HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Department Fiscal Year 2011 First Quarter Report.pdf Commission Memorandum
REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Commission
FROM: Tim McHarg, Director of Planning and Community Development
Anna Rosenberry, Finance Director
Chris Kukulski, City Manager
SUBJECT: Planning Department 1st Quarter FY11 (July 1, 2010 – September .30,
2010) Budget Update
MEETING DATE: October 25, 2010
AGENDA ITEM TYPE: Action
RECOMMENDATION: Move forward with current Planning Department staff levels per
FY11 Adopted Budget; continue to monitor revenue situation closely.
BACKGROUND: Because of the anticipated difficulty estimating current planning
workloads (land use and subdivision applications) and resulting fee revenues in FY11, we
committed to make quarterly decisions regarding staffing levels and operating costs in the
department.
Planning Department highlights for the First Quarter of FY11 are summarized below:
1. Monthly Planning Fee Revenues. The Department budget for FY11 projected
planning fee revenues of $10,500 per month. The FY11 projected revenue figure
represents a reduction of 33% from the FY10 monthly revenue target of $14,000.
First Quarter FY11 Planning Fee Revenues were as follows:
Month Fee Revenue
July 2010 $27,568.10
August 2010 $17,236.80
September 2010 $13,095.25
1st Quarter FY11 Total Fee Revenues $57,900.15
Average Per Month $19,300.05
The First Quarter FY11 monthly average of $19,300 exceeds the $10,500 target for
monthly revenues. For the quarter as a whole, revenues surpassed the projected level
by nearly 84%.
174
2. Budget Expenditures: The Department’s FY11 budget is approved for an average
of $61,402 in monthly expenditures, or $736,828 annually. The FY11 expenditure
level represents a reduction of 6% from the annual expenditure $784,287 for FY10.
Actual spending through August 2010 averaged $60,757 per month, or approximately
1% under budget.
3. Applications Received: The following table lists the planning applications that were
received each month of this quarter. In the 1st Quarter of FY11, the Department
averaged 59 project applications and 35 sign permit applications per month.
Application Type Jul-10 Aug-10 Sep-10
Q1 FY11
Total
Percent of
Total
Pre-Application 1 1 1%
Prelim. Plat 1 1 1%
Final Plat 2 1 3 0%
Sub. Exempt. 2 1 3 2%
Flood Plain 0 2%
BOA (COA-DEV) 1 1 1%
Admin. Appeals 2 2 1%
Master Plan Amend 0 0%
UDO Amend 0 0%
CUP 1 2 1 4 2%
ZMA 2 1 2 5 3%
Conservation Update 0 0%
Entryway Update 0 0%
PUD 0 0%
PUD Final 0 0%
Re-use 3 3 1 7 4%
Annexation 0 0%
Prel. Site Plan 2 2 2 6 3%
Master Site Plan 1 1 2 1%
Final Site Plan 1 1 1%
Mods to FSP 4 4 7 15 8%
Informal 2 1 1 4 2%
STUP 6 1 1 8 5%
COA 27 43 35 105 59%
Improvements Agreement 2 2 1%
Variance 0 0%
Comp. Sign Plan 0 0%
Condo Conversion 1 3 4 2%
Code Enforcement 3 3 2%
Monthly Totals 56 65 56 177 100%
Signs 42 32 31 105
175
4. Application Trends: As illustrated in the chart below, the volume of project
applications in the 1st Quarter of FY11 compares favorably both to the 4th Quarter of
FY10 and to the 1st Quarters of FY10, FY09, and FY08.
(Please note: Application volumes aggregated by quarter are not available prior to
Q1 of FY08, which would allow comparisons to pre-recession levels.)
While the trend of increased volumes of project applications is a very positive
indicator, it does come with a caveat. The majority (59%) of project applications in
the 1st Quarter of FY11 were COAs, many of which were the result of hail damage.
In the Conservation and Entryway Corridor Overlay Districts, the UDO does not
require a COA for repair or maintenance, unless materials, size or architectural style
is being changed. So the vast majority of repair to hail damaged properties did not
require a COA. However, because many property owners elected to take the
opportunity to modify or improve hail damaged buildings instead of simply repairing
them as they were, a significant volume of COAs were processed for hail damaged
structures. This resulted in a one-time increase in the number of COA applications,
which has somewhat skewed the total number project applications.
With that being said, this has only strengthened the trend of increasing project
application volumes, which has been established for several quarters at this point in
time. Staff is hopeful that this trend is sustainable moving forward, and we remain
open to ideas to allow the Department to enhance and stabilize the local economic
recovery.
5. Accomplishments and Milestones: The primary focus of the Department in the 1st
Quarter was current planning review of project applications. This was not limited to
COAs associated with hail damaged structures. The range of applications to which
the Department allocated significant staff resources included several relatively large
scale projects, specifically:
· Petra Academy;
· Kohl’s;
· Billion Auto Plaza;
176
· Safeway;
· Alpine Orthopedics; and,
· Residential Emphasis Mixed Use District zoning regulations.
A more detailed discussion of completed tasks will be provided in the Quarterly
Update to the Commission’s Work Plan. However, the highlights from the 1st
Quarter are summarized as follows:
· Finalized locational regulations for medical marijuana dispensaries;
· Supported TIF Boards to implement district plans;
· Continued process to amend sign code;
· Initiated work with Planning Board to evaluate and improve the project review
process;
· Organized a round-table discussion group of local development professionals
(developers, builders, lenders, realtors, etc.) to identify and evaluate opportunities
to revise UDO to work through distressed subdivisions;
· Initiated implementation of Workforce Housing Ordinance; and,
· Evaluated alternatives for establishment of a demolition by neglect policy.
6. Workload for Next Quarter: Given the typical seasonal reduction in project
applications in the upcoming 2nd and 3rd Quarters, the Department will reallocate a
significant additional amount of staff resources to long range planning efforts and,
specifically, the Commission’s Work Plan.
Highlights of anticipated work items in the upcoming quarter include the following:
· Implement Commission Work Plan items:
o Complete revisions to Sign Code
o Support Planning Board evaluation of existing review processes:
§ Site Plan/DRC/DRB Review
§ Subdivision Review
§ Incentives for infill development
o Increase densities in CBD and B-3 District
· Continue support of TIF Boards to implement district plans
· Initiate an update to Impact Fee Studies
· Complete evaluation of Workforce Housing Ordinance
· Initiate evaluation of Conservation Overlay District and COA process
· Evaluate opportunities for formalizing and expanding over the counter approvals
in partnership with the Building Division
FISCAL EFFECTS: FY11 total expenditures are running slightly under budget, and
application fee revenues are well ahead of projected levels in the budget. We are certain that we
will continue to monitor and control expenditures at or below levels projected in the budget.
We are hopeful that the positive trends in revenues will continue into the initial portions of the
2nd Quarter. However, it is very likely that application volumes will decrease from those seen in
the 1st Quarter, based on the seasonality associated with permitting and construction activity.
ALTERNATIVES: As suggested by the City Commission.
Report Compiled: October 13, 2010
177