Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the In Town Design Review Restructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board reviews draft to trim and standardize in‑town design review committee, schedules public hearing
Summary
Staff presented draft ordinance language to reduce the in‑town design review committee's membership to nine, standardize terms and introduce quorum and continuity rules; board debated residency, quorum thresholds and continuity of panel members for multi‑meeting projects and scheduled a public hearing in August.
Planning staff brought draft ordinance changes to the Belfast Planning Board on July 10 that would restructure the city’s in‑town design review committee by standardizing membership and process and reducing the committee’s target size from 15 to nine members.
Planning and Codes Director Bob Fournier said the draft aligns the committee with other city committees by setting staggered three‑year appointments, clarifying review types (type 1 mandatory compliance for major commercial changes, type 2 residential voluntary compliance, and type 3 minor projects) and adding an acting‑chair selection process for development review meetings.
Board members debated quorum rules and continuity for projects that span multiple meetings. Staff proposed a quorum of three members with a majority of members present required to carry a motion; several board members urged a higher protection for type‑1 (major) reviews so that at least three members must vote in favor on any approval to make decisions more defensible against appeals. The board asked staff to consult the city attorney and consider written language to require the same panel members to serve on all hearings for a specific project.
Members also split on whether committee membership should be limited to Belfast residents or allow property owners and business operators who work in the review districts. Some members argued resident participation preserves local accountability for large projects; others said allowing nonresidents with expertise (property owners, business operators) can benefit the committee and that exceptions can be handled by council appointment discretion.
Fournier said staff will revise the draft based on feedback and bring it back for a duly noticed public hearing at the second planning‑board meeting in August to gather public comment before forwarding any ordinance changes to the City Council. “Please come on the 2nd meeting of August… that’s where the really important stuff happens,” the acting chair said, urging public participation.
Next steps: staff will consult the city attorney on quorum and continuity language, update the draft for clarity, and present the revised ordinance at the board’s August meeting for a public hearing.
