The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 12141999 - D6 Contra Costa Cot TO. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS111"l '" FROM. CARLOS BALTODANO, DIRECTOR BUILDING INSPECTION DENNIS BARRY, DIRECTOR COMMUNITY DEVEL.OPME ~ MIKE WALFORD, DIRE OR PUBLIC WORKS ,. DATE. December 14, 1999 r� � SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF PLANS TO IMPROVE EFFICIENCY OF THE APPLICATION PERMIT CENTER SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATIONS)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS 1. NOTE that the Application and Permit Center {APC} is popular with applicants and presently works well; 2. EXPAND on the success of the APC by consolidating and adding additional functions in the same location; 3. RECOGNIZE that this will consolidate functions and provide a better level of service for the public; 4. ACCEPT the cost estimate of $112,512 of which $77,860 Will amortized over the remaining years of the building—for an estimated cost of$19,415 per year; 5. FIND that this project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as a Class 1 a Exemption; 6. APPROVE plans to improve the efficiency and functionality; 7. DIRECT staff to obtain a bid package to proceed With the work; and 8. Direct staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the County Clerk. FISCAL IMPACT Cost covered by Development fees. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: X YES SIGNATURE RE MMENC3A'rION OF CO7NTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURES : x ACTION OF BOARD ON December 14,1599 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDEDe*4C- t VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREIN CERTIFY WHAT THIS IS A TRUE . . UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ' r . m, _ AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: "`r" AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE ABSEN 's y` ABSTAIN: i(azV BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. Contact: Carlos Saltodano(5251336-1108) rL ATTESTED' cc: County Administrator Phil Batchel ,Clerk of the Berard of Supe ors County Counsel and County Administrator Community Development Public Warks .' 7AX6 _ EPU`TY CB:nr Wordt Mromodal.12-1�4-99 Approval of Plans to Improve Efficiency of the Application Permit Center Page Two December 14, 1599 BACKGROUNDIREASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS The APC currently is staffed by fifteen (15) professional and technical employees from the following departments. County Building inspection Department; Community Development Department; Public Works Department;, Environmental Health department; the Contra Costa County Consolidated Fire District; and the California Environmental Protection Agency. Typical APC services include administering information and accepting development related applications for the aforementioned departments, preapplication reviews, building permit plan checks, the issuance of building permits over the counter and by fax, egress permit service, etc. One of the critical elements in the economic vitality of Contra Costa County is the ease with which businesses can obtain the development-related permits necessary to start and carry on their business activities. Towards this end, the Contra Costa County Application and Permit Center (APC) was created to provide County residents and the business community with a permit facility dedicated to the efficient processing of as many development related permits as possible at one (1) location. The Contra Costa County APC is committed to improving the processing of development related permit applications thereby making it more efficient and user friendly to obtain permit approvals. The APC is constantly searching for ways to improve the delivery of services to its customers. Problems that impact the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the organization have been identified and recommendations for improvement have been prepared. A review of the types of complaints and problems identified by customers, staff and management prompted an internal review of the current operations and practices of the organization. Consequently, the APC prepared a work program to respond to and resolve the complaints and problems. The work program identified a need to understand the user's attitude towards the APC's services. APC customers have been encouraged to complete and submit Customer Service Evaluation forms that are kept in the lobby areas in order to develop an understanding of their attitudes and determine what is important to them. In addition, a survey was conducted focusing on what the customers actually experience when they come to the APC. Questions to the customer centered on the following: what they want; where they are being sent; and when they are served by the various staff members. The survey was conductedfor a two (2) week period between April 5, 1999 and April 15, 1999. Comments received from customers in the Customer Service Evaluations and the findings revealed by the subject survey indicate there is a collective opinion among customers that they resent being sent back and forth to the 2nd and 3rd floors for service. They are consistently indicating that this is a major problem for them, and they continually express their desire to have all of the APC services located on one (1) floor instead of two (2) floors. In an attempt to alleviate this problem, the APC has explored the various opportunities available to transform the current facility into a premier permit center that provides coordinated plan reviews with substantially reduced processing timeframes at one (1) central location. Staff explored relocating to leased office space, remodeling the 15`floor of the Forth Wing of the Administration Building, remodeling of the 2nd',floor of the North Wing of the Administration Building, as well as building a new facility. The most cost- effective alternative ended up being to remodel the 2nd floor of the North Wing of the Administration Building to handle the current space needs of the APC. Approval of Plans to Improve Efficiency of the Application Permit Center Page Three December 14, 1999 Alternative floor plan scenarios to remodel the 2"¢ floor were prepared by a general Services Department (GSD) project architect with input from the APC staff, and the Executive Committee. As a result of this effort, a conceptual floor plan has been created. The Executive Committee, made up of the three land development departments, have approved the conceptual floor plan and it is attached to this document as Attachment 1 for your consideration. The costs of this alternative are as follows: Description of Cast Item Percentage Costs New Modular Workstations, 31% 34,700 Miscellaneous General Svcs. Charges2 19% 211600 Contingency Amount 18% 20,100 Carpet Replacements 10% 11,000 Department Computer Staff Casts 2% 2,000 Permanent Improvements to Bldg. 21% 231160 TOTAL $112,56 1. This cost item is designated for modular furniture which will be taken to the new building and therefore is not being amortized. 2. The project has already incurred a GSD charge of approximately$16,O00. 3. flue to safety(trip hazard)this item needs to be implemented anyway. REMODEL COSTS E $23,980 wrlewModWar Workstatiorm $34,700 a MksoellaneousGewsl&os. Ctrsrg eel $2,000 UCordingeuicy ArnoLmt f $11,000 pCerpet RepiscerwO 1 $20,100 $29,840 ■Depart""Contiar staff Costs I i j �parrwrent IrrproNements to 8kdg. a IEL 7r -r El sum ❑ �i1M 12 Ll V-51 0 WO 1 C I❑ a � m z cr �i rn Wo 0 co wh 0 � i m z ❑� ., , ❑ m X m0 0 A PIL El mu f m a 0 cr e E3 � rn o �l