The city’s Design Review Board has been suspended for a year and now staff is recommending reinstating it with changes.
Last fall, city staff proposed suspending the DRB for six months since the planning department was understaffed and working on substantial changes to the development review process.
Design Review Board discusses its process in case suspension ends
After the six month suspension, commissioners voted in May to suspend the board for another six months due to continued staffing shortages and continuing changes to the design review process.
That second suspension is set to expire on Dec. 3.
Commissioners will consider during their Dec. 3 meeting whether to reinstate the board with the changes recommended by city planning staff.
Commission to consider another 6-month suspension of city’s design review board
Since the board was suspended, city planning staff handled the functions of the DRB, including reviewing site plans and administering the guidelines and design standards included in the city’s land development code.
According to city staff, City Manager Greg Doyon prefers that staff continue handling those functions and there have been no complaints about staff performance of those duties. Some neighborhood councils have asked questions about getting information about the status of development projects in the city.
Since the DRB was suspended, two new planners have been hired and the division is now fully staffed, according to planning staff, but training is still in the early stages.
Changes to the city’s development review process also remain in the works and are substantial, needing staff time for development and implementation of the changes.
Members of the DRB believe the board adds quality to the design of development process and in September, they met to discuss potential changes to their process that might it more predictable for developers and less time consuming for staff.
During that meeting, Doyon said he still thought the board duplicated efforts and played into the common criticism of the city’s review process that it’s slow and unpredictable.
The process proposed by staff would let the board “provide timely and helpful expert advice in the design of development projects,” rather than duplicate staff review, according to the staff report.
The changes would need to be incorporated into the city’s land development code but include:
- Earlier review of development applications: In the past, projects requiring a DRB meeting would be reviewed by staff and the DRB relatively late in the development design process. A developer or their design representative would submit an application when they were anywhere between 80-100 percent done with their designs. Sometimes, due to tight project timelines, an architect or engineer would be forced to submit an application for the DRB concurrently with the submittal of a building permit application. In such instances, any action taken by the DRB to request modifications would often lead to building plan modifications and significant project delays.
- To address this problem, staff recommends implementing a process change with the DRB reviewing in the conceptual stage. “Specifically, staff believes that the DRB can still fulfill its review authority as identified in City code section 17.12.3.010 as well as their responsibility for administering design guidelines as noted in 17.28, Exhibit 28-1 by reviewing design plans that are approximately at a 30 percent level of completion.”
- Simplify DRB application submittal requirements: In the past, developer applications for the DRB were rejected periodically or required additional materials due to the previous practice of requiring project designs to be completed at an 80-100 percent level. For the developer’s consultant, this meant the need to submit such items as lighting photometric plans and light fixture specs, signage details, and fully designed landscape plans. These are already requirements for the issuance of permits, so essentially the developer’s consultant was being asked to submit items before they were ready. This created unnecessary tension and delays in the DRB process.
- To alleviate this problem, staff proposes that when a developer submits an application for the DRB, the material provided be limited to the following: 1) a project narrative, 2) conceptual site plan showing basic compliance with zoning district requirements, and 3) building renderings and/or architectural elevations. The submittal of these items is less burdensome on the applicant to provide and is sufficient for the DRB to administer its function as part of the development review process.
- Reduced Burdens on Staff – As a result of implementing earlier DRB review and simplifying submittal requirements, past workload burdens on staff will be reduced significantly.
