Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10 - Record Specialist PositionCITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 10 February 22, 2005 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Building Department Jay Elbettar, Building Director, (949) 644 -3282 ielbettar(ai city. newport- beach. ca. us. SUBJECT: Staff Proposal to Create a Record Specialist Position in the Building Department Responsible for the Management and Maintenance of Department Records and Facilitating and Tracking the Flow of Customer's Plan Submittals ISSUE: Should the City Council amend the Fiscal Year 2004 -2005 budget to authorize a new records specialist position for the Building Department responsible for the management and maintenance of department records and facilitating and tracking the flow of customer's plan submittals? RECOMMENDATION: Approve a budget amendment appropriating $17,395.23 from General Fund Unappropriated Fund balance to provide salary and benefits for a new full time position for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2004 -2005. DISCUSSION: The Building Department presented this staff report at the February 8, 2005, City Council study session. As a result, the Mayor directed staff to place this item for consideration on the regular council meeting agenda. The Record Specialist position salary range will be $40,892.80 to $57,512.00 annually. Attached is the study session staff report and the position's job description. Agenda Item No. _ February 22, 2005 Page 2 of •11 Prepared and submitted by: y Ef6dttarlBuilding Director JE /mg Attachments: Council study session staff report, dated 2/8/2005, with Exhibits I and 11 Record Specialist job description Council Stuft\20051record mgmt pos council 2 -22 -05 Agenda Item No. _ February 22, 2005 Page 3 of 11 Attachment 1 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Study Session Agenda Item No. 2 February 8, 2005 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Building Department Jay Elbettar, Building Director, (949) 644 -3282 ielbettar(a)city.newport- beach.ca.us. SUBJECT: Records Management for Plan Check ISSUE: What steps should the City take to improve record management and timelines for plan check for departments involved in development review process? DISCUSSION: Background: Since 1995, the construction activity in Newport Beach has steadily increased (see Exhibit 1). In July 2002, the Building Department led a streamlining effort by all City departments involved in the development review process. This effort had a goal to "improve the plan check and permit issuance process." The measure of success was to perform 90% of the plan checks submitted within four weeks or less. In order to achieve this goal, several techniques and procedural changes were implemented. Concurrent plan review by all the departments involved, versus successive review, was the key to the success of this new program. The concurrent review required a greater number of project documents and plans, which have now overwhelmed our resources and our filing systems. Overseeing the management and flow of the plans amongst all the departments involved in the review process is an important part of the success of our plan check turn - around time goal. If a set is misplaced and does not reach its destination, the review will not be conducted and the project will be delayed. Agenda Item No. _ February 22, 2005 Page 4 of 11 Current Records Management Requirements: To begin the plan check process, between 2 -6 sets of plans (depending on type of project) are submitted to the Building Department. Building then routes the plans to the City departments responsible for plan check concurrently. As plan checks and rechecks are completed by each department, extra plan sets are returned to the Building Department, often one new set for every department doing a plan check for every round of corrections. This means that if six sets were submitted initially, and each department requires corrections to be addressed two times, there will be 18 sets of plans that must be filed and organized by project. In order to issue a permit, all these sets need to be collected and merged with other supporting documents. These added sets of documents presented a challenge to manage, look up, file and retrieve from the outset of our streamlining efforts. This challenge was amplified further when the number of project submittals increased in 2003 and 2004. The number of plan submittals in 2004 was 3,306 compared to 2,352 in 2002 when the streamlining effort was initiated, representing a 41% increase (See Exhibit II). Considering the additional number of duplicate documents required to achieve concurrent reviews, the number of additional plans to manage increased by up to 3500. In addition to the Records Management related to plan check and permitting, Building Department administrative staff is responsible for customer service related to records research. While there is no direct proportional relationship between the number of plan checks submitted and the number of the customers requesting historical information, the greater number of plan checks increases the record management workload in two ways: by having a larger volume of permits and plans to archive and file, and by having a larger number of customers seeking access to the records to assist in plan preparation. This relationship also exists between the number of plan check submittals and auxiliary records requests such as subpoenas and Freedom of Information Act records requests. An additional challenge for the Building Department is the large volume of records that have been turned over to the Building Department for the Newport Coast/Santa Ana Heights /Bay Knolls annexation areas. Processing the annexed records entails complete reorganization of the records, as the County records are received in large boxes loosely organized by tract number. Once the documents are reorganized, administrative staff can send them to the imaging company to be scanned and can archive them in a separate Alchemy database dedicated to Newport Coast, Santa Ana Heights or Bay Knolls. The records transfer began in March 2003, when the Building Department received a number of boxes of records for the Newport Ridge area. The second transfer in December 2003 had the Building Department receiving 15 boxes of Agenda Item No. _ February 22, 2005 Page 5 of 11 plans and grading files. The most recent transfer was on January 31, 2005, the first transfer of files in 13 months. The Building Department expects to receive similar size shipments of permits to complete the previous transfer once every two to three weeks for the next several months. Santa Ana Heights and Bay Knolls records transfers were completed in July 2003. The transfer of annexation records from Newport Coast is an ongoing process that may take several years, with a constant flow of records from the County adding to our Records Management responsibility. Current Records Management Staffing: Currently the supervision of Records Management is divided between the Senior Permit Technician for projects prior to permit issuance and the Administrative Assistant for approved projects. The increase in the number of sets is impacting the Permit Technicians' availability to deliver customer service at the counter, because they have to spend more time organizing and searching for plans. They frequently need to work overtime to organize and file plans returned during the day, so they can be ready for the next day's flow of work. And when a Permit Technician is not able to file or retrieve a needed plan, our Civil Engineers must do that, which takes away from their time for checking plans. Finally, the difficulty in managing all of these records has caused us to lose plans, which is contrary to the customer service goal with which we started our streamlining efforts. Records Management for approved projects is only one part of the Administrative Assistant's varied duties. The increase in the volume of records in the Building Department is impacting the Administrative Assistant duties and delivery of customer service, such as answer, screen and direct telephonic, telecommunications; maintain executive calendars and schedule meetings; investigate and resolve customer complaints; respond to and assist with visiting customers' inquiries; train, coordinate and supervise office clerical staff; prepare a variety of documents for the department; assist in budget preparation; prepare payroll; process accounts payables and credit card statements; process customer refunds; receive and process subpoenas; act as Building Code Board of Appeals secretary; act as record custodian by organizing, managing and overseeing records management. Proposed Solution: Centralizing the flow and management of plans among all the departments involved in the review process would allow the plan check staff in the Building and other departments to do more efficient review and processing of projects, without delays resulting from time spent in locating or organizing plans. To accomplish this, I am suggesting that a new full -time position be dedicated to the organization and management of all Building Department records. This position will create a filing system that is uniform throughout and will provide training to Agenda Item No. _ February 22, 2005 Page 6 of 11 staff. Creation of the Records Specialist position would free up the other staff in the Building Department to provide customer service more effectively, as well as allow for increased customer service by making a person with expertise available to help customers locate permits and plans. Better assistance and supervision of customers also will reduce the potential for record loss. It is intended that the Records Specialist also provide assistance to the Planning Department with posting of sites that are the subject of public hearings, and delivering agenda packets to the Planning Commission. These tasks are currently performed by the Planning Technician, taking away from that person's time at the counter and on plan check assignments. Financial Analysis: The cost for this position will be offset by the elimination of part time or student aide positions in the Building Department and the additional fees from the high volume of construction activities. Conclusion: Staff is requesting that the City Council provide direction for staff to bring a budget amendment for a new Records Specialist position for Council consideration at a regular meeting. Submitted by: Jay Elbettar, Building Director JE /mg Attachments: Exhibit I through II Agenda Item No. _ February 22, 2005 Page 7 of 11 $350 p $300 w _ $250 M N o $200 r. o= $150 v N $100 c 0 $50 $0 EXHIBIT I Construction Valuation 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005* Fiscal Years *Projected Agenda Item No. February 22, 2005 Page 8 of 11 3,500 EXHIBIT II Number of Plan Checks 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005' Calendar Years `Projected 3,000 2,500 p v 2,000 t 1,500 E v 1,000 Z 500 EXHIBIT II Number of Plan Checks 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005' Calendar Years `Projected Agenda Item No. _ February 22, 2005 Page 9 of 11 Attachment 2 CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH RECORDS SPECIALIST DEFINITION: To provide responsible administrative support in the maintenance of electronic and manual records in a centralized system and coordinate the plan flow between various City departments. SUPERVISION RECEIVED AND EXERCISED: Receives direction from the Building Director. EXAMPLES OF ESSENTIAL DUTIES: Duties may include, but are not limited to, the following: Essential Job Duties • Develops and implements manual and computerized systems and procedures for centrally classifying, indexing, filing, retrieving and controlling plans, specifications, maps, drawings, reports, contracts and various other documents; • Files, catalogs and inventories plans in the development review process; Coordinates the flow of plans between City departments during the approval process; • Maintains historical records in computerized system; Creates files and indexes in database for newly scanned records; Coordinates the scanning of historical records with an outside contractor; • Provides assistance to the public, contractors and City departments in researching and retrieving permits, plans and other documents; Maintains the Building microfiche library; • Coordinate, train, and supervise the work of part-time and temporary office personnel; • Posts Public Hearing Notices; Delivers packets to Planning Commission; and • Perform related duties as assigned. Agenda Item No. _ February 22, 2005 Page 10 of 11 QUALIFICATIONS: Knowledge of: Blueprints and construction related documents; Computerized data storage systems such as Alchemy and ACCELA (Permits Plus); Records Management practices and procedures; Applicable laws, rules, regulations, codes and ordinances; and Modern office practices, procedures and equipment. Ability to: Enter data into a computer terminal at a speed necessary for successful job performance; Plan, organize, and prioritize tasks in order to meet deadlines; Frequently stand, reach, lean, twist, grasp, lift, and carry, push, pull, bend and kneel, and sit for prolonged periods of time; Communicate clearly and concisely, both orally and in writing; Appear for work on time; Follow directions from a supervisor; Understand and follow posted work rules and procedures; Accept constructive criticism; and Establish and maintain cooperative working relationship with those contacted in the course of work. This position may be required to work overtime hours as needed. Agenda Item No. _ February 22, 2005 Page 11 of 11 EXPERIENCE AND TRAINING: Experience: Two years of customer service experience including one year of data base software, computerized records, or data filing storage and retrieval systems experience. Prior building or construction experience is desirable. Training: Equivalent to completion of twelfth grade. Completion of some college courses is highly desirable. LICENSE OR CERTIFICATE: Possession of, or ability to obtain, an appropriate, valid California driver's license. Bargaining Group — CEA? Created 08/31/04 City of Newport Beach, NO. BA- 042 BUDGET AMENDMENT 2004 -05 AMOUNT: $17,ss5.zs EFFECT ON BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE: Increase Revenue Estimates Increase in Budgetary Fund Balance Increase Expenditure Appropriations AND X Decrease in Budgetary Fund Balance Transfer Budget Appropriations No effect on Budgetary Fund Balance SOURCE: from existing budget appropriations from additional estimated revenues PX from unappropriated fund balance EXPLANATION: This budget amendment is requested to provide for the following: To increase expenditure appropriations to provide salary and benefits for a new position in the Building Department. ACCOUNTING ENTRY: BUDGETARY FUND BALANCE Fund Account 010 3605 REVENUE ESTIMATES (3601) Fund /Division Account EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS (3603) Division Number 2910 Account Number 7000 Account Number 7210 Account Number 7224 Account Number 7225 Account Number 7290 Account Number 7295 Account Number 7425 Account Number 7438 Account Number 7439 Account Number 7440 Signed: Financial Approval: Signed: '1'7 ^ °� Z. Signed: Description General Fund Fund Balance Descri Description Building - Administration Salaries - Miscellaneous Health /DentalNision Insurance Retiree Insurance Reserve Retiree Insurance Life Insurance Employee Assistance Program Medicare Fringe SRP Contribution PERS EE Contribution PERS ER Contribution Services Director Approval: City Manager City Council Approval: City Clerk Amount Debit Credit $17,395.23 ' Automatic $12,745.60 $2,333.91 $64.62 $284.76 $29.06 $6.78 $184.81 $191.18 $961.27 $593.24 Date Date Date ' COUNCIL AGENDA • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH a "aa " °5 CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Study Session Agenda Item No. 2 February 8, 2005 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Building Department Jay Elbettar, Building Director, (949) 644 -3282 aelbettar a city. newoort- beach. ca. us. SUBJECT: Records Management for Plan Check ISSUE: What steps should the City take to improve record management and timelines for plan check for departments involved in development review process? • DISCUSSION: Background: Since 1995, the construction activity in Newport Beach has steadily increased (see Exhibit 1). In July 2002, the Building Department led a streamlining effort by all City departments involved in the development review process. This effort had a goal to "improve the plan check and permit issuance process." The measure of success was to perform 90% of the plan checks submitted within four weeks or less. In order to achieve this goal, several techniques and procedural changes were implemented. Concurrent plan review by all the departments involved, versus successive review, was the key to the success of this new program. The concurrent review required a greater number of project documents and plans, which have now overwhelmed our resources and our filing systems. Overseeing the management and flow of the plans amongst all the departments involved in the review process is an important part of the success of our plan check turn - around time goal. If a set is misplaced and does not reach its destination, the review will not be conducted and the project will be delayed. Current Records Management Requirements: To begin the plan check process, between 2 -6 sets of plans (depending on type • of project) are submitted to the Building Department. Building then routes the plans to the City departments responsible for plan check concurrently. As plan Study Session Agenda Item No. 2 February 8, 2005 Page 2 of 6 • checks and rechecks are completed by each department, extra plan sets are returned to the Building Department, often one new set for every department doing a plan check for every round of corrections. This means that if six sets were submitted initially, and each department requires corrections to be addressed two times, there will be 18 sets of plans that must be filed and organized by project. In order to issue a permit, all these sets need to be collected and merged with other supporting documents. These added sets of documents presented a challenge to manage, look up, file and retrieve from the outset of our streamlining efforts. This challenge was amplified further when the number of project submittals increased in 2003 and 2004. The number of plan submittals in 2004 was 3,306 compared to 2,352 in 2002 when the streamlining effort was initiated, representing a 41% increase (See Exhibit ll). Considering the additional number of duplicate documents required to achieve concurrent reviews, the number of additional plans to manage increased by up to 3500. In addition to the Records Management related to plan check and permitting, Building Department administrative staff is responsible for customer service related to records research. While there is no direct proportional relationship between the number of plan checks submitted and the number of the customers • requesting historical information, the greater number of plan checks increases the record management workload in two ways: by having a larger volume of permits and plans to archive and file, and by having a larger number of customers seeking access to the records to assist in plan preparation. This relationship also exists between the number of plan check submittals and auxiliary records requests such as subpoenas and Freedom of Information Act records requests. An additional challenge for the Building Department is the large volume of records that have been turned over to the Building Department for the Newport Coast/Santa Ana Heights /Bay Knolls annexation areas. Processing the annexed records entails complete reorganization of the records, as the County records are received in large boxes loosely organized by tract number. Once the documents are reorganized, administrative staff can send them to the imaging company to be scanned and can archive them in a separate Alchemy database dedicated to Newport Coast, Santa Ana Heights or Bay Knolls. The records transfer began in March 2003, when the Building Department received a number of boxes of records for the Newport Ridge area. The second transfer in December 2003 had the Building Department receiving 15 boxes of plans and grading files. The most recent transfer was on January 31, 2005, the first transfer of files in 13 months. The Building Department expects to receive • similar size shipments of permits to complete the previous transfer once every • Study Session Agenda Item No. 2 February 8, 2005 Page 3 of 6 two to three weeks for the next several months. Santa Ana Heights and Bay Knolls records transfers were completed in July 2003. The transfer of annexation records from Newport Coast is an ongoing process that may take several years, with a constant flow of records from the County adding to our Records Management responsibility. Current Records Management Staffing: Currently the supervision of Records Management is divided between the Senior Permit Technician for projects prior to permit issuance and the Administrative Assistant for approved projects. The increase in the number of sets is impacting the Permit Technicians' availability to deliver customer service at the counter, because they have to spend more time organizing and searching for plans. They frequently need to work overtime to organize and file plans returned during the day, so they can be ready for the next day's flow of work. And when a Permit Technician is not able to file or retrieve a needed plan, our Civil Engineers must do that, which takes away from their time for checking plans. Finally, the difficulty in managing all of these records has caused us to lose plans, which is contrary to the customer service goal with which we started our streamlining efforts. • Records Management for approved projects is only one part of the Administrative Assistant's varied duties. The increase in the volume of records in the Building Department is impacting the Administrative Assistant duties and delivery of customer service, such as answer, screen and direct telephonic, telecommunications; maintain executive calendars and schedule meetings; investigate and resolve customer complaints; respond to and assist with visiting customers' inquiries; train, coordinate and supervise office clerical staff; prepare a variety of documents for the department; assist in budget preparation; prepare payroll; process accounts payables and credit card statements; process customer refunds; receive and process subpoenas; act as Building Code Board of Appeals secretary; act as record custodian by organizing, managing and overseeing records management. Proposed Solution: Centralizing the flow and management of plans among all the departments involved in the review process would allow the plan check staff in the Building and other departments to do more efficient review and processing of projects, without delays resulting from time spent in locating or organizing plans. To accomplish this, I am suggesting that a new full -time position be dedicated to the organization and management of all Building Department records. This position • will create a filing system that is uniform throughout and will provide training to staff. Creation of the Records Specialist position would free up the other staff in Study Session Agenda Item No. 2 February 8, 2005 Page 4 of 6 • the Building Department to provide customer service more effectively, as well as allow for increased customer service by making a person with expertise available to help customers locate permits and plans. Better assistance and supervision of customers also will reduce the potential for record loss. It is intended that the Records Specialist also provide assistance to the Planning Department with posting of sites that are the subject of public hearings, and delivering agenda packets to the Planning Commission. These tasks are currently performed by the Planning Technician, taking away from that person's time at the counter and on plan check assignments. Financial Analysis: The cost for this position will be offset by the elimination of part time or student aide positions in the Building Department and the additional fees from the high volume of construction activities. Conclusion: Staff is requesting that the City Council provide direction for staff to bring a budget amendment for a new Records Specialist position for Council • consideration at a regular meeting. Submitted by: .1 A / 1 Jay Elbettar, Building Director JE /mg Attachments: Exhibit I through II Council Stuf \2005\record mgmt pos 2 -3 -05 • Study Session Agenda Item No. 2 February 8, 2005 Page 5 of 6 E $350 p $300 3 _ $250 � _ N o $200 o= $150 Lm N v $100 i 0 $50 $0 \J • EXHIBIT I Construction Valuation 30 $221 $227 0 • $202 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005* Fiscal Years 'Projected Study Session Agenda Item No. 2 February 8, 2005 Page 6 of 6 C M C. O -Y L E v 3 Z 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 • EXHIBIT II Number of Plan Checks 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005' • Calendar Years 'Projected E CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH • CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT • Study Session Item No. SS2 . February . 8, 2005 TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Planning Department Patricia L Temple, Planning Director 949 - 644 -3228; ptemple @city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Plan Check Workload and Turnaround Issues in the Planning Department ISSUE What changes should be made in the Planning Department to address plan check workload and turnaround issues? DISCUSSION For the last 6 months or more, the Planning Department has been unable to meet the City's goal of 4 week turnaround time for initial plan check. In fact, the Department's turnaround time has deteriorated to 8 to 10 weeks. This is proving to be a source of great frustration and anger for our customers, as the Building Department can usually return residential plan checks in 4 weeks or less. The Planning Department's failure to meet the 4 week turnaround results in extra delays because planning - related issues can lead to structural changes, requiring structural revisions to be prepared by the applicant and then rechecked by the Building Department. As has been illustrated by the Building Director in the report regarding the Records Specialist position, there has been a steady increase in plan check submittals over the past decade. The number of projected 2005 submittals is 43.5% higher than actual submittals in 1995. During this time, the Planning Department increased the staff dedicated to plan check by 33 %, from 3 to 4. However, it is not just the increase in the number of plan check submittals, but the increasing complexity of plan checking for zoning compliance, which creates the backlog problem, especially in the older areas of Newport Beach governed by • conventional zoning. The City's conventional zoning regulations have evolved over time Plan Check Workload and Turnaround Issues in the Planning Department February 8, 2005 Page 2 into a combination of very complicated standards combined with a high number of • exceptions and special provisions for unusual situations. These have led to the need to spend much more time on zoning plan check than other communities do, or than we do in our residential Planned Communities (PCs, such as Harbor View Homes, Big Canyon). For example, the PCs govern the size of buildings based on lot coverage as opposed to floor area ratio. This method of regulation frees the plan checker from the detailed and time consuming task of calculating floor area. Another example is that the 32 -foot height limit in most PCs make it easier for architects to design houses that meet their clients' needs within the height limit. With the 24 -foot limit in the older residential areas, architects need to be more creative in designing houses that comply. This results in more complicated plans to check and more pressure on staff to stretch what the Code allows. Because of these differences in zoning regulations across the City, there is a great disparity in the time various types of residential plan checks take. Plan checking a new home or remodel in Corona del Mar, on Balboa Island or the Balboa Peninsula (where development activity is the highest) takes upwards of 4 hours to complete (15t round). This is compared to similar new construction or remodel projects in PC and R -1 -13 areas that seldom take more than '' /z hour. There are many reasons the Planning Department's ability to meet the 4 week turnaround has so deteriorated. They are listed below, with the 3 most significant items listed first: • • The Department has had a vacancy within this work group since August, 2004. While the position has now been refilled, the new employee will require a significant amount of training before prior efficiencies are restored. • Extra time away from routine plan check has resulted from procedural changes which we refer to as the "Goetz Effect." We more closely scrutinize the consistency between topographic surveys submitted with plan sets and the translation of that survey information on to the building elevations and sections. We also field check more often if there are any questions about the existing grades on the plans. • The Telecom Ordinance has established a process and permit requirements which necessitate more analysis and greater detail than before. Prior to the Telecom Ordinance, these were simple building permits. Now, just preparing and processing the permit takes about 2 days, not counting pre - application meetings with applicants, which can be numerous. • Follow -up on Special Circumstance Variances on Goetz projects draws time away from normal plan check. • The Plan Check team receives 80 to 100 phone calls and counter queries per day. This high level of activity is a natural outgrowth of the extremely high level of residential remodeling and reconstruction going on in Newport Beach, and draws time away from plan check. • Plan Check Workload and Turnaround Issues in the Planning Department February 8, 2005 Page 3 • • The complexity of our regulations combined with the pressure to turn plan checks around quickly results in errors, necessitating more time to correct. • Records received from the County of Orange for Santa Ana Heights, Newport Coast and Newport Ridge are not indexed. This requires extra time for retrieval since the records are not easy to find. • We are starting to see the permits for residential remodels, accessory structures, pools, patio covers, etc. from the transferred areas of Newport Coast and Newport Ridge. Because these must be checked pursuant to the County's Zoning Code (requirement of the Annexation and Development Agreement), staff has to learn the provisions and standard administration of the County Code. This requires City staff to call County staff on a regular basis. • With the conversion from folded to rolled plans, it has become more difficult to find the oldest submittals, which mean some plan checks "fall through the cracks." • Filing and handling of plans is done by the plan checkers, cutting into plan check time. • Plan checkers provide staff support to the Zoning Administrator on a rotational basis. This is necessary support because of the increasing workload of the Zoning Administrator, but also provides the opportunity for the plan checkers to develop professionally as planners. • What have we done to address the problem, and can we do more? Despite being reassigned to Advance Planning more than a year ago, the transferred Assistant Planner still spends about 50% of his time plan checking. Also, we have recently retained a contract planner for 20 hours per week just to do plan check. Indexing of records is a primary duty of the department's part time Office Assistant. While this position has been vacant for quite some time, we expect to hire a person by the week of February 7,2005. On Saturday, January 29tH, the department held a "Plan Check Party." Many department members participated, which was designed for the sole purpose of making significant progress on our backlog. The event was very successful, and we plan to do this again on February 12tH As we learned from our plan check party, we can benefit by reviewing plans as they are submitted to identify projects and plan checks of greater and lesser complexity. We can then assign the easier plan checks to the contract planner so that more experienced staff can focus on those more difficult. Also, the ability to work uninterrupted by phone calls and calls to the counter was identified as a great assistance to productivity. As a result, we will be establishing a "sequester schedule" for all plan checkers. This will set established times when they will not be available for phone calls or consultation. Each applicant will be notified at the start of plan check the times their planner will be available to them, so that they can plan their contacts accordingly. Should the City • Council approve the Records Specialist previously discussed by the Building Director, Plan Check Workload and Turnaround Issues in the Planning Department February 8, 2005 Page 4 that position will also be of great assistance to the planners in keeping the plans and • paper flowing efficiently. Even with these changes in place, we do not expect to have fully addressed the problem we have currently, or in the longer term. Solutions to consider The solution to this situation that we have used in the past is to request more staff so the Planning Department can provide the plan check turnaround that the City desires to achieve. Based on the overall workload increases experienced during the last decade, at least one additional full time Assistant Planner for the plan check function is necessary. A second option would be to increase the use of contract planners. However, this option presents some issues. There is not a ready pool of consultants geared to provide this type of service as there is for engineering services. Because our codes are somewhat unique as well as complex, it may be difficult to find contract staff willing to take this type of assignment, and they may not be willing to stay in such an assignment for extended periods of time. Also, contract plan checkers require a high amount of training, which reduces their benefit compared to cost. • Another option that staff would like the City Council to consider is to make significant amendments to the Zoning Code to simplify the residential and commercial development regulations. This would not only improve efficiency, but it also would make the rules more easily understood by the public and the design community, and reduce the ways in which designers attempt to "get around" standards, as well as the potential for plan check errors. The question of the City's rules governing the height of buildings has been discussed in City Council Study Session in the past, and a code amendment has been initiated. Reform of the height limit system is one of the changes most likely to reduce the time it takes to do a plan check, although it is important to stress that the primary purpose of that amendment is to establish a more straightforward and understandable system which is less prone to unequal application and fraud. Should the City Council consider Zoning Code reform to be the preferred solution to the zoning plan check problems, staff would like to develop amendments for Planning Commission and City Council consideration as soon as possible. This would require using a planning consultant to draft the regulatory changes. Should this be the direction the Council takes, we are likely to also need additional contract plan check help in the meantime. • Plan Check Workload and Turnaround Issues in the Planning Department February 8, 2005 Page 5 • ALTERNATIVES Direct staff to return to Council with a budget amendment to: 1. Increase the Professional Services budget in the Planning Department for consultant services, both for a Zoning Code reform project, and additional interim contract plan check staff; or 2. Add an additional Assistant Planner position to the Planning Department; or 3. Add contract planning staff. Environmental Review A discussion of the staffing of the Planning Department is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act, so no environmental review is required. Public Notice No public notice is required for this discussion. However, this item is on the Study Session Agenda, which is posted at City Hall, and is also available on the City's web • site. Fundinq Availability All of the identified options would require an appropriation from the City's General Fund. However, costs can be offset by the increased revenue attributable to the high volume of business. Prepared by: "A(�il iy,6M4� Patricia L. Temple, Plarnning Director •