HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 5.2 Planning Services Backlog AMMOIMMINIMMIMMMMOM
D(IBC'
•
AGENDA STATEMENT
•
Meeting Date: October 11 , 1982
SUBJECT : Planning Services Backlog
EXHIBITS ATTACHED : List of pending applications
RECOMMENDATION : 1 . Authorize Staff to secure planning consultant services on an
interim basis
2. Authorize purchase of a microfische reader/printer.
3. Authorize a budget transfer from the Contingent Reserve Account to
the Planning Department Equipment Account in the amount of $2,300.
) 4. Authorize a budget transfer from the Contingent Reserve to the
Planning Repairs Account in the amount of $350.
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: 1 . Estimated cost for planning consultant services not to exceed
$4,800; sufficient funds are budgeted.
: 2. Estimated cost for purchase of .microfische reader/printer approximated
$2,300 and $350 for maintenance agreement.
DESCRIPTION: • At its meeting of September 27, 1982, the City Council directed Staff to
provide it with additional, information on the planning application
backlog and the need for additional planning assistance. Staff has
reviewed the planning application backlog and determined the following:
1 . The average processing time (including notification and appeal periods) for the 3 appli-
cations, which have been approved thus far, was 19 working days.
2. There are a total of 17 pending applications. Half of these applications have been in
processing for more than 22 working days. The longest outstanding application is Naugles
Inc. , which has been in processing for 66 working days and is pending a continued hearing
Staff has identified the following to be major problem areas which have contributed to the
lengthening of the application review process. Some of these problems have been dealt with
and resolved.
1 . Upon assumption of planning service responsibility, a City coordinated planning applica-
tion review process had to be developed, which involves City planning, police, county
engineering, county building inspection, county flood control , DSRSD public works, and
DSRSD fire. The development of this coordinated application review process was begun
in July and completed on September 15, 1982.
2. County planning has provided the City with files for all planning actions which have
occurred in the City of Dublin. All actions which occurred prior to 1979 are on •
microfische; those which have occurred subsequently are batch filed. In addition, all
assessors rolls are on microfische. Assessors rolls are used in notification of property
owners with respect to planning hearings. The indexing system for both the microfische
and the files is incomplete. The City does not have a microfische reader/printer to
COPIES TO:
ITEM NO. Z
review pre-1979 actions on parcels and to identify property owners from the assessors
rolls. This results in delays in responding to simple zoning inquiries and in research-
ing prior actions on parcels in question as part of the application review process.
3. The planning application forms which were being used by the County were initially used
by the City because the City did not have time in July to develop its own form. The
City has found that the County's form was inadequate from the standpoint of the
information it required from applicants. As a result, the City has had to go back to
developers or applicants to obtain the additional information needed, thus requiring
further delays in processing of applications.
4. The City's present zoning ordinance requirements for site specific computation on basic
regulations, such as set back requirements and signs, require individual review of each
parcel and any conditions that have been placed on that parcel in the past in order to
make a determination as to what type of development or sign can be placed on the parcel .
This involves additional research and delays the ability of Staff to process the
application.
In order to resolve these problem areas, which the City has, in essence, inherited from the
County, Staff has taken several actions and proposes several others which are identified
below. As indicated above, with respect to the planning application review process, Staff
has implemented a coordinated approach with all other appropriate agencies for the application
review process. With respect to the filing problem, the City needs to secure a microfische
reader/printer in order to have the necessary equipment to review past planning applications,
and also to review current property owners of parcels from the assessors roll . Although the
printer adds considerable cost to the unit, it is Staff's position that this feature is
necessary especially when site plans and conditions from prior planning actions need to be
reproduced. In addition, when the Planning Secretary position is filled, it is anticipated
that the Planning Secretary will be able to assist the Planning Director in developing an
adequate indexing system for files that the City has inherited from the County of Alameda.
The Planning Director has developed a new application form with a check list for all
information that is required of applicants. When the Planning. Secretary comes onboard she
will be able to assist in performing the initial checks of the application to determine
whether all appropriate materials have been submitted.
If the City Council believes that the present processing time for pending applications that
have been submitted to the City is too long, it is Staff's recommendation that the City
Council authorize Staff to secure the part-time services of a planning consultant to assist
Staff in the performance of technical review of zoning requirements and providing professional
assistance in the review of planning applications that have already been submitted. It is
anticipated that such assistance would be needed on a 20 hours per week basis for approximatel
4-6 weeks to clear up the present backlog, at a cost ranging from $3,200 to $4,800.
The County Planning Department has indicated that it could provide planning consultant service.
The County personnel would be well versed in the technical review aspects. However, the
County planning input on planning applications may contain certain biases that would not be
totally consistent with City goals and objectives. Therefore, if the Council feels that
additional assistance to Staff is appropriate, a private planning consultant is recommended,
who could not only render the necessary professional assistance, but also provide unbiased
objective planning input.
The last long-term solution for the improvement of the planning application review process
would be the revision of the zoning ordinance, which must come after the development of the
General Plan.
Based on the information which Staff has prepared for City Council review, it is Staff's
recommendation that the City Council take the following actions:
1 . Authorize Staff to secure planning consultant services on an interim basis.
2. Authorize the purchase of a microfische reader/printer.
3. Authorize budget transfer from the Contingent Reserve to the Planning Department Equipment
Account in the amount of $2,300.
4. Authorize budget transfer from the Contingent Reserve to the Planning Department Repair
Account-in the amount of $350.
10/6/82
PROCESSING
APPLICATION (Working) STATUS
DAYS
- Naugles: drive-in restaurant - CUP 66 pending continued hearing
- Frumenti : RV and boat storage - CUP 65 being reviewed
- Valley Christian Center: landscaping - CUP 37 pending letter of credit
- Lemoine and B&B Rental : outdoor storage-CUP 33 pending additional information
- Diamond Signs: directional tract sign - CUP 29 being reviewed
- Parkway Baptist Church: trailers - CUP 25 being reviewed
- Alcosta Associates: directory sign - SDR 25 being reviewed
- Marra: fence - variance 23 being reviewed
}1
- McClure: sign - SDR 22 being reviewed
- Wong: room addition - variance 21 being reviewed
- Murco: sign - SDR 21 being reviewed
- Valley Christian Center: trailers - CUP 20 being reviewed
- Hemstalk/Vintage Develop: offices - SDR 17 being reviewed
- Hackler: pet hospital - CUP 15 being reviewed
- Albertson's: addition - variance 11 being reviewed
- Wyatt: garage conversion - variance 8 being reviewed
- Valley Christian Center: wind generator -. CUP 1 being reviewed