|
|
|
| Audit Reveals Ways to Fix Planning Woes By Olin Ericksen July 7 --The results of a much-anticipated four-month planning department audit released last week confirms what many already know -- the department, as well as the City’s existing development process, needs a significant overhaul. Compared to similar California cities such as Pasadena, West Hollywood and Palo Alto, the report found that Santa Monica’s Planning Department typically takes weeks and even months to approve projects and permits. The report found the City also suffers from staffing shortages and high turnover and is riddled with inefficiencies. It also suggests there is a contentious relationship between staff and the various City boards and commissions they work with almost daily. “City staff, Council members, Planning Commission members and process users have had concerns about the efficiency and effectiveness… despite enhanced staffing and an initial process redesign within the past several years,” according to a City information item summarizing the report. Matrix Consulting Group, the firm hired by the City to conduct the audit, proposed a host of recommendations to fix the problems, including streamlining the permit process, reorganizing staff duties, creating a handful of new positions and holding a “retreat” to smooth the rough rapport between staff and governing bodies. Topping the list, the report calls on the Planning Commission and Architectural Review Board to relinquish some of their oversight in the permit process. Under the recommendations, projects larger than 25,000 square feet would be reviewed by the Planning Commission, those between 10,000 and 25,000 square feet by the Architectural Review Board and any project under 10,000 square feet by planning staff. The Planning Commission, ARB and some City Council members recently rejected a staff proposal to that would allow projects smaller than 30,000 square feet, or 60,000 if the project is primarily residential, to be administratively approved without a public hearing. Opponents worried that raising the current “design threshold” from 7,500
square feet, or 15,000 for residential projects, would sacrifice public
input for faster permit approval. The power struggles over raising the threshold underlines the rift between staff and those who sit on the various governing bodies. Indeed, questionnaires filled out by 34 planning department employees show that nearly 50 percent disagreed with the statement that “staff involved in the development process had a good working and professional relationship with the Planning Commission.” On the other hand, only three disagreed they had a good working relationship with ARB, though 13 staffers declined to respond. One anonymous staff person suggested in a comments section that planning commissioners “not hold a grudge if (they) disagree with a staff member.” Another asked that they “not deride or make light of staff in public.” In order to mend fences, Matrix suggests that the governing bodies and senior staff attend a retreat to “define the relationship between Planning Commission and the staff of the Planning Division. “Without discussing the expectations each has of each other,” the report continued, “misunderstandings can result. This, in turn, can lead to publicly aired disagreements that reflects poorly on the City as a whole.” Other recommendations for the Planning Commission include reducing the length of meetings by strengthening the role of the chair, adding special sessions, shifting public comment times, passing certain items over to the ARB and not considering new items after 11 p.m. The report suggests that the Planning Department, and the Planning Division in particular, institute several changes to function more efficiently, including dedicating four staff members to long-term planning if the permit process is streamlined, or hiring four new planners if the process is not. Such a change is aimed at making the job more satisfying for planners, many of whom complained in the report that their “talents and intellect” are being wasted on simple permit checking. “We spend so much time processing unnecessary paper work that the real work, such as policy projects, imaginative solutions, gets relegated to the corners of our time, or to our supervisors,” wrote one staff member. “It’s boring and unrewarding.” According to the report, “81 percent of staff hours is dedicated to customer service, administrative permits, plan check and meeting and presentations” to the boards and council. One planner wrote: “I think that the overwhelming workload, coupled with the unimaginative nature of the majority of the work and the hierarchical management style of the team structuring and lack of promotional opportunities, make it hard to justify staying here for the long term.” “The result of job turn over for those who decide to stick it out makes it even more stressful and demoralizing,” the planner added. Matrix recommends hiring additional staff, including creating new positions, as well as consultants, to do everything from conducting over-the-the counter permit and plan checks to coordinating work between departments. In addition, a limited-term Project Manager would be hired to oversee the transition to new work methods. Some job cuts may be instituted as well if the recommendations are adopted by City Council. A final recommendation outlines a comprehensive approach to updating the Zoning, Land Use and Circulation Elements of the City’s General Plan. Matrix suggests holding off on passing any further interim ordinances until those elements have been tackled. The council has set aside $500,000 to institute the changes recommended by Matrix. An update on the projected costs will be provided around September or October. The council will hold a joint session with the Planning Commission next week to discuss the hiring and policy recommendations. The complete report can be found on the City’s website. |
Copyright 1999-2008 surfsantamonica.com. All Rights Reserved. |