Let’s slow down the fast-tracking

By Jeff Poole
Review Managing Editor
Published: June 12, 2008

There seems to be a new trend in planning and zoning–fast-tracking. And we don’t like it one bit.
Planning and zoning issues work like this. First, an applicant (a landowner) approaches the county’s planning office with a proposal. They want to rezone a piece of property, apply for a variance, or seek a special use permit for their land.
The planning office reviews their application, offers suggestions, and ultimately schedules a public hearing for the applicant before the county planning commission.
The commission reviews the applicant’s materials and listens to comments for and against the application at an advertised public hearing.
Then, considering the comments it’s heard, the applicant’s project and their own concerns and questions, the commission makes a recommendation of whether or not the application should be approved or denied. Sometimes, the commission might recommend approval with conditions. Regardless of the commission’s recommendation, the matter is forwarded to the board of supervisors, which makes the final determination.
Following the planning commission public hearing, the supervisors schedule the applicant for a public hearing and that part of the process is repeated.
Usually, the process takes several months to complete-from the time the applicant first files their project to the time the supervisors render a decision. Until recently, there generally had been a month between the commission’s hearing and the supervisors’ hearing.
But for some reason, a number of planning issues seem to be getting fast-tracked, with commission and supervisor hearings occurring within days of each other.
We want to be clear here: we’re not quibbling over the ultimate resolution of these recent projects. We’re not arguing they should or should not have been approved. We’re simply wondering why the hurry?
Recently, the planning commission public hearings (held the first Thursday of the month) have been followed almost immediately by the board of supervisor hearings the following Tuesday. That’s a pretty quick turnaround. We don’t feel that gives the applicant adequate time to address commission concerns in preparation for the supervisors, nor projects’ opponents adequate time to adjust their strategy. Just as importantly, it doesn’t give the supervisors much time to consider the points raised at the planning commission hearing. Lastly, it could limit the public’s participation. How likely are folks going to be to give up two nights in less than a week’s time?
Good government requires thoughtful consideration of multiple factors-most importantly, the impact of today’s decisions on tomorrow’s community.
Fast-tracking planning issues doesn’t allow for the requisite consideration of their impact.
If a project is a good project, it will still be a good project a month later. If a project is a bad project, a month later it could still be a bad project, or it could get better. Either way, the time in between is time well spent.
Let’s move away off the fast-track and proceed slowly and carefully.