MOR Development Review Board Meeting

January 12, 2017 MEETING MINUTES JOINT MEETING of the URBANA DESIGN REVIEW BOARD and the MOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BOARD DATE: January 12, 2017 APPROVED TIME: 5:30 p.m. PLACE: Urbana City Building – City Council Chambers 400 South Vine Street Urbana, IL 61801 _______________________________________________________________________________ MEMBERS PRESENT: Scott Kunkel, Nancy Ouedraogo, Dannie Otto, Jeffery Poss, Kim Smith, Maryalice Wu STAFF PRESENT: Lorrie Pearson, Planning Manager; Teri Andel, Administrative Assistant II OTHERS PRESENT: Adam Rusch 1. CALL TO ORDER, ROLL CALL, AND DECLARATION OF QUORUM Chair Poss called the meeting to order at 5:47 p.m. Roll call was taken and a quorum was declared present. 2. CHANGES TO THE AGENDA There were none. 3. APPROVAL OF THE MINTUES There were none. 4. COMMUNICATIONS There were none. 5. AUDIENCE PARTICIPATION There was none. 6. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS There were none. 1  January 12, 2017 7. OLD BUSINESS There was none. 8. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS There were none. 9. NEW BUSINESS There was none. 10. STAFF REPORT There was none. 11. STUDY SESSION Board Member Training Chair Poss opened this item on the agenda. Lorrie Pearson, Planning Manager, gave a training presentation on the following:  District Boundaries  Lincoln-Busey Corridor  East Urbana Design District  MOR Zoning District  Board Membership  MOR Development Review Board  Design Review Board  Public Hearings Mr. Kunkel commented that one example of findings, evidence and considerations that must be “on-the-record” or presented at the meeting is if a board member drives by the subject property in a case and mentions what he/she saw. This happens quite frequently. Ms. Pearson continued her presentation discussing the following:  Miscellaneous  Open Meetings Act  Ex-parte communication  Criteria used for decisions must be within bounds of adopted guidelines and the Urbana Zoning Ordinance Chair Poss stated that looking at the guidelines, Zoning Ordinance, and other documents can be overwhelming. When they have an actual case, City staff will prepare and distribute a packet including a staff report, which is very detailed. The staff report addresses legal issues, analyzes the criteria to be considered and states a staff recommendation for the case. There is a lot of very good background information included as well. If you read through this, then you will be 2  January 12, 2017 prepared for any case that comes up. Ms. Pearson added that a staff recommendation is just that. The board members are not required to follow the recommendation. Mr. Otto asked Ms. Pearson to talk about communications from concerned citizens that are sent directly to the board members. Ms. Pearson replied that the best practice would be to provide a copy to City staff prior to the meeting to allow staff time to make copies to distribute at the meetings and incorporate it as part of the record. If a board member keeps that information to himself/herself, then it will not be part of the public hearing and cannot be considered when making a recommendation or decision. Ms. Wu inquired about people who approach board members out in public and make comments or ask questions. How would a board member relay this? Ms. Pearson responded that the board member could generally announce that they have had conversations with neighbors and state the neighbors’ concerns. Mr. Otto noted that he tells people to come to the meeting so that their concerns would be entered into the record. This prevents him from incorrectly relaying their concerns. He does not discuss details with the people who approach him in public. Chair Poss asked if the any of the audience members had any questions. Adam Rusch commented that he liked Mr. Otto’s approach to referring people to attend the meeting rather than relaying what they told him. Ms. Pearson ended by saying that the board members should not publicly support or oppose a case outside of the hearing. If you do, the by-laws state that it may be considered a conflict of interest and will prevent you from being able to vote on the case. 12. ADJOURNMENT Ms. Smith moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Kunkel seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 6:07 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Lorrie Pearson, Planning Manager 3