After a final application is accepted, it must be reviewed to determine if it meets the requirements of the County Code and other applicable laws and adopted guidelines. Individual reviewers must provide their recommendations regarding the approval of the application. These recommendations are part of the basis for the eventual Board or Director action on the plan.
A. Referral and Inter-Agency Consultation. When a final application is accepted, the planning staff must:
• provide a copy of the plan and necessary supporting information to designated offices of the Commission, other government or public agencies, and utility companies for comment or approval, as required by applicable law; and
• if applicable, schedule a discussion of the application between reviewers and the applicant before the Development Review Committee (DRC) chaired by the DARC Division Chief, or designee, within 15 days after the copies are sent.
1. Lead Reviewer. For each plan application, the appropriate chief or supervisor must assign a Planning Department lead reviewer. The lead reviewer ensures that the following steps are coordinated and occur in a timely manner.
(a) Comments and recommendations from the reviewers are included in the application file and conveyed to the applicant team.
(b) Documentation is added to in the application file noting assigned reviewers that do not participate or provide any substantive comments.
(c) Potential conflicting comments are identified.
(d) Plan revisions and information from the applicant in response to comments are provided to reviewers.
(e) The adopted protocol for resolving any agency conflicts is applied when necessary.
2. Responsibility of all reviewers. Comments from any reviewers must be made in writing before the end of each designated review period. A reviewer who is unable to meet this timeframe must complete their review by stating their need for additional time and providing an estimate of when their review will be provided.
3. Consultation during review. Reviewers may hold meetings during the application review period to help evaluate the application as necessary or appropriate. These meetings may include the applicant, other interested parties, and the public. Minutes for each meeting must be prepared by the meeting organizer and included in the application file. Each set of minutes must include the date, time, meeting location, and a list of participants, major issues discussed, and any decision or recommendation made.
4. Review Steps. Chapter 50 and Chapter 59 establish review periods for the different applications, but these may be extended depending upon the number of issues identified as part of the review and the need for plan revisions. The typical review for most applications consists of the following steps:
(a) Agency review before DRC meeting
(c) Applicant revisions after DRC meeting
(d) Agency review and approval of each final revised plan
(e) Planning Staff prepares a written report
(f) Staff report is posted 10 days before a Board hearing
(g) Board or Director Action
5. Extended review. Review and action on the application types covered in these regulations involves approval of certain required plan components by other agencies, such as, fire access and road grade plans; and concurrent review of related applications, such as, stormwater management concept and Special Protection Area (SPA) water quality plans, water and sewer category change requests, well and septic permits, or conditional use applications. Obtaining these related approvals may require extension of the review timeframes specified above. Delays may also result if an applicant does not submit adequate revisions under section 50.10.01.06.B.
6. Extension of a Board hearing date or Director decision date. Review deadlines may be extended for sketch, site, preliminary, and administrative subdivision plans under Chapter 59, Sections 7.3.3.C and 7.3.4.C, and Chapter 50, Sections 4.2.E and 6.3.B.3, respectively, by rescheduling the required decision date. A request must be made in writing to the Planning Department for such extension.11 Per Chapter 50 and Chapter 59, the Director may postpone the decision date by up to 30 days one time without Board approval. The Board may act to grant extensions of more than 30 days upon request from the Director or applicant. Any extension of a hearing date acted upon by the Board must be noticed on the
hearing agenda with the new hearing date indicated. The new hearing date must be identified for individuals on the notice list as part of the written hearing notice.
7. Extension of plat review. An applicant may consent to waive the 90-day review period required under Chapter 50, Section 8.2.B to gain time to obtain the necessary approvals from the reviewing agencies; otherwise, staff must base their required recommendation on the latest version of the plat. When staff’s final recommendation on a plat is denial, the applicant must be permitted to submit a final plat and staff must prepare a staff report and schedule a Board hearing on the next available agenda.
8. Application lapse deemed withdrawal. An application that has been inactive for 365 days with no substantive response to review comments, or that has not been properly extended under Chapter 50 or 59 must be treated as withdrawn unless the applicant can demonstrate good cause to extend the application. The staff must send written notice to an applicant whose plan has been inactive that the applicant has 30 calendar days to request an extension of the staff review. Any request for an extension must:
(b) show good cause to grant an extension; and
(c) propose a timeframe to finalize the application.
If the applicant does not request an extension by the due date, staff must send the applicant written notice that the application has been withdrawn by default. A new application and fee must be submitted to re-file any plan that is withdrawn by default.
B. Plan Revision.12 Each applicant is responsible for timely response to reviewer comments. The response may be by resubmitting plans and other documents with revisions, requesting a meeting with reviewers to discuss the comments, or indicating the desire to proceed to Board or Director action without any revision. Resubmitted materials should be submitted within 14 days after the comments are received, unless staff and the applicant agree on an extended deadline. Depending on the size and complexity of the
proposed project, a plan may be revised multiple times during the application review. Any final revised plan for an application that is scheduled for Board action must be submitted not less than 65 days before the scheduled Board meeting date.
1. Major revision. If the lead reviewer determines that an applicant’s revised plan or any other related revised document constitutes a major change13 from the original submission, the applicant must:
(a) re-send written notices to all parties on the Notice List; and
(b) revise and resubmit an application form if the revision involves a change in:
i. acreage of the application site;
ii. type of use or units proposed;
iii. proposed density of any use;
iv. proposed method of development; or
v. ownership, applicant, or engineer.
The submittal of a major application revision should be discussed with the assigned lead reviewer before they are submitted, and will require extension of any minimum review timeframe specified by law. The lead reviewer must decide how the revised plan will be reviewed after submittal, and may schedule another DRC meeting.
C. Public Participation. Any individual or organization with an interest in or concern about a proposed development or specific application may participate in the review and approval process by:
• attending the pre-submission community meeting organized and held by the applicant before an application is submitted to the Planning Department.
• reviewing information about the submitted plan application online at the Planning Department website; and
• attending the DRC meeting scheduled for the application14, if applicable. The DRC meeting is not open to public participation; but members of the public may attend and listen the discussion. Groups should notify DARC staff about their interest in attending the DRC meeting before the scheduled date so that space accommodations can be made.
1. Public comment. Members of the public who have questions or concerns should contact the Planning Department’s lead reviewer at any time during the review process. Public comments should be submitted in writing by letter or email, and become part of the public record of the application. The Planning staff must make every effort to address issues raised by the public during the plan review, and address the issues that are not resolved in their recommendations on the plan. Public comments may also be presented directly to the Board if a public hearing is scheduled.
2. Community meetings during review. Meetings with members of the public may be scheduled for a case upon request to the lead reviewer, or for particularly complex or controversial cases, staff may initiate a community meeting. These meetings must include other agency representatives and the applicant, as appropriate.
D. Staff Reports. The lead reviewer, after completing the application review and receiving all required agency recommendations or approvals, must prepare a report summarizing the proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law that the Board or Director must make and recommend approval, approval subject to conditions, or denial of the application.
1. Contents of the staff report. A staff report should include the following elements:
(a) a site description, including a vicinity map and aerial photograph of the site;
(b) an overview of the project, and a plan drawing;
(c) a summary of previous approvals, if any;
(d) a summary of the major issues and concerns related to the application and staff’s proposed resolution;
(e) staff’s recommended action, including for an approval, any recommended conditions; and
(f) staff’s findings of fact and conclusions regarding each applicable requirement of law related to the plan under Chapter 50, Section 4.2.D and Chapter 59, Sections 7.3.3.E and 7.3.4.E; and the basis for each finding and conclusion.
2. Staff Reports for Board action. The staff report for a plan or plan amendment application under Chapter 50 or 59 must be published on the Board’s website as part of the Hearing Agenda at least 10 days before the date of the scheduled meeting.
3. Staff Reports for a minor plan amendment. A staff report for a minor plan amendment involving limited aspects of the original plan must include the elements listed above and details on each item that is proposed to be changed.
4. Objections to a staff report scheduled for Board action. The applicant or other individuals may submit objections to any finding or conclusion in a staff report that is scheduled for Board action no later than one full business day before the scheduled Board meeting that includes the application. Each objection must be made in writing to the Board Chair and must clearly identify and fully explain the basis for each disagreement. The applicant or any other party may also object to any finding or conclusion in the staff report during the scheduled public hearing on the application.
5. Request to postpone a public hearing agenda item. The applicant or any other party may request postponement of a scheduled public hearing after the staff report has been published. The request must be made in writing to the Chair of the Planning Board no later than one full business day before the scheduled Board meeting that includes the application. Each request for postponement must clearly identify and fully explain the basis for postponement. The staff must notify the applicant of each postponement request, and the applicant must be given an opportunity to respond. A decision to postpone a public hearing may only be made by the Planning Board Chair or the Planning Board.
6. Removing items from the Consent Agenda. The Planning Board may only approve a plan amendment under Chapters 50 and 59 on its Consent Agenda if the amendment is unopposed. If any individual or party opposes an amendment scheduled on the Consent Agenda at any time before the Board votes on the amendment, the Board must remove the item from the Consent Agenda and schedule it for a Full Hearing. Any Board member may also remove an item from the Consent Agenda on the day it is to be heard by making a motion in open session.
9 The public record is not the same as the legal record that the Board bases its decision upon for purposes of a petition for judicial review.
10 Licensed professionals include engineers, surveyors, landscape architects, attorneys, and any other profession licensed by the State of Maryland.
11 Template for the Regulatory Extension Request Application.
12 A plan revision is distinct and separate from a plan amendment. A plan revision incorporates changes that are made as part of the plan review process (i.e., before a plan is approved by a regulatory body). An amended plan incorporates changes made to a certified or approved plan.
13 A major revision includes any increase or significant decrease in density or number of units, an increase in the limits of disturbance, a significant change in lot layout, or an increase in building height or scale. The lead reviewer determines if an applicant’s proposed plan revision is a major or minor revision.
14 The DRC meeting is generally held every 2 weeks, on Tuesday. A DRC Agenda containing items and the times they will be discussed, is posted on the MNCPPC website.
