HomeMy WebLinkAbout05-21-2015 C5 JohnsonRECEIVED
MAY 21 2013
c o u n c i t M O RA y o ITY CLERK
May 20, 2013
TO: City Council
FROM: Derek Johnson, Community Development Director
VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manager
i
AGENDA
CORRESPONDENCE
Date 5 1 � item #_L!S_
SUBJECT: Agenda Item C5 — Requests for Proposals (RFP) for Building and Planning Services
This Council Correspondence file addresses a request for clarification regarding the proposed
Request for Proposals for Building and Planning Services.
Question 1: Will CDD still require large projects (i.e. Chevron) to cover a portion of a staff
person's salary to facilitate an EIR and other planning services? Will this consulting -firm
RFP process replace that requirement? If it does not replace that requirement, how will it be
determined which of the two strategies will be applied?
In the case of Chevron, this is a unique project in which entitlements are being processed concurrent
with the consideration of a Development Agreement. The complexity of the project demanded a
significant amount of dedicated planner time (i.e. nearly 0.5 FTE) and Chevron was agreeable to
fund the costs to dedicate the resource to manage the project and all of the planning components
that are interrelated with the Development Agreement.
For this particular project, the time and effort to coordinate this complex project in combination
with the Development Agreement created planning work exceeding what the City would normally
recover in standard fees to review the application, coordinate the preparation of the EIR, and
provide complex project management services. This is not a standard requirement, but one that
Chevron and the City felt could facilitate the timely review and coordination of this multifaceted
project.
Consultants will only be used when workload exceeds available City staff resources and only when
funds are available as recommended in item C7.
Question 2: This process successfully reduced the time element for SESLOC, please note the
funding of this previous work and fees charged, and consultant fees?
Revenues received from planning and building applications are deposited into revenue accounts.
Currently, fees which are paid and deposited into revenue accounts are not budgeted or readily
available in expense accounts to retain outside consulting services.
On the expenditure side, the approved budget for the 2012 -2013 Fiscal Year includes $9,000 to
retain outside plan check services. The City recently managed the building plan review for
SESLOC using Willdan whom specializes in building plan check services and frequently
supplements cities and counties throughout the state when plan check workloads exceed municipal
C -5 Council Correspondence - Planning and Building RFP Page 2
resources. Willdan charged the City 55% ($10,207.43) of the standard plan check fee of
$18,558.96. The remaining 45% ($8,351.53) was retained for inspections and supervision of the
consultant's work. No other additional fees were charged to receive this service.
The $9,000 of funding allocated by the City Council was augmented by other Community
Development Funds that were not going to be spent in the current fiscal year to ensure that the
review of the extensive building plans would be timely processed.
The purpose of item C -7 is to provide a funding source to hire outside resources when permit
activity exceeds available staff resources with revenues that are in excess of budgeted revenues.
These two RFP's will provide two on -call consultants to process building and planning applications
during peak permit activity with applicant generated revenue.
How will the costs of bringing consultants up to speed on appreciating and understanding our
General Plan be factored in? Will follow -up, supervision of same be provided in early
assignments?
The review of planning applications as compared to building applications is a more customized area
of plan check services. In comparison, the building code is generally uniform throughout the state,
with exception of limited amendments to account for unique local topographic, geological, or
climatological conditions. The City of San Luis Obispo has adopted such amendments and building
plan review consultants are required to encompass any amended building codes into their plan
review.
In contrast, the review for planning applications is based on the adopted General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance which is unique to the City of San Luis Obispo and reflects the community's values and
adopted development standards. There are local land use firms (i.e. PMC, Rincon, and Sage
Consulting) whom are familiar with the City's policies and standards as a result of preparing
environmental documents for projects. These firms are required to become familiar with the City's
policies and development standards. Rincon Consulting currently acts as the contract planner for
the City of Guadalupe and provides both the review of development applications and long range
planning services.
The Community Development Department will likely limit consultant review of planning
applications to larger projects. This is because there is generally a clear beginning and end of the
review process and their effort would focus on the unique issues associated with a project rather
than smaller projects which demand a broader understanding the City's land use policies. The
Deputy Director for Development Review Division would be responsible for supervising and
ensuring that the review of projects meets adopted City land use policies and standards.
Consultants reviewing building plans would be supervised by the Chief Building Official.
1 The SESLOC plan set included over 200 sheets of structural details and plans.
C -5 Council Correspondence - Planning and Building RFP Page 3
The fact that purchase orders will be issued and billed to the project accounts seems to
indicate the business /developer picks up the consultant costs. Is that in addition to other
standard SLO City planning fees?
No additional fees would be required should the City determine that a consultant is needed to
review a building or planning application and achieve established permit processing times.
Applicants will pay the same fee as if City staff was reviewing or processing an application.
Consultants would be paid out of the account proposed under item C -7 and consultants would only
be used when funds are available. It is expected that consultant proposals will be paid a percentage
(e.g. 55% of City fee) of the building and /or planning fee as was the case with the review of the
SESLOC application, the remaining portion of the fee will be retained for inspection and
supervision.
Please contact Derek Johnson at 805- 781 -7187 should there be any questions.
Ocouncil agenda reports \2013\2013- 05- 21 \authorize issuance of rfp on -call building - planning plan check Qohnson- lease) \council correspondence. docx