary transition to another position and another who was seeking 1 outside employment. Our experience suggests that we should change the format of Planning Board minutes to a more sustainable format. White it is imperative that we meet our goals, staff recognizes that it is important to provide a more detailed documentation of board discussions for particular review types and special projects (Concept Plan reviews, City Council call-ups, etc.). The proposal below outlines how these discussions will be captured in the minutes. III. Proposal In considering the purpose of minutes for Planning Board meetings and the most appropriate changes that could be made, staff reviewed the following standards: • Minutes are a permanent record of the actions taken at a meeting, including adherence to the rules of order and bylaws. • Minutes, as a form of communication, provide basic information about the meeting for those who were not present. • Minutes serve as a method for following up on administrative requests. The proposed action minutes are consistent with the form of minutes described in Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised 2000 Edition (see Attachment B) and will typically include: • date, time and place of the meeting, • meeting attendance, • names and addresses of all public speakers and whether they support or oppose the staff recommendation, • motion and board member vote, • amendments to motions, • conditions of approval, • in the case of an action item (Site Review, Use Review, etc.) -brief specific statements from individual board members regarding the intention of a motion and/or a member's vote will be documented in the minutes (these statements of intention will be made by the board after the vote on a motion), • in the case of a discussion item (Concept Plan Review, update memo, etc.) -findings will be summarized by the Chair and documented in the minutes, • specific direction or comments requested to be entered into the nunutes, and • special administrative requests. Detailed minutes may be requested for call-up items, or other specific requested items approved by the Executive Director of Community Planning. A set of proposed action minutes is included as Attachment C. In addition to the action minutes, each board meeting is digitally recorded and is retained in the Central Records office for seven years. The digital recording is accessible online by visiting the Planning Board web page: www.boulderplandevelop.net, then selecting boards, planning board and previous agendas. The recordings are available within five business days of the meeting and will remain available on the board's website for at least one year. 2 IV. Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Board minutes be prepared in action form, consistent with the form of minutes described in Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised, 2000 Edition. The minutes will include specific statements from individual Planning Board members regarding the intention of a motion and/or a member's vote, and the digital recording of the meeting will be kept on file in Central Records for a period of seven years. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Comparison chart of action and detailed summary minutes Attachment B: Excerpt from Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised 2000 Edition Attachment C: Sample set of action minutes 3 ATTACHiVTENT A Action Minutes Detailed Summary Minutes 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Jan. -Dec. Jan.-Dec. Jan.-Dec. Jan.-Dec. Jan.-Dec. Number of Board 23 28 27 31 26 Meetings Average length of meeting 4'/i hours 4 hours 4 hours 4 3/a hours 4'/2 hours (approximate) Time spent per meeting preparing 2 hours 2 hours 2 hours 14 hours 13'/s hours minutes a roximate Average annual cost $1,051 $1,137 $1,137 $8,810 $7,125 to prepare minutes 4 ATTACHMENT B Excerpt from Robert's Rules of Order, 2000 I~,dition 60. 'Che Minutes. The record of the proceedings of a deliberative assembly is usually called the Minutes, or the Record, or the Journal. The essentials of the record are as follows: (a) the kind of meeting, "regular" (or stated) or "special," or "adjourned regular" or "adjourned special"; (b) name of the assembly; (c) date of meeting and place, when it is not always the same; (d) the fact of the presence of the regular chairman and secretary, or in their absence the names of their substitutes, (e) whether the minutes of the previous meeting were approved, or their reading dispensed with, the dates of the meetings being given when it is customary to occasionally transact business at other than the regular business meetings; (f) all the main motions (except such as were withdrawn) and points of order and appeals, whether sustained or lost, and all other motions that were not lost or withdrawn; (g) and usually the hours of meeting and adjournment, when the meeting is solely for business. Generally the name is recorded of the member who introduced a main motion, but not of the seconder. In some societies the minutes are signed by the president in addition to the secretary, and when published they should always be signed by both officers. If minutes are not habitually approved at the next meeting, then there should be written at the end of the minutes the word "Approved" and the date of the approval, which should be signed by the secretary. They should be entered in good black ink in a wellbound record-book. The Form of the Minutes may be as follows: At a regular meeting of the M. L. Society, held in their hall, on Thursday evening, March 19, 1914, the president in the chair, and Mr. N acting as secretary, the minutes of the previous meeting were read and approved. The Committee on Applications reported the names of Messrs. C and D as app}icants for membership, and on motion of Mr. F they were admitted as members. The committee on reported through Mr. G a series of resolutions, which were thoroughly discussed and amended, and finally adopted, as follows: Resolved, That On motion of Mr. L the society adjourned at 10 P.M. R....... N_...... Secretary. In keeping the rninute;s, much depends upon the kind of meeting, and whether the minutes are to be published. In the meetings of ordinary societies and of boards of managers and trustees, there is no object in reporting the debates; the duty of the secretary, in such cases, is mainly to record what is "done" by the assembly, and not what is said by the members. He should enter the essentials of a record, as previously stated, and when a count has been ordered or where the vote is by ballot, he should enter the number of votes on each side; and when the voting is by yeas and nays he should enter a list of the names of those voting on each side. The proceedings of the committee of the whole. or while acting as if in committee of the whole, should not be entered in the minutes, but the report of the committee should be entered. When a question is considered 5 informally, the proceedings should be kept as usual, as the only informality is in the debate. If a report containing resolutions has been agreed to, the resolutions should be entered in full as finally adopted by the assembly, thus: "The committee on submitted a report with a series of resolutions which, after discussion and amendment, were adopted as follows:" then should be entered the resolutions as adopted. Where the proceedings are published, the method shown further on should be followed. If the report is of great importance the assembly should order it "to be entered on the minutes," in which case the secretary copies it in full upon the record. Where the regular meetings are held weekly, monthly, or quarterly, the minutes are read at the opening of each day's meeting, and, after correction. should be approved. Where the meetings are held several days in succession with recesses during the day, the minutes arc read at the opening of business each day. If the next meeting of the organization will not be held for a long period, as six months or a year. the minutes that have not been read previously should be read and approved before final adjournment. If this is impracticable, then the executive committee. or a special committee, should be authorized to correct and approve them. In this case the record should be signed as usual, and after the signatures the word "Approved," with the date and the signature of the chairman of the committee authorized to approve them. At the next meeting, six months later, they need not be read, unless it is desired for information as it is too late to correct them intelligently. When the reading of the minutes is dispensed with they can afterwards be taken up at any time when nothing is pending. If not taken up previously, they came before the assembly at the next meeting before the reading of the later minutes. With this exception the motion to dispense with reading the minutes is practically identical with the motion to lay the minutes on the table, being undebatable and requiring only a majority vote. The minutes of a secret meeting, as for the trial of a member, should not be read at a meeting that is open to the public, if the record contains any of the details of the trial that should not be made public. Minutes to be Public{zed. When the minutes are to be published. in addition to the strict record of what is done, as heretofore described. they should contain a list of the speakers on each side of every question, with an abstract of all addresses, if not the addresses in full, when written copies are furnished. In this case the secretary should have an assistant. With some annual conventions it is desired to publish the proceedings in full. In such cases it is necessary to employ a stenographer as assistant to the secretary. Reports of committees should be printed exactly as submitted, the minutes showing what action was taken by the assembly in regard to them; or, they may be printed with all additions in italics and parts struck out enclosed in brackets in which case a note to that effect should precede the report or resolutions. In this way the reader can see exactly what the committee reported and also exactly what the assembly adopted or endorsed. 1. In many organizations it is preferable for the secretary to keep his original pencil notes in a pocket memorandum book which he carries to every meeting, and these original notes, as corrected, are approved and then copied into the permanent records.'I'his plan usually results in neater records, but the original notes should be kept until they are carefully compared with the permanent records. In such case it is better to have the minutes signed by both president and secretary as a guarantee against errors in copying. 6 AT'T'ACHMENT C Note: these minutes were altered to provide an example of the proposed format of action minutes CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD ACTION MINUTES November 20, 2003 Council Chambers Room, Municipal Building 1777 Broadway BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Macon Cowles, Vice Chair Thom Kxueger, Chair Simon Mole Alan O'Hashi John Spitzer BOARD MF,MBERS ABSENT: Elise Jones -excused absent Beth Pommer -excused absent STAFF PRESENT: Jeff Arthur, F,ngineering Review Manager Varda Blum, F,ngineer Don Durso, Planner David Gehr, Assistant City Attoz~ney Jean Gatza, Planner Elizabeth Hanson, Acting Land Use Review Manager Ruth McHeyser, Long Range Planning Manager Peter Pollock, Planning Director Susan Richstone, Planner 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair'I'. Krueger declared a quorum at 6:04 p.m., and the following business was conducted. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOTION: On a motion by A. O'Hashi, seconded by M. Cowles the Planning Board approved the minutes of October I6, 2003 as presented. (Vote: 5-0 L. Jones and B. Pommer were absent.) 7 3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Robert Sharpe, 5995 Marshall Road, spoke to the board about the XYZ project. 4. DISCUSSION OF DISPOSITIONS, PLANNING BOARD CALL-UPS The following dispositions where not called up by the board: Jacobsen's Subdivision Replat A Wonderland Creek at the Diagonal - Floodplain Development Permit 5. ACTION ITEMS A. Public hearing and consideration of LUR2003-00075 request for Annexation And Initial Toning of a 2.97 acre parcel located at the southwest corner of 4th and Linden Avenue. 'The proposal includes: 1. A request for a change to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Land Use Map for the eastern 2.02 acres from Open Space-Other to Very Low Density Residential. 2. A request for initial zoning of the property as follows: a. The eastern 2.02 acres to be zoned as Rural Residential One- Established (RR1-E). b. The western 0.95 acres to be zoned as Agricultural-Established (A-E). Project Manager: Don Durso Applicant Presentation Bill Mitzelfcld presented the item to the board. Staff Presentation Don llurso presented the item to the board. Public Hearing John Gerstle, 3750 Lakebriar Dr., supported the staff recommendation. Ray Haberman, 3835 Spring Valley Rd., opposed the staff recommendation. Final Action MOTION: On a motion by iV1. Cowles, sec:ondcd by T. Krueger, the Planning Board approved the land use change to the t3VCP and recommended approval of the annexation to City Council (Vole 4-l, A. U'Hashi opposed, E. ,Tones and B. Pommer were absent. ,subject to the followin conditions of approval: RECOMMENDED CUNUITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Priar to first reading of the annexation ordinance, the Applicant shall: (a) File an application, and pay the applicable fees, for inclusion in the Northern Colorado Water Conservation iVlunicipal Subdistrict; 8 (b) Dedicate to the City, in fee and at no cost, that portion of the Property shown as "32,959 sq. ft., (0.76 acres)" as City open space as shown on attachment C; (c) Dedicate to the City, at no cost, a 30' Open Space Conservation and Access Easement on that portion of the Property, as shown on attachment C, subject to the review and approval by the City Manager; (d) Dedicate to the City, at no cost, a 15' Public Access Easement on that portion of the Property as shown on attachment C, subject to the review and approval by the City Manager; (e) Dedicate to the City, at no cost, a Flood Conveyance Easement on that portion of the Property shown within the conveyance flood zone of Two Mile Canyon Creek, consistent with the City of Boulder's detailed Floodplain Regulatory Map for Two Mile Canyon Creek prepared by Love & Associates, dated May, 1993, and adopted by the City in 1995 or based on the best available information as determined by the City of Boulder Director of Public Works., 2. IvTo fence shall be constructed between the City's open space fee dedication area and the conservation and access easement area. Any fence built along the conservation and access easement area shall located east and south of the easternmost and southernmost edges of the newly dedicated conservation and access easement area, as shown on attachment C. 3. No structures shall be located within any portion of the property designated as being in the 100-year floodptain, as shown on the City of Boulder detailed floodplain regulatory map for Two Mile Canyon Creek prepared by Love & Associates, dated May 1993, and adopted by the City in 1995, nor in any other easements being dedicated to the City of 13oulder in this Agreement, based on the best available information as determined by the City of Boulder Director of Public Works. Statements of Intent A. O'Hashi indicated concerns about the number of units and the access to open space. T. Krueger mentioned that the property has been in the city's service area for a long time and that the proposed concept plan was an improvement over what could occur in the county. B. Public hearing and consideration of requests for changes to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan to be considered during the 2003-2004 Annual Update to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP). Project tVIanager: Jean Gatza Applicant Presentation Paul Tabolt, University of Colorado, presented the item to the board. 9 Staff Presentation J. (:atza presented the item to the board. Public Participation Nancy Simon, 770 3151 St., supported the staff recommendation Iver Wahl, 1205 East Ridge; opposed the staff recommendation Final Action MOTION: On a motion by A. O'Hashi, seconded by M. Cowles, the Planning Board added the proposal by Schlereth to the list of items to be considered. (Vote: 4-1, 1. Spitzer in opposition, 1J. Jones and B. Pommer were absent.) MOTION: On a motion by M. Cowles, seconded by S. Mole, the Planning Board approved the staff recommended list of proposed changes to the BVCP. (vote: 5-0 E. Jones and B. Pommer were absent.) Statements of Intention No statements were made by the board. C. Public hearing and consideration of a recommendation to the City Council on an ordinance amending Title 9, "Land Use Regulation," B.R.C. 1981, to allow convenience retail, personal service, and restaurant uses as part of a residential project in the Industrial General (IG) and Industrial Manufacturing (IM) zoning districts. Project Manager: Ruth McHeyser Staff Presentation K. Mclleyser presented the item to the board. Public Hearing Richard 1';pstein, 1319 Spruce, Suite 200, supported the staff recommendation. Final Action MOTION: On a motion by S. Mole, seconded by 1. Spitzer, the Planning Board /lpprovcd a motion recommending to the City Council on an ordinance amending, Title 9 "Land Use Regulation," B.R.C. 1981, to allow convenience retail, personal service, and restaurant uses as part of a residentia~rojcct in the lndust~ial General (IG) and Industrial Manufactwin~ (IM) zoning districts. (vote: 5-0 E. Jones and B. Pommer were absent.) 10 6. DISCUSSION ITEM A. Consideration of a draft letter from Planninl; Board to City Council on thresholds and review procedures for major residential additions and demolitions, i.e., pop-ups and scrape-offs. Project Manager: Susan Richstone S. Richstone presented the item to the board. Summary Findings Planning Board discussed the draft letter to City Council prepared by staff based on the board's discussion and direction at the October 23 meeting. Board members indicated that this is a serious problem that needs to be addressed and would like to make a strong statement on this issue. As an interim step in addressing this issue, board members supported moving Forward with a review process that would require all new homes and additions that would result in above-ground building square footage exceeding an FAR of 0.5 in the LR-E zone district to be reviewed by the Downtown Design Advisory Board (DDAB). Compliance with DDAB's comments would be mandatory. Additionally, the board recommended that all construction of 1000 square feet or greater of net new floor area should require notification of nearby property owners. T'he board viewed these actions as a first step and does not believe this adequately addresses the problem. 'fhc board would like the new City Council to reexamine the options that were discussed back in April. 7. MATTERS FROM "1'HE PLANNIN(; BOARD, PLANNING DIRECTOR, AND CITY ATTORNI+;Y 8. DS:BRIEF/AGENDA CHECK 9. ADJOURNMENT Chair'I'. KrueKer adjourned the meeting at 10:41 p.m. 11