AD HOC TASK FORCE FINAL REPORT 12-12-13.PDF

Maricopa County
Planning and Development Department
AD HOC TASK FORCE REPORT
With the direction of the Board, an ad hoc task force committee was formed to review the service level and processes of the department. At
the invitation of the County Manager, 26 key stakeholders comprised of business owners, engineers, architects, attorneys and project
managers participated in a kick-off meeting on August 26, 2013. There was active, open discussion of the department’s strengths and
opportunities for improvement.
Based on the discussion items, four (4) subcommittees were formed—Drainage Review, Customer Service/Information Gathering,
Permitting/One Stop Shop and Regulatory Reform. The subcommittee members, along with assigned staff, met on a biweekly basis starting
in September through November 2013. In the first meeting, each group identified particular topics or areas to be explored for improvement.
Key staff was assigned to record and publish minutes and to provide current process information, reference material, organizational history
and any other support needed by the team.
Through the intense efforts of the subcommittee members and staff, a total of 22 improvement initiatives were identified. All of the final
initiatives are supported by staff. Where possible, initiatives have been implemented. For initiatives requiring additional financial resources
or time for operational coordination, a phased implementation schedule has been proposed.
On December 4, 2013, the full task force reconvened to review the work of each subcommittee. Each subcommittee chairperson presented
the background and recommended action items for consensus from the members. Outlined below is the high level summary of those specific
recommended action items being submitted to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors for consideration.
Drainage Review Task Force Subcommittee
Recommendation Proposed Action(s) Status
1. Reduce burdensome a) Allow for a conceptual drainage plan option during land use review / entitlement Staff Concurrence /
requirement of detailed process, i.e., Development Master Plans, Preliminary Plats, Special Use Permits. Target for
drainage studies in early b) Revise applicable checklists and department directive(s). Implementation:
entitlement phases. Dec. 31, 2013
2. Adjust drainage run-off a) After comparing other jurisdictions and conditions, the run-off coefficient was Staff Concurrence /
coefficient to be less adjusted with the condition of a specific amount of free board included. This Target for
restrictive while maintaining would be applicable for subdivisions. No change is deemed necessary on Implementation:
safety standards. commercial properties. Dec. 31, 2013
Page 1 of 6

Maricopa County
Planning and Development Department
Drainage Review Task Force Subcommittee
(Continued)
Recommendation Proposed Action(s) Status
3. Incorporate temporary a) Reviewed examples of how other jurisdictions approach temporary drainage Staff Concurrence /
drainage easements into easements. These easements may be recorded on a separate document rather Target for
subdivision process. than cited on the plat. This will allow for a simpler process after development of Implementation:
the subdivision. The language for this option is being drafted and reviewed. Dec. 31, 2013
Customer Service / Information Gathering Task Force Subcommittee
Recommendation Proposed Action(s) Status
1. Improve accessibility to a) Allow for inspection of files / records at time of request if available. Staff Concurrence /
information / Public Records b) Revise department directive. Implemented
Requests. c) Develop fillable online form.
2. Code Enforcement forms a) Reviewed formats from several other jurisdictions. The forms were revised, which Staff Concurrence /
should be less intimidating included the Code Enforcement Officer’s telephone contact on Notice and Target for
and staff should be more Summons as well as information on how to schedule a customer assistance Implementation:
accessible. meeting if needed. Dec. 31, 2013
3. Enhance and promote a) Expanded customer survey groups & developed targeted questions to capture Staff Concurrence /
customer survey tool. usable feedback on each phase of the process. Pending cost estimate
b) Promote the survey through various avenues – website, emails, forms, etc. Target for
c) Include an option for customers to leave their contact information if they want to Implementation:
have staff follow up with them on questions or concerns. Feb. 28, 2014
4. Incorporate an option for a) Phoenix School of Law to serve as a voluntary mediation option. This is a no cost Staff Concurrence /
mediation services for service also utilized by City of Phoenix. Implemented
complicated, contentious
Code Enforcement cases.
5. A supervisor should be in the a) Quotes to partition and create an office for the Customer Service Manager were Staff Concurrence /
line of sight of the Service received and then approved. The office was constructed and is now staffed for Implemented
Counter in order to address improved support.
questions and diffuse conflict.
Page 2 of 6

Maricopa County
Planning and Development Department
Permitting, Inspections & One Stop Shop Task Force Subcommittee
Recommendation Proposed Action(s) Status
1. Adopt an Annual Facilities a) Reviewed City of Phoenix model, developed process and initiated the Enhanced Staff Concurrence /
Permit Process (AFP) Regulatory Outreach Program (EROP) for necessary changes to the ordinance. Pending EROP
b) Text Amendment TA2013005 initiated. Stakeholder meeting held 10/25/2013. process
2. Reorganization to have a) Develop a work model proposal to be considered by BOS including organizational Under review and
Planning & Development changes, personnel and financial impacts with operational benefits / gains. development
assume lead role over b) Consider interagency agreements where appropriate and how Info Technology, Target:
development areas of the One i.e., Accela Automation accessibility may improve coordination. Jun. 30, 2014
Stop Shop agencies.
3. Expand electronic plan review a) Upgraded version of ProjectDox planned for June 2014. Unclear if this new Staff Concurrence /
to include commercial projects version will support recommended expansion. Under Review
and subdivisions. b) Staff will continue exploring other system solutions. The focus is to consult with
jurisdictions currently using an online digital submittal and review system. Once a
system is identified, the financial implications and options will be considered.
4. Simplify approach to plan a) Management working with staff to adopt a more problem-solving, common sense Staff Concurrence /
review process and improve approach. Implemented –
consistency. b) Whenever possible, the same reviewer should be assigned to projects. Text Amendments
c) Several amendments have been initiated to reduce regulatory burdens: proceeding through
d) TA2013009 – allow for greater flexibility for residential setbacks EROP process
e) TA2013004 – to exempt construction in existence prior to 1/1/2000 from
permitting requirement unless visibly unsafe conditions are present
f) TA2013006 – allow for greater flexibility in meeting parking requirements
g) TA2013010 – revise hillside regulation to remove minor washes from designation.
5. Reduce redundancy and a) Combined review comments from all reviewing disciplines are now being Staff Concurrence /
improve coordination in the provided. Routing will be project specific as not all disciplines need to review Implemented – Note:
intake and distribution each resubmittal each time. A customized resubmittal form listing the exact # of Capability and process for
process. copies has been developed. providing redlines of
b) Pre-Submittal or Pre-Application meetings are now available for complicated construction plans to be
commercial and residential projects, i.e., schools, churches, etc. tested by June 30, 2014
c) Incorporate providing redlines of plans along with review comments.
Page 3 of 6

Maricopa County
Planning and Development Department
Permitting, Inspections & One Stop Shop Task Force Subcommittee
(Continued)
Recommendation Proposed Action(s) Status
6. Host public workshops on the a) Develop ongoing workshops / presentations that target specific groups, i.e., Staff Concurrence /
permitting process. residential, commercial, and online processes. Also use the workshops to share Target date for first
changes in the ordinances and processes session Feb. 2014
7. Develop a process to handle a) Prepared policy and procedures guideline for phasing of subdivision infrastructure Staff Concurrence /
retro-phasing of defunct permits. Implemented
subdivisions to foster
development.
Regulatory Reform Task Force Subcommittee
Recommendation Proposed Action(s) Status
1. To modify the Special Use a) Minimum effective period for SUPs and Comprehensive Plan Amendments will be Staff Concurrence /
Process to make less for 10 years. (Implemented). This is to serve as a stopgap until the option of Staff to present
cumbersome. submitting conceptual plans for rezoning and SUPs is available. proposed language for
b) Applicants should have the option of providing conceptual site plans for rezoning Text Amendment(s) to
and SUP’s submittals for entitlement determination. This action will lessen the the P&Z Commission by
substantial conformance issues that often result in minor or major amendments. July 2014 with
c) SUP’s should be for temporal uses. SUP categories of a permanent nature should recommendation to the
be listed as a permitted or conditional use in certain zoning districts. This would BOS by Jan. 2015
include wireless communication facilities. Staff to review and initiate applicable
text amendments.
2. Incorporate the Subdivision a) During the process of incorporating these regulations into the Zoning Ordinance, Staff Concurrence /
Regulations and there are sections that could be reduced and streamlined for better understanding Staff to present
Administrative Guidelines into and cohesiveness. proposed language for
a single, simplified document. Text Amendment(s) to
the P&Z Commission by
July 2014 with
recommendation to the
BOS by Jan. 2015
Page 4 of 6

Maricopa County
Planning and Development Department
Regulatory Reform Task Force Subcommittee
(Continued)
Recommendation Proposed Action(s) Status
3. To allow for mixed uses within a) Staff to review the Planned Area Development (PAD) Overlay Zoning District Staff Concurrence /
certain districts. against that for other area jurisdictions to gauge any confusion created by Staff to present
differences and potential benefits to amending the ordinance so that the PAD proposed language for
allows for a customized mixed use project. Text Amendment(s) to
b) Staff has initiated text amendment TA2012017 to allow for Mixed Use zoning the P&Z Commission by
districts. July 2014 with
recommendation to the
BOS by Jan. 2015
4. Review Board of Adjustment a) The BOA bylaws to be reviewed. Staff reports to present Summary and Finding Staff Concurrence /
(BOA) processes. Staff to of Facts rather than a Recommendation. Target date for BOA
defer to the BOA for statutory b) Allow the analysis to include the zoning district universe and not just the public meeting workshop
interpretation on applications surrounding lots, i.e., a wash traversing four lots may be a physical hardship for with review and advice
for Variance. all four of the lots. by counsel to be held by
c) Revise Board of Adjustment (BOA) application materials eliminating any July 2014.
elaboration to be consistent with the statutory test and eliminate any elaboration
on qualification of an unnecessary hardship or peculiar condition being created by
the implementation of the Zoning Ordinance.
5. Eliminate redundant Planning a) Staff is to establish two options from which the applicants may choose – Apply Staff Concurrence / If no
Zoning and Drainage plan with a Precise Plan (current process) or with a Conceptual Plan. If entitlement is text amendments are
reviews. granted with a conceptual plan, precise plans will be required for permitting and required, target date for
would then be reviewed by both disciplines. If entitlement is granted with a implementation is July
Precise Plan, only a building safety review would be required at the permitting 2014.
stage.
6. Improve communication and a) Staff will provide tentative recommendation and stipulations and/or conditions at Staff Concurrence /
provide staff the pre-application meeting and with technical review comments. Implemented
recommendations earlier in
the process.
7. Provide applicants with a a) The Planning Information & Application Packets will be revised to include Staff Concurrence /
better understanding of the flowcharts with timeline details or examples to help prepare applicants. Target date Jan. 31,
process and timeframes. 2014
Page 5 of 6

Maricopa County
Planning and Development Department
ACTION REQUESTED
The action requested is to consider the contents, accept the report in whole or in part on behalf of the Ad Hoc Task Force and to provide
guidance and direction to staff.
Page 6 of 6