February 15, 2001
| Members Present
John Augustine Ben Barcon Gary L. Coley Mike Colletto Stephen Elssmann Peter Hemingway David Kelly Gary Morris Herman Orcutt Judy Pavsek Steve Speer Darrell Wilson
Members Absent |
Staff and Interested Parties
Shawn Billman, City of Phoenix, DSD Carole Borrego,City of Phoenix, DSD Stuart Casey, City of Phoenix, DSD Erynn Crowley, City of Phoenix, NSD Rick Doell, City of Phoenix, DSD Frank Dolasinski, City of Phoenix, DSD Lynn Favour, City of Phoenix, DSD Carole Fitz, City of Phoenix, DSD Ryan Gregory, City of Phoenix, CED Chris Hartye, City of Phoenix, Mayor's Office Lanny McMahill, City of Phoenix, DSD Larry Litchfield, Development Services Kelly O'Neal, City of Phoenix, DSD Alan Olson, City of Phoenix, DSD John Parks, City of Phoenix, DSD John Verdugo, City of Phoenix, Planning John Watson, City of Phoenix, Fire Jon Wendt, City of Phoenix, DSD
Rus Brock, Home Builders Assoc. of Central Arizona |
Gary Coley, DAB Chairperson, convened the meeting at 3:08 p.m.
MINUTES OF JANUARY 18, 2001:
MOTION was made by Herman Orcutt, seconded by Ben Barcon, to approve the meeting minutes of January 18, 2001, as amended. Motion carried unanimously.
REQUEST FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS:
Mr. Coley again urged the members to speak with their constituency for any items that need to be brought before the Board. Mr. Stephen Elssmann asked the Board to explore ways to communicate with builders and developers that interact with the City on a daily basis. He was not sure what approach should be taken, but suggested some type of survey or letter.
Mr. Coley advised that the Board did send out a survey to a listing of associations, which included contractors, engineers and architects. He also mentioned the involvement of Rus Brock, representing the Home Builders Association, as a good example of effective communication in that arena. Mr. Coley suggested that perhaps something could be made available at the City's permit counters that would educate customers on the Development Advisory Board and its mission.
Ms. Carole Fitz advised that Development Services is currently in the process of developing a newsletter designed to keep the development community updated on department activities and changes. She suggested that it could provide a venue for informing customers of the Development Advisory Board and its goal of serving as a resource for development industry concerns. Mr. Coley advised he has also made contact with the director of the Valley Partnership regarding the Board and encouraged their involvement as well.
DISCUSSION OF SUBCOMMITTEE REPORTS:
Fiscal Subcommittee:
Mr. Herman Orcutt advised that the subcommittee did not meet, but that he had an opportunity to meet with Manuel Davila, who advised him that Jamie Fox, Rate Analyst, is no longer with Development Services. Ms. Fox was involved in the restructuring of Development Services fee schedule. Mr. Orcutt advised that recruitment for the position is underway, but he expressed concern that the planned July 1, 2001 target date for the fee review/restructuring may not be met.
Process and Procedures:
Mr. Ben Barcon reported that the subcommittee met on February 9. Discussion included communication between the Development Services Department and the Planning Department. The two departments held a workshop out of which several subcommittees were formed to review the areas of enforcement, zoning ordinances, automation, community education, zoning stipulations, and planned community development. Mr. Barcon advised that the subcommittee requested staff to keep them informed on the progress of these groups.
Mr. Barcon stated that the timing and process for water meter sets was also discussed. This primarily affects large subdivision developers. The City currently uses the submittal of the as-built documents as a prerequisite for release of water meters. The City (Water Department) currently allows up to 10% of the water meters to be released prior to submittal of the as-builts. Representatives from Ryland Homes and Brown Family Communities, as well as staff from the Water Department were present at the meeting. Input was received from both contractors and City staff. Mr. Barcon advised this would be an ongoing agenda item in order to bring forward some recommendations to the DAB.
Hillside Subcommittee:
No attending members of the subcommittee were available to report.
Black Canyon Corridor Design Guidelines Ad Hoc Subcommittee:
Mr. Darrell Wilson advised that the subcommittee has not met since December, but a meeting is scheduled for next week and he will report at the next DAB meeting.
Ad Hoc Planned Community District Subcommittee:
No attending members of the subcommittee were available to report. Mr. Frank Dolasinski advised that the subcommittee did meet and reviewed the initial draft of the Planned Community Development (PCD) Text Amendment. Mr. Dolasinski advised that staff is working on additional revisions to the draft that will be brought to the subcommittee at a future date. The tentative date for a hearing with the Planning Commission has been pushed back to April 11, 2001.
Technical Subcommittee
Mr. Mike Colletto reported the subcommittee met February 14 and discussed the accessibility issues regarding single-family residences. At a prior meeting, December 18, a motion was made by the Home Builders and passed by the subcommittee proposing that requirements on accessibility not be mandatory to all single-family homes, but that a no-step entry and route be demonstrated in at least one of the models provided in a subdivision. The intent is to amend the ordinance to include this requirement along with definitions of "no-step" and "route."Mr. Barcon asked when this item would come before the Board for review and recommendation? Mr. Coley advised that the language was being clarified and subsequently, a public hearing would need to be scheduled. Mr. Coley advised that the item should be brought forward at the next Board meeting.
Mr. Peter Hemingway added it was discussed that the builders would advertise this as an option in the home. He asked how that would be addressed, in order to ensure that builders complied? Mr. Rus Brock advised that item was not specifically discussed at the most recent meeting and he did not know exactly how that would be handled. He added that it was something that builders would want to point out and make visible to customers. Mr. Brock emphasized that the Home Builders see this as a conscious choice by buyers. A choice that could not be made if buyers are not made aware of the "no step" option. He indicated that the details of how they would go about marketing these options have not yet been discussed. Mr. Coley would like to have some of those items clarified before the item comes back to the Board for approval.
Mr. Hemingway reiterated that he just wants to ensure that people are aware of the modifications and their availability. Mr. Barcon asked about the smaller builder/developers that do not have model homes. Would there be requirements for those builders to advertise the availability of such options? Mr. Coley stated that those details would have to be a part of the development of the language for the code change. Mr. Rick Doell advised that he is working on the language, but that the current provision being discussed is for model homes only. Any additional provisions would have to be addressed by the subcommittee.
Mr. Barcon asked for clarification on whether the accessible route would be from the garage to the house or from the sidewalk to the house? Mr. Doell responded that it was still under discussion as to whether the route would be from the public way into the house or from the arrival point (car); or in the case of the model home, from the sales office to the first model home. The language still needs to be firmed up before it can be brought to the Board.
Mr. Barcon asked when this item would come before the Board for review and recommendation? Mr. Coley advised that the language was being clarified and subsequently, a public hearing would need to be scheduled. Mr. Coley advised that the item should be brought forward at the next Board meeting.
Mr. Peter Hemingway added it was discussed that the builders would advertise this as an option in the home. He asked how that would be addressed, in order to ensure that builders complied? Mr. Rus Brock advised that item was not specifically discussed at the most recent meeting and he did not know exactly how that would be handled. He added that it was something that builders would want to point out and make visible to customers. Mr. Brock emphasized that the Home Builders see this as a conscious choice by buyers. A choice that could not be made if buyers are not made aware of the "no step" option. He indicated that the details of how they would go about marketing these options have not yet been discussed. Mr. Coley would like to have some of those items clarified before the item comes back to the Board for approval.
Mr. Hemingway reiterated that he just wants to ensure that people are aware of the modifications and their availability. Mr. Barcon asked about the smaller builder/developers that do not have model homes. Would there be requirements for those builders to advertise the availability of such options? Mr. Coley stated that those details would have to be a part of the development of the language for the code change. Mr. Rick Doell advised that he is working on the language, but that the current provision being discussed is for model homes only. Any additional provisions would have to be addressed by the subcommittee.
Mr. Barcon asked for clarification on whether the accessible route would be from the garage to the house or from the sidewalk to the house? Mr. Doell responded that it was still under discussion as to whether the route would be from the public way into the house or from the arrival point (car); or in the case of the model home, from the sales office to the first model home. The language still needs to be firmed up before it can be brought to the Board.
DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION ON PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT:
Mr. Dolasinski reiterated that the draft provided to the Board is still being revised and evaluated. Mr. Coley advised the Board to direct any questions or concerns to either Mr. Dolasinski or Ms. Julie Stiak.
DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION OF SEMI-ANNUAL DEPARTMENT REPORTING - NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES (NSD):
Ms. Erynn Crowley, Deputy Director (Preservation Division), provided an overview of the Neighborhood Services Department and the areas of overlap with the Development Services Department. NSD interacts with DSD in many areas including code enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance and Mobile Vending regulations as they involve development-related issues. The departments also interact on issues with problem rental properties involving safety and building code violations. Neighborhood Services also works with DSD on various revitalization, infill and redevelopment projects coordinating issues such as site requirements, code requirements and permitting.
Mr. Elssmann asked how aggressive Neighborhood Services was in pursuing federal monies or low interest loans for revitalization. Ms. Crowley advised that the largest portion included in their grants monitoring is the Community Development Block Program (CDBG) which is administered by NSD. In addition, they have obtained Need and Seed Grants geared toward crime and blight elimination and have worked with the City Prosecutor's Office to obtain community prosecution grants to deal with crime and blight abatement. Ms. Crowley confirmed that NSD does actively pursue federal grant dollars that are available for revitalization efforts.
DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION ON ASSIGNMENT OF SUGGESTED TOPICS FROM JANUARY 9 BOARD PLANNING SESSION TO APPROPRIATE DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY BOARD SUBCOMMITTEE:
DAB Subcommittees were to review the listing of suggested topics and report back to the Board on their evaluation of the assignments and their priority. Mr. Ben Barcon advised that the Process and Procedures Committee has reviewed the listing of items suggested for the subcommittee. He advised that the assignments as listed were accepted by the subcommittee with the exception of one item on which they needed further clarification. The five items assigned were: water meter sets, consistent application of DSD requirements, create process to codify policies that are not clearly enumerated, expedite plan review and increase implementation of conditional permits.
Mr. Barcon asked for further clarification on the item "consistent application of DSD requirements." The subcommittee interpreted this as consistent requirements by plan reviewers, companies contracted for plan review, and consistency between the teams. Mr. Hemingway advised that he raised this issue at the Planning Session and indicated his focus was the consistency of plan review between the teams.
Mr. Coley advised that this item would be continued to the next meeting and asked that the subcommittees review and prioritize the item listings and asked the subcommittee chairs to report back at the next meeting. Mr. Coley asked that it be added as an agenda item for the March 15 meeting.
DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION ON STATUS OF 1999 NEC ORDINANCE ADOPTION:
Mr. Lanny McMahill, Electrical Inspections Supervisor, reported that the five amendments to the 1999 NEC recommended by the Valley-wide Committee, the Ad Hoc Electrical Subcommittee and the DAB were adopted by Phoenix City Council and would be effective April 1, 2001. Mr. McMahill expressed his appreciation for the Board's participation in the code adoption process.
Mr. Coley asked if we had a status on what other jurisdictions have adopted the amendments? Mr. Alan Olson advised that Cave Creek is ready to adopt the amendments and several other jurisdictions are currently discussing adoption. Mr. Olson advised that he felt it was just a matter of time until the other jurisdictions adopt the amendments.
DISCUSSION/POSSIBLE ACTION ON UPDATE OF SMART PERMITTING EFFORTS:
Ms. Shawn Billman, Management Assistant II, provided a background and update on the Smart Permitting efforts made by the City. A Smart Permitting Forum formed with surrounding Valley jurisdictions has met and developed a list of items which they divided into three different categories: uniformity of the permitting process, codes and standards implementation and technology issues. In addition, a separate MIS Users Group made up of computer technology representatives from the various jurisdictions was formed to address specific technology issues.
At the second meeting of the Forum, the jurisdictions reported back their top five priorities from those three categories. That list included: common application and permit process for utility providers, green building, fee comparison, electronic plan review, GIS parcel database coordination with Maricopa County, standardized permit applications, electronic utility clearances and contractor licensing database. A lead jurisdiction was assigned to each of these five items, each will form a committee to address their issue and develop a plan of action. The City of Phoenix is lead jurisdiction on a common application and permit process for utility providers and electronic utility clearances.
Ms. Billman advised that the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) has advised the City that they feel MAG should be leading these efforts. The City has responded that at the urging of our City Manager, they have already been working with the various jurisdictions and have developed an agenda of items they are focused on and are prepared to move forward. Ms. Billman advised that she will continue to provide updates on the progress of the forum.
Mr. Barcon inquired if input was being provided on the issues by other involved parties, i.e., the utility providers? Ms. Billman advised that a great deal of input has been received from these groups and input will continue to be solicited from these agencies and the public. Mr. Kenny Harris advised that the groups are being charged with expanding themselves to include the appropriate representatives in each of their respective areas.
Mr. Barcon asked if the Board had any comments after reviewing the materials, who should they send those comments to? Ms. Billman advised that comments could be forwarded to her at her city e-mail address sbillman@ci.phoenix.az.us.
Mr. Orcutt stated that that he feels that standardization of the codes, as has been done with the electrical code, would be a major improvement for the Valley as well as the County. Ms. Pavsek asked if a timeline or target date for these items had been established? Mr. Olson advised that the items would probably be handled in phases. Some items can be accomplished rapidly, while other issues such as electronic plan review are much more complicated and involve a more extended timeframe.
Mr. Gary Morris advised that he will be able to provide an update to the Board on any progress relating to the standardization of the Fire Code with the State Fire Marshal's Office after the March meeting of the Metro Fire Marshals.
DISCUSSION/INFORMATION ON OVERVIEW OF DSD PHYSICAL RECONFIGURATION TO TEAM LAYOUT:
Mr. Alan Olson provided the Board with a brief overview of the physical reconfigurations taking place in Development Services. Layout of staff cubicles into a team orientation and the consolidation of those teams on the third floor has been completed. Floor plans of the second and third floors were provided to the Board.
DISCUSSION/PRESENTATION OF PUBLIC SEMINARS PLANNED FOR 2001:
Ms. Melanie Payne, DSD Curriculum and Training Coordinator, briefed the Board on planned public awareness training covering such subjects as "How to Use the Internet" (in order to access plan review information), Central Log-In, and use of the universal permit application form. Mr. Ben Barcon asked when the seminars would be taking place; how are we planning on publicizing; and what size groups were planned? Ms. Payne responded that the seminars would be scheduled for no more than two hours. The mailing list will probably be pulled from the department's customer database, as well as posting customer notices at our Development Center counters. Class size would depend on the customer response and meeting room availability. Scheduling for these seminars is projected for mid-summer to fall. Ms. Payne invited the Board to contact her at her e-mail address mpayne1@ci.phoenix.az.us with any suggestions or input on training topics.
DISCUSSION/INFORMATION ON THE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE CENTER (DAC):
Mr. Stuart Casey updated the Board on the Development Assistance Center. The Center was designed to provide the new user or infrequent customer with assistance in navigating the development process and assist the Development Center by providing some specialty services such as permit extensions, Mobile Vendor information and permits, etc.
Mr. Casey covered statistics detailing customer counts for the DAC since its summer opening. The DAC has helped take some of the load off the Development Center Counter 4 (Residential), allowing that staff to spend more time on plan review. Mr. Casey distributed a copy of the newly developed universal application form, which will be put into place in the next week.
Mr. John Augustine stated that he hopes with the success of the Development Assistance Center that plans for outstation locations would be planned for the future. Mr. Casey advised that the DAC is serving as a pilot program for the planned development of other off-site locations.
CALL TO PUBLIC (NO BOARD DISCUSSION):
None
ADJOURNMENT:
MOTION was made by Herman Orcutt, seconded by Judy Pavsek, to adjourn the February 15, 2001 DAB meeting. Motion carried unanimously.
Session adjourned at 4:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Larry Litchfield, PE
Deputy Director, Building Official
Minutes Prepared by:
Carole Fitz, Administrative Assistant I
| c: |
Board Member Mayor Skip Rimsza City Council Members Mr. Fairbanks City Clerk Mr. Harris Mr. Olson Mr. Washington Mr. Wendt Mr. Goodhue Mr. Litchfield |
Mr. Dolasinski Mr. Davila Ms. McKinley Ms. Beckley Mr. Doell Mr. Parks Mr. Mushtaq Mr. Thurman Mr. Kienow Mr. Taschner Mr. Bunyard |
Ms. Reed Mr. Mundy Mr. Fleming Mr. Horn Ms. Wilson Ms. Fitz |
Last Modified on 06/28/2001 11:38:33