County Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Not so fast. And then there was the Do our live. Well, we always follow your Okay, we're all set. of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Today is a joint public hearing with the Lorain County Board of Commissioners and Lorain County Planning Commission. Um roll call is Mr. Gallahar. Here. Mr. Gallahar. Here. Mr. Moore. I'm here. Mr. Hignett. Here. Uh Mr. Greenspan. Here. Mr. Brobst. Mr. Knect just Here. Mr. Warren. Here. Mr. Sayers. Here. Mr. Weidman. Is that me? Yes. Yeah, okay. Mr. Gibbs and Mr. Sprague. Present. We have a quorum. Good. All right, thank you. Is this Is this on? Okay. Well, I want to thank you all for for uh being here today. This is a a uh subdivision regulation 2.0 uh meeting. If you recall back in December, uh there was a joint commission called to discuss amendments and changes in the consolidation of subdivision regulations of Lorain County. At that meeting, there were concerns raised that the trustees did not have an opportunity to review uh the materials because they weren't sent directly to them. Just as a point of clarification, then I subsequently sent out an email um the um and by state law, we are only

required from the planning um perspective to notice the township fiscal officers, which the township fiscal officers and or related contact was noticed of the information in the appropriate time leading up to that meeting. Um however, um because the township trustees did not receive that information that was sent into the townships, it was decided to defer the discussion and vote until a later date, which is why we're here today. Now, let me just say this, in between that meeting in December and now, we did receive feedback from trustees and those feed those comments have been since um adjusted into the regulations that were subsequently sent out on March 16th uh to the um to the trustees as well as the other noted elected officials. So, that information has been sent out and I can go through the if if you tell me it's at your discretion what you would like to hear. I can go through the whole presentation again, the one that was was presented in December or I can go through just the two slides that represent the changes that were made at the recommendation of the trustees. I it's at the pleasure of the committee. I think we should just have the abbreviated and the two page Just the two pages. Okay, so on pages 12 and 13, this is all the same information um of the PowerPoint presentation, which by the way was sent out, as I said, on March 16th. This is as a result of the feedback from the trustees and this the this came in um and it was discussed with uh the uh stormwater with the engineer's office and with our county planning and all this feedback was consolidated, comprised, and and approved by the same body that was responsible for putting together the original documentation. So, the the the there were five changes that were recommended and were adopted

and are now in the in the um in the regulations. In section 302, we made three changes to definitions. It was further clarified that the subdivision reviewing agencies review agencies are listed here are appointed represented the following areas: soil and water, Lorain County Public Health, County Engineer, County Sanitary Engineer, and such others as the commission deems necessary whose responsibility is to review subdivision plans and compliance for these regulations. The check mark you see there uh is kind of it's just a broader definite um just an explanation. So, we shift authority from the chair appointing subcommittee to direct appointments by the reviewing agencies themselves since they're the ones who be responsible for reviewing the information. The second was clarifying the subdivision review committee. This is a transition. This makes the subdivision review committee a five-member group of township residents appointed by the chair of the planning commission. That way you've got those directly responsible or have interest in the in the townships directly responsible on the subdivision review committee. The last one is the township notification, which is what how I just explained things. And we are now, by the way, although you have not adopted these regulations, are abiding by this standard. We are sending out information right now to the fiscal officers and every township trustee. Um we're actually getting feedback of what are we getting so much information, but we are going to continue to over over inform instead of the risk of under informing, even though we were we were sending out the information to the townships with the expectation it was being disseminated within the townships. There's a caveat in here. If a township wishes to expand beyond the fiscal officer and the trustees, we would expect a resolution appointing or nominating or electing that person to receive the information. We will then

send that and include them in the list. Those were three of the five. The other two right here and and these are very good recommendations in sections 504.04 and 506.04 as to the approval. This requires that the subdivider be present at the subdivision review I'm sorry, at the preliminary plan meeting and the final plat meeting answer questions. I know it's been at the discretion of the chair whether to move forward um without the the without the representation. It's been a may not a shall. This we changed it to a shall. So, automatically if the developer is not here or the representative, the item is automatically moved to the next meeting. So, those were the those were the five items recommendations coming out of the trustees feedback. I think they're very good recommendations and they are now included in the document you have um uh to to uh later today, there will be two subsequent meetings to approve. Let me add one other comment. After the the the March 16th dissemination of the information, we were asked to consider an additional amendment and and um I'll explain the process for that and how that will work. The the the inclusion of the amendment, but I'll explain what the amendment is and you have it in front of you. Um and this, by the way, was sent out to the list, as I mentioned, trustees, fiscal officers, and others uh on April 15th. So, the memo you have is dated as April 14th. This was sent out on April 15th. This is the only amendment that we um that will be presented to you this evening. This has to do, under section 904, with the approval of the endorsements of the signatures. The current regulations um state that the order um of the signatures shall be as stated. Uh it's been recommended and there's been no objection from the engineer, from planning, or from from stormwater

uh that that um to the proposed amendment the word order and is to be removed and the engineer's um signature we move to the end. That's the whole amendment, but we received it after the information was sent out, so it has to be included as an amendment in order for it to be uh added to the regulations. So, are there any questions? I I'll entertain any questions at this time with the five amendments or anything related to the regulations or uh five additions or the one amendment. What What was the What's the difference between the engineer signing in the beginning or the There is There is no really is no. It was recommendation to move it to the end um because we removed the word order. There's no real specific order. Um it was just a recommendation. Can I address that? Yes, sir. The original We've already not been following uniformly that all the all the approving agencies did it in order. And and it was one of those things that passed all the review by everybody simply because we're we're operating that way. We already weren't doing that but by doing by leaving it in order it meant that nobody else could sign and review those till the engineer had. And the engineer had some of the most you know, timely like you know, filing for bonds and all that kind of stuff and and so in order to get the bonds they needed some of the other approvals kind of thing. So, it was already these things were moving in parallel to the developer and because it was already in practice when we looked at the thing nobody really paid a lot of attention to

it. And so, uh at the end of the day all this does is you have to have all the same approvals but you don't have to necessarily get them in any particular order. You you know, when the when the storm water plan is done you can get storm water approval and when the when the sewer's done you can get sewer approval. All that kind of stuff so that you know, nobody nobody can stop the train. Everybody's got to everybody's got to do it and sign it. Okay, but you know, it doesn't it it doesn't mean that if somebody in first place doesn't do it they're doing that everybody else later doesn't get to evaluate it. So, it's and it really reflects something that was already being done but you know. It just cleans it up. Yes, cleans it up. Right. And chairman to your point when we remove the word order technically it could stay there but as the discussion was evolving the original point was let's move the engineer to the end because you know, some wouldn't sign until the engineer signed because the word order would was was present. So, you're right. If with When you remove the order doesn't matter where they are in in the document no but it's just from a procedural perspective it would it would flow better. It also speeds it up the process. Right. By removing the word order does clearly speed up the process. Absolutely. Yeah, this this does make sense to me. I just wanted to ask a question. Yeah. One the one other thing I just want to clarify. And it has to do with what one of one of those five things were. As far as the developer or his desig- is designate being at the meetings do they have to be in person and they be virtual? Is that So, I'll defer to our clerk. I I believe post COVID that all presence of at these meetings needs to be in person. Correct. There is no more virtual meetings.

There's no what? Virtual meetings. No virtual public meetings. Correct. Right. Okay. So, then so they would have to be in person. They or their designate. Well, I just wanted to just want to put [clears throat] it on the record what that they would have to be in person either like we say either the developer their their engineer whoever they just designate to be their representative. Right. Okay. All right. Sounds good to me. Any other questions? So, as to process from here, all right. So, this is just an informational meeting and joint meeting. The commissioners meet next. So, at the last planning commission meeting the planning commission made an informal um um Help me draw a blank on a word. An informal recommendation recommendation to adopt the subdivision regulations. So, they will um receive that and make a motion to accept the informal recommendation. There'll be a second then the amendment would need to be added and what I just I just stated. Once the amendment is assuming it's added is added to they become part of the regulations themselves they will then move to vote to adopt the regulations. Once that's done that meeting's over and the planning commission comes back I'll make the same statement that this amendment it's the same document you have seen with the amendment being added. You would then adopt the regulations and then um I would then go from a technical standpoint harmonize the amendment into the regulations cuz it's not done yet cuz it's not technically been voted on. Once that's done um then that document will be taken to the recorder's office and it will be officially registered and recorded with the recorder. Are we ready Teresa? Not yet. Not yet. Oh, we got a motion. This is an open hearing. We've got to close the hearing.

Yeah, that's I think that's part of the commissioner's meeting next but Any other further discussion? We close the hearing? Yeah, public comment. to take public comment then close. Public comment. I said it was just that. Public comment. Anybody with public comment? Yeah, if I could address [clears throat] um I see that prosecutor's office is here and we've been trying to get a plat signed for the Woods of Eaton. I'm sorry. We need your name and address for the record. I'm sorry. Name and your name and Oh, I'm sorry. Easy easy there. Um the prosecutor

Commissioner, you want to come here? Yes, could you come to the podium, please? That was just like just like a county commissioner's [clears throat] meeting. Attend podium, name and address. Uh Bob Yosh 260 South Logan. Um in the Woods of Eaton phase two we've been trying to get a plat signed for over a month. We took to the prosecutor's office and the prosecutor refused to sign it pending they thought they needed to have a meeting with Eaton Township. They are signing in form only. In form only means the form of the document. We've never had this problem anytime ever in the history of signing a plat but it's still not signed by the prosecutor or Eaton Township. Now, Eaton Township and I and Rosanne met yesterday had a meeting on site for some outstanding issues that needed to be complete and I think we have an understanding of that. And this goes back to the order in which they get signed. Um I struggle with who's on first and who's on second. So, typically it used to be the prosecutor would sign the the township would sign last after the engineer but the prosecutor would sign before those. So, I don't know what to do. Now, if the prosecutor's position still is not to sign in form only I I guess I need to know why. And in conversation with my engineer which is Polaris Engineering everywhere else they work the prosecutor's not listed as a signatory on the plat. I don't know why it is in Lorain County. I know from Eaton Township standpoint that the fact that the Woods of Eaton is a part of the judicial agreement that the court put into place in 2019 that Jason Maschin told me today that he's been uh requesting from the prosecutor's

office an opportunity to find out if whatever is being requested since that development is not a part of the regular subdivision okay in terms of being formally adopted.

So, so Dick why was phase one done so smoothly? Because it was also part of the same degree. Phase one we didn't have a problem. This problem just came up in phase two. Okay. And and again I've got a ton of money sitting in the ground and I got a builder that wants to buy and I can't physically do it. I can't make this happen. Bob, how long ago was phase one done? Uh two years ago. Part of the same decree Carl. It was longer than that. No. Two years ago. I was just wondering if it had anything to do with the change over in the prosecutor's office. I'm sure that has something to do with it. Yes. Well, I I know that But that's not still that's not getting my plat signed. And again Okay, I'm just trying to explain what I've heard and I've seen myself that when the previous administration was there I myself was trying to get um paperwork signed for OPWC to do road construction. And and to your note to what had done previously I would get all the different signatures filled out everything would be completely filled out by the contractor, by the trustees and then I would take it to the prosecutor's office and they would say that okay, everything is com- it is too form and then sign it last. So, [clears throat] then this just the previous uh administration Dan Petticord completely re- re- reversed that. He said no, I have I have to sign it first. Well, okay. And I told him I said, well, that's fine with me.

You just tell me what the process is going to be but don't expect me to read your mind. So, and that's all you're trying to do is get clarity as to I I can't get an answer. I can't even get I can't get Jason Maschin to call me back to talk to Jason who's the township trustee. We've asked for opinions from the prosecutor and they say they want a meeting with the trustees. Well, that could take 2 months. Okay? I I got a lot of money tied up in the ground with and I can't file a plat yet, guys. That was very simple to do in phase one and has been simple my entire life. And I don't know why. So, you're saying that this form that's being presented today is wrong? No, I'm telling you that the on the plat it says that the prosecutor signs for form only. What does in form only mean? Okay? And why am I being held up? It's just that simple. Let me Let me just interject real quick. Bob's Bob's issue is irrelevant to It That's kind of what I'm Well, right now. Well, but but it is part of why the change was made.

Correct. Correct. It is the reason for it. I was the one that asked for the change. Yeah, I would I would agree. His His issue is not part of this document, but it is absolutely germane to the reason we went through Right. making the sausage the last 18 months is that we've got to get our county [cough]

working together, you know, and not and not detrimental to each other. So, I All I can do is tell you that we we will recommend to the to the to the parties that, you know, having signing off as to form doesn't even really enjoying the trustees. It appears they're asking for We don't know what the legal document is. We know what our zoning is. And so, you know, all we can do is encourage the prosecutor's office to expedite this so that you're not harmed unnecessarily. But, thank you. Sir, all I can say. Thanks. We'll work on it. The good news is this is the kind of stuff that we tried to eliminate with this new document. Right. And and and I do believe in in Bob's right. I mean, he's wouldn't brought this specifically to us. Especially removing the word order helps expedite the process, which is what we're trying to do is not subvert or cut anybody's authority in any way, but just to provide a more streamlined process for for development. Any other public comments? During the meeting? Uh Motion to close the public Most Motion to close the public hearing public hearing. Second. Discussion. Discussion. Mr. Gallagher. Aye. Mr. Miller. Aye. Mr. Hignett. Aye. Mr. Greenspan. Aye. Mr. Justice. Aye. Mr. Moore. Miss Hayes. Aye. Here. Or yes.

[laughter] Mr. Weisman. Yes. [clears throat] Mr. Gibbs and Mr. Sprague. Yes. Okay. That is closed. Okay. So, the next meeting is at 3:45. start the next one yet? Do we adjourn? We have to adjourn. Meeting is adjourned. Thank you.