Development Review Process Task Force Recommendations
|
Priority |
Action Steps/Timeline/Staff Resources Required
|
|
2 Phase ZMA Process
2 phase ZMA process will avoid need for detailed submissions until “big picture” issues have been answered, reducing cost to applicants and reducing review times.
|
Phase I – the first phase of the two step process will consist of recognition by the Planning Commission that the land use designations have been appropriately addressed and that the concepts related to relationship to adjoining property and impacts to the community are generally acceptable. The project does not go to the Board at this stage, and the PC’s “recognition” does not insure the ultimate approval of the application but does indicate agreement on general principles. This phase results in “findings” that the project is generally consistent or not consistent with intended land uses including density and a record of comments is available to the applicant. A copy of the findings would be sent to the Board for their review and information.
Phase 2 – the second phase consists of a detailed review to meet all requirements and policies of the County
A related staff recommendation is to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the 100-plus item list to see if some/all requirements should be included in an ordinance.
STATUS: COMPLETE Ongoing refinements as needed |
|
Improve ARB/PC/Board coordination, clarify role of ARB
Clarify the sequential review process to alleviate confusion for staff, applicants, planning commission and board of supervisors and clarify the extent of review from the PC and ARB expected by the Board, prior to BOS review.
|
Comp Plan amendments review step 1- PC, Step 2 - BOS, ZTAs - review step -1 PC, step 2 - BOS ZMAs - Assuming 2 part zoning review (part 1 focused on land use, part 2 focused on design elements) review part 1 - PC, review part 2 if in an entrance corridor- ARB, PC, BOS SPs- PC, ARB, BOS
STATUS – COMPLETE Ongoing refinements as requested by Board, PC, or ARB |
|
Detailed process documentation focused on creating consistent review
Documentation on review process for ZMAs, SPs, SDPs, and SUBs will be used by staff for performing reviews and available to applicants to understand process. Also, need to include the complete list of (104) issues considered with applications and the process for proffer review.
|
STATUS – PARTIALLY COMPLETE SP and ZMA process complete, SDP and SUB process being edited |
|
Expanded staff authority for waivers and modifications in the development areas
|
STATUS – COMPLETE Now considering expansion of administrative waivers |
|
Development of a Proffer Policy to include elements beyond a cash amount
|
STATUS – COMPLETE |
|
One-stop webpage devoted to staying informed about county development
Creation of a new webpage on the county website that brings all elements of the online county development information together in one place
|
Due to evolving nature of internet technology, staff anticipates that this will be an ongoing task, but estimates that the first level of priority improvements could be made to the website within 6 months. This work will be incorporating into existing ongoing improvement efforts.
STATUS – ONGOING EFFORT Implemented measures include the following: o CountyView Web o Applications with guidance o On-line PC staff reports o Expanded GIS-Web |
|
Create a comprehensive guide to the development process for citizen use
“How to Understand and Get Involved with County Development Processes”
|
STATUS – ONGOING EFFORT
|
|
Expand the contact area around projects to include more than adjoining owners, include more comprehensive info in the letter
Newly defined contact radius for notification letters and a more descriptive letter to be sent as the initial notification
|
STATUS – INCOMPLETE More detailed letters being sent, but no change to contacts |
|
Create easily accessible space at COB for project information
Public information/ visual displays on critical projects
|
STATUS - COMPLETE |
|
Standardized proffer and code language for applicants/proffers on Web
Model Code of Development and Proffers available to applicants, which reduce the need for changes and resubmissions of documents. Also, need to provide examples of good CDs and proffers and standard conditions used with certain SPs (e.g. Churches, Home Occupations) |
STATUS – PARTIALLY COMPLETE Standard proffers and codes of development drafted and shared with applicants, but not yet placed on-line |
|
Approval letters explaining remaining process through occupancy
Approval letters will outline steps necessary before buildings can be occupied or uses are allowed. |
STATUS – COMPLETE Approval letters now explain next step towards use |
|
Outlines of staff reports with outstanding issues (provide advance notice and interaction)
There should be no surprises for applicants in a staff report. Any issue should have been raised in advance of the staff report, with the opportunity to resolve misunderstandings or mistakes. |
STATUS – COMPLETE For rezonings and special use permits, this has been incorporated into the 2-step ZMA process. For subdivisions and site plans, this has been incorporated into the review process. Now expanding this to waiver requests |