Agenda - Planning Commission - 06/05/2008

Home

materials"garages, and a building height set- back plan:e. The village did not want to control . residenti~{ architecture and require design reviewfor:each new structure. Step 5: AOmiJiister and Implement the Code The final step is to create the tools to adminis- ter and implement the hybrid code. This should begin with an assessment of the capacity and expertise of both staff and the various boards and commissions to determine. who is best able to "review the applications. There are a number of options to put a hybrid code into action. One of the most bas.ic is the site plan review process. Generally, site pian review addresses the different aspects-of site design (e.g., circulation, parking, land- scaping, and open space, etc.), but communi- ties can expand this process to include build- ing design review that originates from the form-based controls in the code. Implementing a hybrid code through the site plan reviewpmcess requires considera- tion of who reviews the applications. The Implementing a hybrid code through the site plan review process may also increase the number of applications seen by the review body, depending on what districts or develop- ment types have received form-based treat- ment. For example, if single-family infill is now subject to significant form-based controls, then the site plan review body, depending on the development activity in the area, may see its workload double or even triple. If the area is active, a separate committee and review process may be necessary just to accommo- date the number of applications in a timely manner. This is especially true if site plan review is handled by a body like the plan commission, which already has a number of other duties. One option outside of site plan review is to create a design. review process. A design . review committee, comprised of community members (including some with specific design expertise), would analyze each appli- . cation for compliance with the intent ofthe regulations. If the hybrid coding is only. review body must be comfortable with this added layer of responsibility. If the site plan review process is conducted internally by staff, they may be comfortable making site plan assessments but uncomfortable with interpreting architectural standards, which may require additional ~pertise. In this situa- tion, it may be appropriate to. conduct the site plan review through staff and forward the comments to another committee for design review. 110 applied to a certain areas, staff can conduct an internal site plan review and forward their report to the design revieyv committee to be integrated at the end of the process as one comprehensive.review report_ If requirements are strict, staff can review the applications anQ expedite the process by checking for compliance. If more standards are encouraged and require negoti- ation for their inclusion ina design, or if the standards are very broad or offer a number of alternatives, there will be a more subjective interpretation. Staff may not be comfortable making these subjective decisions and a pub- lie committee may be necessary. As the community formulates its stan- dards and considers the review process, the key issues to keep in mind are: capacity, effi- ciency, expertise, and consistency. In other words, the jurisdiction needs to review each application and render a decision within a rea- sonable time frame. The outcome .should be predictable, and the review body should be consistent in the application of standards and decisions. Because Riverside's original ordinance dated from 1922, there were no review processes in place that could evaluate devel- opment applications against the new stan- dards. Therefore, as part of the creation of the CBD zoning district, the village established a site plan review procedure. The updated zon- ing putthe plan commission in charge of reviewing and approving site plan applica- tions. Because of the small size of the village core and the expertise of plan commission members, integrating application review as a member responsibility proved to be an effec- tive and efficient way to (jdminister the new design-oriented regulations for the CBD. Because residents are very concerned about the character of new development, the plan commission's review also allows for trans- parency in the development approval process. When Riverside initially discussed design standards for new residential develop- ment, the village worried it would need a design review committee to assist in review of those applications. However, because the design.standards were restricted to a series of requirements that must be met, the need for .such a committee became unnecessary. Staff could continue to process applications as they came in for compliance with new form-based regulations. THE TRANSITION As new rules affecting the design and place- ment of buildings are integrated with use and bulk controls, it is important for a community to agree upon urban design goals or guidelines and to illustrate how form-based regulations within a revised zoning code can help to advance the design vision. The result of this, however, may be the creation of nonconfonni- ties. It is helpful in these instances to provide that existing structures are "deemed confonn- ing." This type of provision should not be ZONING PRACTICE 5.08 AMERICAN pLANNING ASSOCIATION I page 6