Development Services Review. Final Report. Zucker July 2016

Handouts, Planning Application Form

The Division posts available handouts on their web page, as well as project status report and the Planning Application Form. Interviewees reported that several of the planning division handouts posted online are out of date. We reviewed the handouts and found that the majority had been updated in 2015, which is good. We did find a couple that appeared to need updating however, including the “Zoning Text Amendment” and “Urban Service Area” handouts, which were last updated in 2005 and 2007, respectively. In addition, we found that while the handouts did a good job of outlining the submittal requirements, none of them adequately explained the review process. The lack of a detail on the Preliminary Plan Review and Conceptual Plan Review process was particularly problematic because it did not explain the difference between the two, which is confusing for the unfamiliar user (see our discussion under the “Conceptual Plan Review, Non-Measure C Preliminary Plan Review” heading in this Section of the report). A summary explanation of the review process would be particularly helpful in explaining the Design Review Committee (DRC) process, which replaced the Architectural and Site Plan Review (ASPR) Committee process. 104. Recommendation: The Community Development Director should update out-of-date handouts and include a thorough summary explanation of its purpose and the review and approval process. In addition to some handouts being out of date, we found the Architectural and Site Plan Review handout confusing. The Zoning Code provisions that establish this application process is titled, “Design Review,” (Chapter 18.74), so it is not immediately evident to an unfamiliar user that these provisions govern the Architectural and Site Plan Review process, until the user reaches 18.74.010 (G), where the “Architectural and Site Review” term is used. Later is this report we recommend resolving unclear and inconsistent provisions like this one. (see our discussion under the “Zoning Code.” To add to the confusion, the handout for the Architectural and Site Review process contains a hyperlink to “Architectural Review Handbook,” which is a document that sets minimum standards for architecture, site planning and landscaping. However, the hyperlink takes the user to the Division’s Zoning Web Page, rather than the actual document and the document is actually titled “the Design Review Handbook.” When the user clicks on the link, they are sent to a document titled as “Architectural Review

Morgan Hill, California

97

Zucker Systems