planning and community development department update on improvements to the development review...
TRANSCRIPT
Planning and Community Development Department
Update on Improvements to the Development Review Process and
Recommended Changes Related to Design Review
City CouncilDecember 8, 2014
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
2
Purpose
• Report on the progress of process improvements.
• Present future improvements staff will be implementing.
• Review proposed ideas to change the Design Review process.
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
3
Development Process Overview
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
4
Departments that are part of the development review process
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Sample of Building Code Regulations
5
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Sample of California Retail Food Code (Public Health)
6
7
Phase One: Planning Entitlement
Prepare for hearing• CEQA conducted • Staff report
prepared
Project deemed Complete
Incomplete ProjectCorrections provided and applicant resubmits when addressed
Application submitted to
Planning Division
Various departments review and provide conditions
Planner reviews case for
completeness
Hearing Held• Approval or
Disapproval
Development Process Review
8
Applicant submits plans
Staff reviews plans for
conformance to applicable codes
Building Permit issued
Inspections conducted
(preliminary and final)
Corrections required
Development Process Review
Phase Two: Plan check
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Development Review Study• Consultant studied the development review process.
• Consultant conducted focus group meetings.
• Study identified best practices currently in place.
• Study identified where improvements could be made.
10
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Improvements Made to Date
11
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
12
Interdepartmental Improvements
Matrix Report:
IRT
Work Program
• Interdepartmental Review Team (IRT) formed.
• Managed by Planning and Community Development staff.
• Two-year work program created.
• Improvements made.
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
IRT Work Program Improvements • Custom tracking system implemented.
• E-mail notifications sent to supervisors.
• Business license routing procedures improved.
• Entitlement cases routed electronically.
13
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
14
Improved Customer Service in the Permit Center
• Staff relocated.
• Sub-trade permit window established.
• Q-flow system upgraded.
• Real wait times provided on-line.
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
15
Planning and Community Development Department Process Improvements
• Early feedback provided to applicants.
• Cases routed within one week.
• New application forms developed.
• Applications reviewed upon submittal.
• New Design Review staff report templates created.
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
As compared to 2010, the processing time for the most common planning cases has been reduced as follows:
• Certificates of Appropriateness (Historic Preservation Permits) reduced by 34%
• Conditional Use Permits reduced by 44%
• Hillside Development Permits reduced by 53%
• Minor Conditional Use Permits reduced by 43%
• Minor Variances reduced by 46%
17
Planning and Community Development Department
Staff Implemented Recommendations
18
Table 1 – Planning Case Processing Times
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
19
Table 2: Medium Projects are generally classified as: Tenant Improvements between 3,000 and 10,000 square feet, Single-Family residential additions between 500 and 1,000 square feet outside of Hillside Districts, all residential remodels over 500 square feet (interior only), swimming pools and spas in Hillside Districts, Commercial and Multi-Family additions under 500 square feet, signs requiring Zoning Field Inspection or Design Review, Retaining Walls, Wireless Communication Facilities and foundation only for new construction.
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
20
Table 3: Large Projects are classified as Tenant Improvements over 10,000 square feet, Commercial and Multi-Family additions over 500 square feet, all new construction of single-family residential structures, Duplexes, Multi-Family, Commercial, Mixed-Use, industrial or Institutional projects, all single-family additions over 1,000 square feet, seismic retrofit, all grading.
Decrease of 40% from 2010-2014
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Table 4 – Total Planning cases received FY 2010 through FY 2014
28% increase from 2010 - 2014
FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY140
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
Total Planning Cases
Total Planning Cases
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Table 5: Total Building Permit Valuation over last five Fiscal Years
FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY140
50
100
150
200
250
Building Valuation (in Millions)
Building Valuation (in Millions)
212% increase from 2010-2014
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Doing More with Less
• 28% increase in number of planning cases
• 212% increase in Building Permit Valuation
• 24% decrease in staffing levels
23
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Future Improvements to be Implemented by Staff• Establish Personalized Case Manager program.
• Replace the land management system.
• Introduce Permit Technician job classification.
• Improve communications regarding the development review process.
25
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Design Review
• Pasadena places high value on quality design.
• Design Commission plays important role.
• Design Commission and Planning staff have been working together to improve the Design Commission Process
26
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Design Review Process
27
Staff Level
Design staff reviews project
Director approves or disapproves projectDecision appealable to Design Commission
Design Commission
Design staff reviews project and makes recommendations
to Design Commission
Design Commission approves or disapproves project
Decision appealable to City Council
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Design Review
Design Commission cases a four-step process:
28
Preliminary Consultation
50% Conce
pt Review
Concept
Review
Final Review
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Design Review Process
Current Design Commission composition requirements (Title 2.80)
The Commission consists of 9 members appointed as follows:
• The mayor nominates 5 members from persons nominated by the City Councilmembers.
• The Transportation Advisory Commission, the Arts and Culture Commission, the Cultural Heritage Commission and the Planning Commission each nominate 1 member for a total of 4 members.
• All appointments are subject to ratification by the City Council
29
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Design Review Process
Current Design Commission composition requirements (Title 2.80)
• All members must be residents of the City; provided however, that a person nominated by a Councilmember need not reside in the Councilmember’s district.
• The criteria for selection of members must be a demonstrated interest in the community and professional expertise and experience in a design related field, including one or more of the following fields:
30
1. Architecture;
2. Landscape architecture;
3. City planning;
4. Historic preservation;
5. Artist;
6. Urban design;
7. Engineering; and
8. Transportation planning.
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Design Review Process• Current Design Review Process mentioned in study focus
groups.
• Study recommends:> Comprehensive design guidelines> Transition to two-step process and possibly into one-phase> Membership reduced from nine to five> Minimum of three licensed architects
31
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Three-year Review of Design Cases
32
Average of four meetings per case
60% required the 50% Concept Review
20% included Public Art component
93% included Planning entitlement
29 Cases
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Design Review Process
Staff Proposed Process (three-steps):• Eliminating 50% Concept Review• Clarify Preliminary Consultation
33
Preliminary Consultation
Concept Review
Final Review
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Design Review Process
Staff Proposed Composition:
• Reduce from nine to seven members
• Establish specific qualifications: Two commissioners with a background in Architecture (Mayor appointed) One commissioner with a background in Historic Preservation (Mayor
appointed) One commissioner with a background in Landscape Architecture (Mayor
appointed) One commissioner that is a community member at large (Mayor appointed) One commissioner that is a representative of the Planning Commission One commissioner that is a representative of the Historic Preservation
Commission
34
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Design Review Process• Study recommendations presented to various commissions.
• Staff asked for recommendations from the Planning Commission and Design Commission.
• Neither Commission was supportive of reducing the number of Design Commission members.
The Planning Commission commented:
• Modify the membership of the Design Commission to replace the existing Arts and Culture Commission representative with a Mayoral appointee with expertise in Historic Preservation.
• One of the existing Mayoral appointees should have expertise in Historic Preservation.
• Did not comment on eliminating the 50% Concept Review phase.
35
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Design Review ProcessThe Design Commission commented that:
• The Design Commission could benefit from ensuring certain disciplines with experience in historic preservation are represented on the commission (e.g. an architect or urban planner with an expertise in historic preservation).
• The Commission was not opposed to eliminating the 50% Concept Review phase.
36
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Staff RecommendationIt is recommended that the City Council direct staff to prepare amendments to the Municipal Code which:
• Amend the Design Review process to eliminate the “optional” 50% Concept Review and clarify the Preliminary Consultation review; and
• Modify the composition of the Design Commission by reducing the number of members from the current nine to seven and establish specific qualifications for its members.
37
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
Next Steps
• Should the City Council wish to implement the proposed changes, amendments to Title 2 and Title 17 of the Municipal Code would be required.
• Planning Commission review is required for Title 17 changes (Design Review Process).
• The City Council would need to conduct a future public hearing on an ordinance to review any required changes to the Municipal Code.
• City Council should provide direction on any additional public outreach desired prior to City Council action.
38
Planning and Community Development Department
Update on Improvements to the Development Review Process and Recommended Changes
Related to Design ReviewCity Council
December 8, 2014
Planning and Community Development Department
Development Process Review
40
Custom Program for Electronic Routing
Planning and Community Development Department
C. Third Quarter Report: Cycle Times
Case Type Average Number of Days Goal (7 Days) % Meeting GoalNumber of Plan Checks
Represented
Building Review 4 7 84 400D & HP Review 3 7 80 129
Fire Review 3 7 95 174Health Review 4 7 92 26Power Review 8 7 50 10Public Works Review 1 7 100 233Water - Domestic 3 7 96 27Zoning Review 6 7 67 221
Projects Received 1/1/2014-9/30/2014
Building Review
D&HP Review
Fire Review
Health Review
Power Review
Public Works Review
Water - Domestic
Zoning Review
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Final Review - Medium Plan Checks
Goal (14 days)
Average Number of DaysAverage Number of Days
Goal (7 Days)