Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03-21-13 Regular Meeting and Public Hearing of the Planning and Zoning CommissionCity of La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission Agenda Notice is hereby given of a Regular Meeting and Public Hearings of the La Porte Planning and Zoning Commission to be held on March 21, 2013, at 6:00 P.M. at City Hall Council Chambers, 604 West Fairmont Parkway, La Porte, Texas, regarding the items of business according to the agenda listed below: 1. Call to order 2. Roll Call of Members 3. Consider approval of February 21, 2013, meeting minutes. 4. Open Public Hearing to receive citizen input on Special Conditional Use Permit #13-91000001, for the property located at 1926 South 16th Street, further described as 5 acre tract TR 1 B-1, in the William P. Harris Survey, Abstract No. 30, La Porte, Harris County, Texas. Reese Brown, on behalf of Buffalo Horn Investment, LLC. property owner, seeks approval for building approximately 100,000 sq. ft. office/warehouse within Planned Unit Development (PUD) zone. A. Staff Presentation B. Proponents C. Opponents D. Proponents Rebuttal 5. Close Public Hearing. 6. Consider recommendation to City Council regarding Special Conditional Use Permit #13- 91000001 for property located at 1926 South 16 h Street. 7. Open Public Hearing to receive citizen input on Special Conditional Use Permit #13-91000002, for property located at 120 North 7th Street, further described as Lots 1 thru 9 and 34, Block 54, Town of La Porte, Johnson Hunter Survey, Abstract No. 35, La Porte, Harris County, Texas. Deborah Giles, on behalf of St. Mark United Methodist Church, property owner, seeks approval to build a church within Main Street District (MSD) zone. A. Staff Presentation B. Proponents C. Opponents D. Proponents Rebuttal 8. Close Public Hearing. 9. Consider recommendation to City Council regarding Special Conditional Use Permit #13- 91000002 for property located at 120 North 7th Street. 10. Receive Presentation by Mueller Management / Ron Cox Consulting on Planning Department Organizational Review. 11. Discussion or other action regarding Planning Department Organizational Review and Implementation Plan. 12. Administrative Reports 13. Commission Comments on matters appearing on agenda or inquiry of staff regarding specific factual information or existing policy 14. Adjourn A quorum of City Council members may be present and participate in discussions during this meeting; however, no action will be taken by Council. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, the City of La Porte will provide for reasonable accommodations for persons attending public meetings. To better serve attendees, requests should be received 24 hours prior to the meetings. Please contact Patrice Fogarty, City Secretary, at 281.470.5019. CERTIFICATION I certify that a copy of the March 21, 2013, agenda of items to be considered by the Planning and Zoning Commission was posted on the City Hall bulletin board on the day of 12013. Title: Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of February 21, 2013 Commissioners Present: Richard Warren, Phillip Hoot, Mark Follis, Doretta Finch, Les Bird, Danny Earp, Lou Ann Martin, and Hal Lawler (Danny Earp arrived at 6:30 p.m.) Commissioners Absent: Helen LaCour City Staff Present: Assistant City Manager Traci Leach, Planning Director Tim Tietjens, City Planner Masood Malik, City Engineer Julian Garza, Assistant City Attorney Clark Askins, and Office Coordinator Peggy Lee 1. Call to order. Meeting called to order by Chairman Hal Lawler at 6:01 p.m. 2. Roll Call of Members. Commissioners Warren, Hoot, Follis, Finch, Bird, Martin, and Lawler were present for roll call. 3. Consider approval of January 17, 2013, meeting minutes. Motion by Commissioner Hoot to approve the January 17, 2013, meeting minutes. Second by Commissioner Bird. Motion carried. Ayes: Commissioners Warren, Hoot, Follis, Finch, Bird, Martin, and Lawler Nays: None 4. Open Public Hearing to receive public input regarding proposed regulations for Dust Free Surface criteria for all Zoning Districts. Chairman Lawler opened the public hearing at 6:04 p.m. A. Staff Presentation City Engineer Julian Garza presented a summary of the recommended amendments to dust free surfacing criteria, as outlined in the draft ordinance presented to the Commission. Commissioner Hoot suggested subsection B.6., of Sec. 106-841 be cross-referenced under subsection D of the same section. Commissioner Martin had compiled a list of existing businesses that would be impacted if made to comply with the proposed regulations. Mr. Garza pointed out subsection C.S., of Section 106-841, which would not require compliance with Section 106-841 if removal or placement of existing material is for maintenance. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of February 21, 2013 Page 2 of 3 Commissioners discussed the need for maintenance provisions to ensure the surfacing remains dust -free. B. Proponents There were no proponents. C. Opponents There were no opponents. D. Proponents Rebuttal There were no rebuttals. 5. Close Public Hearing. Chairman Lawler closed the public hearing at 6:50 p.m. 6. Consider recommendation to City Council regarding proposed amendments to Chapter 106 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances, for the purpose of enacting regulations for Dust Free Surface criteria for all Zoning Districts. Motion by Commissioner Bird to recommend to City Council, approval of proposed amendments to Zoning Chapter 106 of the Code of Ordinances for the purpose of enacting regulations for Dust Free Surface criteria for all zoning districts; cross-referencing Subsection B.6., of Sec. 106-841 under Subsection D of the same section; and acknowledging that these proposed amendments will not address pre-existing dust conditions in the City. Second by Commissioner Hoot. Ayes: Commissioners Warren, Hoot, Follis, Finch, Bird, Earp, and Lawler Nays: Commissioner Martin 7. Receive an update on the Planning and Zoning Commission Subcommittee's review of Chapter 106 "Zoning" of the City's Code of Ordinances. City Planner Masood Malik provided an update of the subcommittee's (Commissioners Follis, Hoot, and Bird) Zoning Ordinance review progress. The subcommittee is currently reviewing Planning Department policies as well as a working draft of the Zoning Ordinance. At the suggestion of the subcommittee, Commissioners added a rolling alternate position to allow staff to contact another Commissioner to attend subcommittee meetings if there is a known absence. Commissioners Martin, Earp, and Lawler volunteered to serve as rolling alternates. Planning and Zoning Commission Minutes of February 21, 2013 Page 3 of 3 8. Administrative Reports Planning Director Tim Tietjens reported that Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting presented their final recommendation on the Planning Department audit to City Council on February 18. Council requested the final report be presented to the Commission. Members agreed March 7 would be a good date to meet. 9. Commission Comments on matters appearing on agenda or inquiry of staff regarding specific factual information or existing policy. o Commissioner Warren thanked the subcommittee for their work with the Zoning Ordinance review and welcomed back Commissioner Martin. o Commissioner Hoot wished Commissioner Bird and his wife good luck and welcomed back Commissioner Martin. o Commissioner Martin thanked the group for their patience and understanding during her recent absence. o Commissioner Follis attended a recent City Council meeting where the need for updating the Zoning Ordinance was discussed. o Commissioner Bird welcomed back Commissioner Martin. o Chairman Lawler thanked the subcommittee and staff for their work on the dust free surface criteria. 10. Adjourn Chairman Lawler adjourned the meeting at 7:05 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Peggy Lee Secretary, Planning and Zoning Commission Passed and Approved on Hal Lawler Chairman, Planning and Zoning Commission 12013. Special Conditional Use Permit #13-91000001 Exhibits Staff Report A. Ordinance w/SCUP B. Aerial Map C. Preliminary Site Plan Staff Report Special Conditional Use Permit #13-91000001 Office/Warehouse March 21, 2013 Requested by: Reese Brown on behalf of Buffalo Horn Investment, LLC., Property Owner Requested for: Construction of a 100,000 square foot tilt -wall office/warehouse on a 5.00 acre tract described as TR 1B-1, in the William P. Harris League Survey, Abstract 30, La Porte, Harris County, Texas. Location: 1926 S. 16t' Street Present Zoning: Planned Unit Development (PUD) Requested Use: Office/Warehouse Background: The subject property is a part of the General Plan for formerly Texas Import/Export Park (TIEP), 342.262± acres of land out of the George B. McKinstry League, A-47, William P. Harris Survey, A-30, and Johnson Hunter Survey, A-35, City of La Porte, Harris County, Texas. Later, it was renamed as Port Crossing Business Park, consisting of approximately 286 acres of land along South 16t' Street at State Highway 146 South. Being a 5.00 acre tract known as Drill Site "D-9" conveyed to the Middle Bayou, LLC., recorded under F.N. U496686, H.C.O.P.R.R.P., is located at the northwest of McCabe Road and South 16t' Street. A 30' wide Exxon Mobil Corp. pipeline easement runs diagonally to the north and south under Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) right-of-way adjacent to the subject tract to the west. Proposed project consists of a commercial construction of a one-story tilt wall warehouse of approximately 100,000 sq. ft. The structure will be metal framing with concrete tilt wall facade on three sides with metal sheeting facade adjacent to the railroad. The warehouse will have office space and restrooms. The facility will have fire protection sprinkler system in addition to the fire hydrants along South 16t' Street and McCabe Road. The project also includes construction of asphalt paving for fire lane, access and parking in addition to private and public utility improvements. SCU 413-91000001 Buffalo Horn Page 2 of 3 The subject property is zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD). Development in a PUD zoning district requires a site plan or a general plan to be filed and processed simultaneously along with an application for a Special Conditional Use Permit. Analysis: Section 106-659 of the Code of Ordinances establishes the following criteria for review of the development projects within a PUD zone. Land Use — The City's Future Land Use Plan 2012 shows this area developing with heavy industrial uses. The existing land uses of nearby properties are predominantly light industrial and business industrial. Port Crossing Business Park is located just north of this undeveloped land. In addition, the Bayshore Industrial, Inc. is located south of McCabe Road in the Bayport Industrial District — Extra Territorial Jurisdiction (ETJ) of La Porte. Transportation — The project is located near State Highway 146, a primary arterial and major truck route. As a result, this project provides more than adequate accessibility for circulation of traffic. All traffic entering/existing will be through McCabe Road and South 16t' Street. There should be a minimal impact on traffic flow within the business park and the vicinity. Topography — This area is relatively flat and stable and should not be an obstacle to this type of development. Exxon/Mobil Pipeline Easement - Pipeline easement may be an obstacle for this development. However, the plan shows that pipeline easement and underground pipelines will be re-routed around the proposed building location. A letter of approval from Exxon/Mobil shall be required at the time of development site plan submittal. Utilities and Drainage — Public facilities and services are sufficient to handle the supply of potable water, but require upgrading for fire protection in the area. In addition, provisions must be made to ensure sufficient utility extensions are provided to serve this development. Storm water drainage will be conveyed through storm sewer system in the easement on the west side of South 16t' Street, which outfalls into the existing regional detention within the Port Crossing Business Park. Regional detention pond is designed to accommodate properties south of West `K' Street and all of the Port Crossing Business Park. This stormwater/detention facility has been designed in accordance with the City and HCFCD specifications. 2 SCU 413-91000001 Buffalo Horn Page 3 of 3 Conclusion/ Recommendation Staff feels that the project has potential and would make a significant impact on economic development within the City of La Porte. Based on the above analysis, staff recommends approval of the Special Conditional Use Permit with the following conditions: 1. This Special Conditional Use Permit is applicable for the subject property and subsequent plan dated February 12, 2013, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City's Planning Department. Project development shall be consistent with such plan, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of approval. 2. The plan shall comply with all other provisions of Chapter 106, Zoning of the City's Code of Ordinances. 3. Furnish the City a letter from Exxon/Mobil pertaining to the approval of pipeline easement and relocation. 4. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director of Planning. A significant change in the approved concept shall be subject to the Planning and Zoning Commission's review. 5. Exterior modifications, including signage and installation of refuse enclosures shall be reviewed by the Planning Department. 6. The Developer shall comply with all other applicable laws and ordinances of the City of La Porte including building permits, irrigation, landscaping, sidewalk provisions, fire access & suppression systems and the State of Texas. Options available to the Commission are: • Recommend to Council approval of this SCUP with additional conditions. • Recommend to Council denial of this SCUP. • Continue the public hearing at the Commission's next regular meeting to allow additional testimony and further study of this item. This results in tabling any action on this item. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, CHAPTER 106, MORE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, BY GRANTING SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 13-91000001 FOR THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED, FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING OFFICE/WAREHOUSE FACILITY AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SOUTH 16TH STREET AND McCABE ROAD, IN A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (PUD) ZONE; MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT RELATED TO THE SUBJECT; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS: Section 1: Chapter 106 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by granting Special Conditional Use Permit 413-91000001, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference for all purposes, to allow for the development of office/warehouse facility at the following described property, to wit: 5 acre tract of land, being TR 113-1, recorded under F.N. U496686, H.C.O.P.R.R.P., in the William P. Harris Survey, Abstract 30, LaPorte, Harris County, within a Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district. Section 2: All ordinances or parts of ordinances inconsistent with the terms of this ordinance are hereby repealed; provided, however, that such repeal shall be only to the extent of such inconsistency and in all other respects this ordinance shall be cumulative of other ordinances regulating and governing the subject matter covered by this ordinance. Section 3. Should any section or part of this ordinance be held unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, or the application to any person or circumstance for any reasons thereof ineffective or inapplicable, such unconstitutionality, illegality, invalidity, or ineffectiveness of such section or part shall in no way affect, impair or invalidate the remaining portions thereof, but as to such remaining portion or portions, the same shall be and remain in full force and effect and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are declared to be severable. Section 4. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City Council is posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the city for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by Chapter 551, Tx. Gov't Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. Section 5. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby finds that public notice was properly mailed to all owners of all properties located within two hundred feet (200') of the properties under consideration. Section 6. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby finds, determines, and declares that all prerequisites of law have been satisfied and hereby determines and declares that the amendments to the City of La Porte Zoning Classification contained in this Ordinance as amendments thereto are desirable and in furtherance of the goals and objectives stated in the City of La Porte's Comprehensive Plan. Section 7. This Ordinance shall be effective after its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2013. CITY OF LA PORTE Louis R. Rigby, Mayor ATTEST: Patrice Fogarty, City Secretary APPROVED: Clark Askins, Assistant City Attorney City of La Porte Special Conditional Use Permit #13-9100001 This permit is issued to: Buffalo Horn Investment, LLC Owner or Agent 65568 Coyote Lakes Dt., Las Vegas, NV 89122-4763 Address For Development of: Office/Warehouse Development Name 1926 South 16th Street, La Porte, TX 77571 Address Legal Description: TR 1 B-1 in the W.P.Harris League Abstract No. 30,La Porte, Harris County, Texas. Zoning: Planned Unit Development (PUD) Use: Office/Warehouse Permit Conditions: 1. This Special Conditional Use Permit is applicable for the subject property and subsequent plan dated February 12, 2013, a copy of which shall be maintained in the files of the City's Planning Department. Project development shall be consistent with such plan, except as otherwise specified in these conditions of approval. 2. The plan shall comply with all other provisions of Chapter 106, "Zoning" of the City's Code of Ordinances. 3. Furnish the City a letter from Exxon/Mobil pertaining to the approval of pipeline easement and relocation. 4. Minor amendments to the plans shall be subject to approval by the Director of Planning. A significant change in the approved concept shall be subject to the Planning and Zoning Commission's review. 5. Exterior modifications, including signage and installation of refuse enclosures shall be reviewed by the Planning Department. 6. The Developer shall comply with all other applicable laws and ordinances of the City of La Porte including building permits, irrigation, landscaping, sidewalk provisions, fire access & suppression systems, and the State of Texas. Failure to occupy the building within 12 months after issuance or as scheduled under the terms of a special conditional use permit shall void the permit as approved, except upon an extension of time granted after application to the Planning and Zoning Commission. If contract or agreement is terminated after completion of any stage and there is ample evidence that further development is not contemplated, the ordinance establishing such special conditional use permit may be rescinded by the City Council, upon its own motion or upon the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of La Porte, and the previous zoning of the entire tract shall be in full effect on the portion which is undeveloped. Validation Date: Director of Planning City Secretary n W m ©_ ZU �Q 00 z w +NO 0 o¢Y U w ❑�� v z! ❑ z _ ❑ !) Z 0 W QZ O W ❑ ❑ 4WWW f-- J ©WQ Qt LL'�Z a" D D Q � w> W p D 7 (r Q W Q Q (n it (-, CO n J � F-W w Q J M M. E- {n tr [L U d- i— T— N a Z Z O tea moz �Q�zC\lhU)h a.pZw LO Cy m p you �1� O a J L) ] Z CL lf3uj Doff) x(n�pli — L ZOp pX JM 0 0 Ld a /I ~ U- / d Q U I , � Z UJ J U- 3Nd-13814 LL J� o� coo �U) oLJ Lv Vt o_ Li Cr Ld N (CO 0.4 LL W��U .J 0 0A�Q � A� w r- cc La Li U>\ 00 LiJ N (L U) ,OS"tZ5 '£� 10=,98 N y'I"'dHdSH r�4 a��"..4 X Z 9 LL J lk� � aw Va NN a. OZ Q:: Q d to cn Q 0 0-N Ch1� O ah o V) ❑ � 0pCL QO M¢¢ U-V)z 0 dwyx fI✓ SONv-ASNa J �h Q Oh �W C3 ~�Wry nW o Z 0 `� Q LL' J o 4-o O Zx d N VV) a V� V 2I0j,DWWOO HSV-dl312'j: NOS Special Conditional Use Permit #13-91000002 Exhibits Staff Report A. Ordinance w/SCUP B. Aerial Map C. Preliminary Site Plan D. Public Notice Response Staff Report March 21, 2013 Special Conditional Use Permit #13-91000002 St. Mark United Methodist Church Request: Special Conditional Use Permit Request 413-91000002 Requested By: Ms. Deborah Giles c/o St. Mark United Methodist Church Requested For: Development of Church at 120 North 7t' Street, further described as Lots 1-9 and 34, Block 54, Town of LaPorte, Harris County, Texas. Present Zoning: Main Street District (MSD) Requested Use: Applicant is seeking a Special Conditional Use Permit (SCUP) for the purpose of allowing construction of a Church. Section 106-331 of the Code of Ordinance classifies this type of development as a Conditional Use. Background: The subject property is within the Northside Neighborhood, a vibrant community that is part of La Porte's original homestead making it both rich in history and, due to its location just north of the City's Main Street Corridor, a keystone residential presence just footsteps away. The historical significance of the Northside Neighborhood is also prominent and lends to the area's strong sense of heritage. The first school dedicated to African -American students is located at the corner of Tyler and North 5t' Street. Northside Neighborhood is home to seven vibrant churches sprinkled throughout the area. Ms. Deborah Giles, a representative on behalf of the St. Mark United Methodist Church, is working towards building a new church facility at 120 North 7t' Street. Currently, they are conducting services at the New Hope Baptist Church at 222 North 4t' Street. St. Mark United Methodist Church owns several lots in the 100 block of North 6t' and 7t' Streets for quite some time. Due to increase in the attendance/membership, a new building for the church is being considered at this time. A church facility within the Main Street District is described as a Conditional Use. Special Conditional Use Permit 413-91000002 Page 2 of 3 Analysis: Section 106-217 of the Code of Ordinances establishes the following review criteria and conditions for approval of Special Conditional Use Permits: • That the specific use will be compatible with and not injurious to the use and enjoyment of the other property, nor significantly diminish or impair property values within the immediate vicinity. • That the conditions placed on such use, as specified in each district, have been met by the applicant. • That the applicant has agreed to meet any additional conditions imposed, based on specific site constraints necessary to protect the public interest and welfare of the community. Staff would note that the property is in the Northside Neighborhood, primarily a single-family residential community. The tract in question is located at the corner of W. Polk Street and North 7t' Street. This proposed location is currently vacant and just across the street to north is another existing church. The proposed site is surrounded by houses, undeveloped lots, and commercial uses. There are several mature trees on the southeast side of these lots. Some sizable trees may be preserved and add to the required screening of the parking lot. The parking lot will need additional landscaping in accordance with Section 106-444(a)(3) of the Code of Ordinances. Utilities are readily available to the property with adequate fire protection. Water, sanitary sewer, and road conditions adequately serve the area. The proximity to the Main Street, State Highway 146, and Barbour's Cut Boulevard provide adequate access to the area. Staff would note potential alcohol sales restrictions for businesses near proposed church. There is an existing liquor store across the alley from the proposed church along Main Street. A restaurant is located in the vicinity of the proposed location. Per regulations, sale of alcohol beverages within 300 feet of a church, public or private school, or public hospital is prohibited. 2 Special Conditional Use Permit 413-91000002 Page 3 of 3 Conclusion/ Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of Special Conditional Use Permit for the St. Mark United Methodist Church with the following conditions: 1. This Special Conditional Use Permit is specifically limited for the St. Mark United Methodist Church on the above referenced property. 2. This permit does not become valid until a Certified Development Site Plan is submitted to the City; reviewed and approved in accordance with the requirements of the Development Ordinance. 3. The developer acknowledges the existence of existing alcoholic beverage business at 700 W. Main Street and waives the rights for the protection under Section 6-2 of the City's Code of Ordinances for this particular business in regards to church, school and daycare operations now and in the future. 4. The Developer shall comply with all applicable laws and ordinances of the City including building permits, irrigation, landscaping/screening, sidewalk provisions, and the State of Texas. Options available to the Commission are: • Recommend to Council approval of this SCUP with additional conditions. • Recommend to Council denial of this SCUP. • Continue the public hearing at the Commission's next regular meeting to allow additional testimony and further study of this item. This results in tabling any action on this item. 3 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, CHAPTER 106, MORE COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, BY GRANTING SPECIAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 13-91000002 FOR THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND HEREIN DESCRIBED, FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING A CHURCH FACILITY ALONG NORTH 7111 STREET, IN MAIN STREET DISTRICT (MSD) ZONE; MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT RELATED TO THE SUBJECT; CONTAINING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; FINDING COMPLIANCE WITH THE OPEN MEETINGS LAW; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF; BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA PORTE, TEXAS: Section 1: Chapter 106 "Zoning" of the Code of Ordinances is hereby amended by granting Special Conditional Use Permit 413-91000002, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference for all purposes, to allow for the development of church facility at the following described property, to wit: 0.75 acre tract of land, being Lots 1-9 and 34, Block 54, Town of La Porte, as recorded in Volume 8, Page 16, H.C.M.R., Johnson Hunter Survey, Abstract No. 30, La Porte, Harris County, within Main Street District (MSD) zone. Section 2: All ordinances or parts of ordinances inconsistent with the terms of this ordinance are hereby repealed; provided, however, that such repeal shall be only to the extent of such inconsistency and in all other respects this ordinance shall be cumulative of other ordinances regulating and governing the subject matter covered by this ordinance. Section 3. Should any section or part of this ordinance be held unconstitutional, illegal, or invalid, or the application to any person or circumstance for any reasons thereof ineffective or inapplicable, such unconstitutionality, illegality, invalidity, or ineffectiveness of such section or part shall in no way affect, impair or invalidate the remaining portions thereof, but as to such remaining portion or portions, the same shall be and remain in full force and effect and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are declared to be severable. Section 4. The City Council officially finds, determines, recites and declares that a sufficient written notice of the date, hour, place and subject of this meeting of the City Council is posted at a place convenient to the public at the City Hall of the city for the time required by law preceding this meeting, as required by Chapter 551, Tx. Gov't Code; and that this meeting has been open to the public as required by law at all times during which this ordinance and the subject matter thereof has been discussed, considered and formally acted upon. The City Council further ratifies, approves and confirms such written notice and the contents and posting thereof. Section 5. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby finds that public notice was properly mailed to all owners of all properties located within two hundred feet (200') of the properties under consideration. Section 6. The City Council of the City of La Porte hereby finds, determines, and declares that all prerequisites of law have been satisfied and hereby determines and declares that the amendments to the City of La Porte Zoning Classification contained in this Ordinance as amendments thereto are desirable and in furtherance of the goals and objectives stated in the City of La Porte's Comprehensive Plan. Section 7. This Ordinance shall be effective after its passage and approval. PASSED AND APPROVED this the day of , 2013. CITY OF LA PORTE Louis R. Rigby, Mayor ATTEST: Patrice Fogarty, City Secretary APPROVED: Clark Askins, Assistant City Attorney City of La Porte Special Conditional Use Permit #13-91000002 This permit is issued to: St. Mark United Methodist Church c/o Deborah Giles Owner or Agent 120 North 7th Street, La Porte, TX 77571 Address For Development of: St. Mark United Methodist Church Development Name 120 North TL Street Address Legal Description: Lots 1-9 & 34-28, Block 54, Town of La Porte Johnson Hunter Survey, Abstract 35, La Porte, Harris County, Texas Zoning: Main Street District (MSD) Use: Church Permit Conditions: 1. This Special Conditional Use Permit is specifically limited for the St. Mark United Methodist Church on the above referenced property. 2. This permit does not become valid until a Certified Development Site Plan is submitted to the City; reviewed and approved in accordance with the requirements of the Development Ordinance. 3. The developer acknowledges the existence of existing alcoholic beverage business at 700 W. Main Street and waives the rights for the protection under Section 6-2 of the City's Code of Ordinances for this particular business in regards to church, school and daycare operations now and in the future. 4. The Developer shall comply with all applicable laws and ordinances of the City including building permits, irrigation, landscaping/screening, sidewalk provisions, and the State of Texas. Failure to begin construction within one (1) year after issuance or as scheduled under the terms of a special conditional use permit shall void the permit as approved, except upon an extension of time granted after application to the Planning and Zoning Commission. If construction is terminated after completion of any stage and there is ample evidence that further development is not contemplated, the ordinance establishing such special conditional use permit may be rescinded by the City Council, upon its own motion or upon the recommendation of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of La Porte, and the previous zoning of the entire tract shall be in full effect on the portion which is undeveloped. Validation Date: Director of Planning City Secretary 4'. .o-r f' A Meeting of the La Potte i 4 i= Plaimin & Zoning Commission j �1 ) 013 (Type of Meeting) ! Scheduled for Match 21, 2013 (Date of Meeting) to Consider Special Condithojaal Use Permit #13-91000002 (Type of Request) I have received notice of the above referenced public hearing. I am 7AVOR of granting this request for the following reasons: , 4wv Lb-.P,, I am OPPOSED to granting this request for the following reasons: le,Ad& � fvk 1(all'a — Name (please print) IeWau Signature Address City, State, Zip A Meeting of the La Porte Planning & Zoning Commission (Type of Meeting) 1 i Scheduled for Marcia 21, 2013 (Date of Meeting)) to Consider Special Conditional Use Permit #13-91000002 (Type of Request) I nave received notice of the above referenced public hearing. I am in FAVOR of granting thus request for the following reasons: I am OPPOSED to granting this request for the following reasons: RN k) _ 6q-'- Name- 1 e p A,ddddress Signature City, Stat; Zip A Meeting of the La Porte Planning & Zoning Commission (Type of Meeting) Scheduled for Match 21, 2013 (Date of Meeting) to Consider Special Conditional Use Permit #13-91000002 ('Type of Request) MAR 1 2 201 I have received notice of the above referenced public hearing. la ' AV R o this request for the following reasons: c'2s C I am. OPPOSED to granting this request for the following reasons: Name (please print) Address Signature City, State, Zip City of La Porte Planning Department Organizational Review Final Report and Recommendations Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting February 6, 2013 City of La Porte Planning Department Organizational Review Final Report and Recommendations Table of Contents Introduction Recommendations Process Recommendations A. Communication B. Cumbersome Processes C. Site Plan Review Process D. Permitting Intake/Issuance E. Code Enforcement F. Inspections G. Miscellaneous Organizational Culture Recommendations H. Mission & Goals I. Departmental Cohesiveness J. Trust Code Recommendations K. Code Recommendations Zoning Code Development Ordinance Other Conclusion IV. Exhibits A. Site Plan Review Flowchart B. Permit Intake/Issuance Flowchart Page 2 4 4 6 8 10 12 13 14 15 18 19 20 20 23 25 25 i Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting I. Introduction On September 24, 2012, the City of La Porte engaged Mueller Management, in association with Ron Cox Consulting, to perform an organizational review of the Planning Department. The desire for organizational reviews in various departments of the City was identified by the City Council during the FY 2013 budget planning process. The Planning Department was chosen as the initial candidate for review due to its high frequency of customer/citizen interaction points. The results of these interactions can have a significant impact on the community's perception of the City government as a whole. Specifically, the purpose of this review was directed toward evaluating departmental policies, procedures, practices, and codes to identify improvements that may add value, shorten response times, and improve customer service. In particular, the processes involved with site planning and permit issuance were identified as areas of emphasis. The underlying strategy of the analysis by the consulting team was to identify "internal perceptions" and "external perceptions" as they relate to the identified issues/problems. The degree to which the perceptions of internal participants (employees) align or differ from external participants (City Council, Planning Commission, customers) was analyzed to identify gaps in desired -versus -provided service levels. Internal perceptions were gathered from individual interviews with each member of the Planning Department and members of other City departments who are involved with the site plan and building permit processes. Further, the site plan review process and the permit intake and issuance processes were flowcharted to identify potential gaps or inefficiencies in those processes. External perceptions were obtained by individual interviews with each member of the City Council and Planning and Zoning Commission. To further validate the perceptions communicated during those interviews, three separate focus groups were convened — one focused on code enforcement; one with contractors/designers; and one with business owners. An interim report, summarizing the internal and external observations, organized under 10 major themes, was presented to City Council on December 10, 2012. Subsequent to the interim report presentation, the consulting team conducted the following activities: • The interim report and several specific customer concerns that were expressed in the focus groups were reviewed with the Planning Department division managers. This review provided an opportunity for the staff to better understand and accept the reality of the issues at hand and begin to be part of the recommended solutions. • Management recommendations were developed to address the organizational culture, communication, and trust themes that were identified in the interim report. 2 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting • The flow -charted processes were analyzed for efficiency and communication improvement opportunities. • Organizational, process, and communication improvements were developed. Suggestions offered by the elected and appointed officials, customers and employees were incorporated. • The zoning and development codes were evaluated for potential recommendations to improve their functionality and address concerns raised by the customer groups. Implementation Recommendations: Implementation of the recommendations will present many opportunities for organizational and leadership development within the department and with customers. An effective method of implementation is the use of task forces organized around a specific set of the recommendations. Membership in the task forces should primarily consist of employees within the department, but should also consist of representatives of the customer groups identified earlier. Each task force should be managed by a team leader appointed by the Director. Each team leader will be responsible for completing and reporting on the final implementation. It is also important to reinforce the revised processes with underlying improvements in culture, trust, and cohesiveness. The process improvements will not be fully successful until the underlying organizational culture is redirected toward better cooperation internally and a customer focus externally. A variety of tools are available designed to enhance the organizational culture. A commitment by City Council and management toward this holistic approach will enhance the full implementation of the improved customer service attitude. Acknowledgements: The consulting team wishes to thank all members of the City Council, Planning Commission, City Manager's office, the Planning Department, and the customer focus group participants. We received great cooperation from each person we spoke with and encountered no obstacles in obtaining the information we requested. All participants were very candid in their comments and believed their negative and positive comments would be used in the spirit of improvement for the department. Many positive suggestions were put forth by the individuals and groups we worked with that were incorporated into these recommendations. The consulting team appreciates this opportunity to be of service to the city of La Porte. It is our hope that these recommendations will add value to your customer's experiences and your staff's ability to effectively perform their jobs. This report concludes our engagement, however, we are available to provide additional assistance should you or the staff desire an additional engagement to assist with implementation. 3 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting II. Findings and Recommendations The internal observations, external perceptions, and a preliminary assessment of the implications of these observations and perceptions were documented in the interim report. The topics presented in this report generally correspond to the themes that were covered in the interim report. A set of findings are presented for each topic along with a series of recommendations designed to address each finding. The topics are grouped into process, organizational culture, and code -related recommendations. Process Recommendations The following process -related recommendations are intended to respond to concerns expressed by customers and incorporate procedural improvement possibilities observed by the consulting team. These improvements are designed to improve communication and access to information; reduce the time required to obtain permits and improve the customer experience when interacting with the Department. A. Communication Findings The variety of independent prerequisites before the issuance of a building permit provides multiple opportunities for ambiguity and difficulty in coordination. Currently, there is not a single person charged with coordinating all aspects of a project from initial application to final approval so it can be challenging for customers to know exactly which sub -applications apply for a particular project and the correct submittal sequence. Staff acknowledged that multiple resubmittals do occur, but generally believe those cases are a result of poor plans being submitted or designers modifying unrelated items (on which the additional comments are based). There is a gap between the perceptions of the customers and the staff that needs to be resolved. Recommendations 1. Pre -Development Meetings with customers: i. Establish routine days and times for pre -development meetings when staff will be available. ii. Establish which staff is required to attend the pre -development meetings, and hold those staff accountable for attendance. Establish a protocol and assign 4 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting responsibility to the appropriate person for notifying the staff of their attendance requirement. iii. Publicize the availability and schedule of pre -development meetings on the web site and in the Planning Department lobby. Encourage staff to reinforce the preference for using the pre -development meeting format whenever possible in their interactions with the public. iv. Develop a pre -development meeting checklist that outlines all of the permits that may be necessary for a particular project, so that the applicant is made aware of the multiple steps that may be needed before they make their first submittal. Also, provide fee schedules associated with each of the applicable permits. v. Utilize the pre -development meeting to review the checklist and have staff available to elaborate and answer questions. Also, utilize this meeting to communicate lessons learned from similar projects, such as critical review items and long lead-time aspects of the permitting process, to assist the customer in planning their overall schedule. 2. Host periodic forums for the development/contractor/business community to open and maintain an opportunity for dialogue. These forums can be utilized to communicate such topics as new codes, frequently encountered problems, and to receive feedback and suggestions from developers and contractors. The goal is to establish and maintain open lines of communication between the department and customers to reduce the perception that involving management or council is required in order to achieve solutions. Establishing open rapport will facilitate a collaborative problem -solving environment between staff and customers. i. Initially a quarterly schedule is recommended; re-evaluate frequency after the first year. ii. Depending on the interest of participants, the city may want to break the forums into more focused topic sub -groups (for example, separate planning, engineering, and inspections forums). 3. Establish a centralized database of previous code interpretations accessible to the staff and public; or display in a FAQ format. 4. Ensure that the need for address verification and utility verification is communicated consistently; document the need on related forms and communicate early in the application process. 5. Ensure that all permit application forms and related information (that was provided to the consultants in the binder) are available on the website. At a minimum, provide 5 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting printable PDF files, but preferably as live forms that can be completed and submitted electronically. 6. To the greatest extent possible with the current computer system, make information available on-line so that applicants can obtain status updates as easily as possible. Where the computer system falls short, establish an information base that will track status of projects and provide contact information to the customer for obtaining that information. The objective is to develop a system within the constraints of the current computer software system, to provide substantive information to the customer on a timely basis. 7. Post the office hours by the outside door. City hall hours are posted, which may cause customers to think the office is closed when it is actually open. 8. Departmental staff should proactively notify the city management of customer interactions that may be reasonably expected to evolve into more difficult public relations situations. 9. Revise the Planning & Zoning Commission public hearing agenda format. The following agenda sequence is proposed: i. Staff Presentation ii. Applicant Presentation iii. Public Comments (for, against, or simply questions) iv. Question and Answer The current public hearing agenda format encourages the Commission to ask questions before all of the information has been presented and also puts the staff in the position of answering questions better answered by the applicant. The Commission should allow all information to be presented in items i-iii before asking questions under item iv. Any questions posed by the public during item iii should be noted by the Commission and then asked by the Commission during the question and answer period. During the question and answer period, questions should be directed by the Commission to either the staff or applicant, depending on who is in the better position to answer the particular question. B. Cumbersome Processes Findings The cumbersome nature of the NaviLine software system appears to contribute to some of the sluggishness and inconsistencies that customers experience. Ironically, if customers find the 6 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting processes too difficult to navigate and work without permits, this also increases the workload of the code enforcement division. Recommendations 1. Track certain permits outside of the NaviLine system to eliminate excess data entry that does not add value — for example: fill dirt, utility verification, culvert, address assignment, site plan review. i. A separate logging and tracking system (database or spreadsheet) needs to be developed and made available on the server so all staff members have access to update information and check status' as needed. 2. The driveway permit process should be modified so that culvert sizing is handled as part of driveway permit process rather than as a separate application. When a driveway permit (issued by the Inspections Division) requires a culvert, a separate culvert permit (issued by the Engineering Division) is also required. The culvert permit primarily consists of specifying the correct diameter for the culvert pipe. If the culvert is for a non -driveway application, the culvert application would still be a separate application. 3. Complete the water and sewer GIS layer and make available to the public. The internal utility verification process can be eliminated completely by allowing the public, land owners, and engineers to access the data directly. However, in the interim, within the current utility verification process: i. Ensure that the drawing of the existing utilities is provided to the applicant as part of the response to the applicant. ii. If NaviLine is continued to be used to track utility verification requests, save a PDF of the utility drawing as an attachment to the NaviLine file so that all data related to the request can be obtained in one location. 4. Until NaviLine is able to produce the information needed for the monthly reports, the reports should be reconfigured to eliminate the time and effort needed to track information manually. Currently, some data for the monthly and quarterly reports is tracked manually because it is not accessible from NaviLine. 5. Establish and publish plan review time goals for the most commonly issued permits. This information will provide the customer with a reasonable expectation and establish accountability for the staff. 7 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting 6. Allow simple plan sets to be reviewed quickly while more complex plan sets are being reviewed in the background. To expedite simpler plan sets, establish and use a priority process rather than a chronological (first come -first served) policy. 7. Establish a simplified fence permitting process. The current system is both time consuming and expensive and is a source of consistent frustration and complaints. To expedite standard fence replacements in the same location, do not require site plans or formal surveys. Utilize standard details as a condition of approval (setting posts, attachment of runners and pickets, etc.). If a fence is on a common property line, perhaps require consent from the neighbor to waive the site plan requirement. As a further relaxation, the site plan requirement for new fences could also be waived with location restrictions being issued as permit conditions. 8. Upon issuance of the certificate of occupancy, paper inspection files should be purged. Maintaining the paper copies of plan review comments, permits, and inspection results takes considerable staff time. The content of these files is generally redundant to data that has been or should have been entered into the NaviLine permit file. 9. Establish a consistent philosophy to utilize PUD's to simplify, rather than complicate, development applications. Several people who were interviewed reported that the current implementation of PUD's actually makes approval of a project more difficult, rather than facilitating the unique situations they are intended to benefit. Consistent with the organizational culture initiatives previously discussed, an attitude of using PUD's to facilitate development, rather than as a mechanism to add additional requirements, should be encouraged and enforced by management and City Council. C. Site Plan Review Process Findings The site plan review process affects a wide variety of businesses and may be the first interaction an applicant has with the City. As currently structured and administered, the process causes confusion for many applicants and creates a poor first impression. Recommendations 1. Compile and agree upon staff review comments before meeting with the applicant. 2. Establish appropriate review protocol between the Planning and Fire Departments. Evaluate need for fire marshal to be involved with site plan review; consider whether or not one Fire Department representative can handle all fire -related review comments. 8 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting This will better define and possibly reduce the number of people involved in the review process. 3. Develop and consistently use checklists for each reviewer. The contents of each checklist should be unique to the items for which each reviewer is responsible and approved by the Planning Director. Periodically update the checklists as new or recurring issues arise. The checklists can be provided directly to the applicants in advance to better inform them of the requirements. Further the completed checklists can also be provided to the applicants to eliminate the time and effort required to compile all comments into one review letter. 4. Ensure all reviewers are submitting comments electronically in a consistent form (Word document or NaviLine) using the checklists described above; also consider requiring reviewers to provide marked -up plan sets for return to the applicant. 5. Ensure review deadlines for each application are communicated and enforced for all reviewers (inside and outside of the Planning Department). 6. Establish review turn -around time goals for re -submittals. 7. Establish and enforce a policy that additional comments will not be added on resubmittals. Exception: when the applicant has made changes to the plans subsequent to the prior submittal. 8. Research the ability of NaviLine to assign a project number using an HCAD parcel number (if NaviLine tracking of site plans is continued). Currently, site plan applications can not be entered until an address is assigned. This sometimes results in a delay of processing while the address verification process is completed. 9. Ensure NaviLine is sending automatic notices of new site plan applications received to all reviewers (if NaviLine tracking of site plans is continued). 10. Establish and post annually a schedule of deadline dates for submittals, return of comments, resubmittals, and the corresponding Planning and Zoning Commission meeting date on which action will be taken (if applicable). 11. Consolidated review comments that are sent to the applicant should be provided to all reviewers. These consolidated comments will allow each reviewer to be aware of the full context of comments that were made. 9 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting 12. Ensure NaviLine is placing a hold on release of building permits until site plan is approved. 13. Automate the generation of the final site plan approval letter sent to the applicant. 14. Replace the manual "building permits release" form currently being sent to the Inspections Division with the automated letter described above. 15. Develop a screening questionnaire to help applicants better prepare the application; this can be reviewed and provided at the pre -development meeting. i. Communicate to applicants the need for an address request to accompany or precede a site plan application. ii. Communicate to applicants that the proposed electric meter location is critical for determining a proper address. iii. Communicate to applicants the need for a utility verification request to accompany or precede a site plan application. 16. Make available to applicants a sample of a good site plan application to use as a reference in preparing their application. 17. Re-evaluate the site plan application form to ensure all requested information is necessary; remove unnecessary or unused information to make submittal simpler for the applicant. D. Permitting Intake/Issuance Findings Customers perceive difficulty in timely receipt of consistent plan review comments and issuance of permits. In some cases, customers also experience complications in obtaining access to status information. Reducing redundant internal procedures will free up staff time for more meaningful tasks and customer communications. Providing a process to streamline the issuance of more routine permits to trade contractors would address several customer concerns. Recommendations 1. Investigate and implement the ability to allow permit applications to be completed and submitted electronically with payments made on-line, over -the -phone by credit card, or with an escrow fund. At a minimum, contractors should have the ability to pay for and obtain simple trade permits on-line. 10 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting 2. Allow contractors to open escrow accounts against which permit fees can be charged to eliminate the need for recurring checks and trips to city hall to pay for trade type permits. 3. Ensure that building plan review turn -around time goals are established and enforced for all staff members involved with plan review. 4. Establish and enforce a policy that additional comments will not be added on resubmittals. Exception: when the applicant has made changes to the plans subsequent to the prior submittal. 5. Redundant paper logs should be eliminated with the data being retrieved from NaviLine when needed. There are multiple paper logs used for tracking various permit applications and the status of those applications. Examples include: permits issued log (tracks applications during plan review), over the counter log (tracks resubmittals and other delivered documents), roof permits log, temporary and portable sign log, clearing/fill dirt/storm water quality log, new code enforcement case log, and a follow up code enforcement log. Periodically, the data on these logs are typed into a spreadsheet for archiving, but the original paper logs are also maintained. Additionally, there is a separate database maintained for water and sewer taps. Most of the information entered on the logs is also entered into NaviLine as part of the process to set up the permit file in the system. If NaviLine is incapable of appropriately tracking the review steps, a separate database should be set up in place of the paper logs, so that the tracking information can be easily entered, updated, queried, and accessed from the network by all staff members. The database should be set up to track the info needed for the various permit types, but only require the relevant data fields for the particular permit type. The database should also be made available to the public so that applicants can see the review status of their applications. 6. The Inspections Services Technicians should log Planning Division -related applications, such as site plans and zone changes. A consistent logging process as described above should be developed for all Planning Department applications to eliminate the differentiation between processes for each division. 7. Ensure the plan review comments from outside the Planning Department are coordinated with the comments from within the department and returned to the applicant simultaneously from a single source with the Planning Department comments. 11 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting 8. Ensure all three front counter technicians have the same job descriptions and are adequately cross -trained; each have areas of specialty, but workload should always be balanced. 9. Ensure all three front counter technicians have access to the same standard inspection notes files and all relevant NaviLine modules. 10. Plan review for clearing permits conducted by a Parks Department representative and Engineering and Planning Divisions should be done simultaneously rather than serially. A simultaneous review process will expedite the issuance of the permits. 11. Adopt one consistent suite of building codes. Currently, a mixture of the International and Uniform Building Codes are utilized for different trade specialties. From the customer's perspective only one suite of codes should be adopted and utilized. E. Code Enforcement Findings Some customers report difficulty in ascertaining the status of service requests. Inefficient internal processes affect the timeliness of data being available and add a redundant burden to the Inspection Services Technicians. From a broader perspective, there are differing opinions as to the preferred focus of code enforcement efforts — an even distribution, or a focus on hot spots or repeat offenders. Recommendations 1. Implement a method to allow the inspection notes/results to be transferred electronically to NaviLine. Currently the notes are taken in the iPad, printed, and then input into NaviLine by the Inspection Services Technicians. 2. Develop the GIS so that the status of code enforcement cases can be displayed graphically and accessed directly by the public. This will aid citizens in being able to quickly ascertain the status of a complaint they called in or to know the status of cases in their neighborhood. Additionally, the graphical representation will assist staff in identifying recurring problem trends as an aid to targeted enforcement. 3. Conduct quarterly forums with citizens and homeowners groups. These forums can be utilized to identify "hot spots" in the community that may need special attention by code enforcement and provide a system for follow up. 12 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting F. Inspections Findings There are opportunities to improve the customers' experiences as they relate to interactivity and consistency. Many customer suggestions centered on interactivity improvements such topics as the ability to submit permit applications, request inspections, or view inspection results on-line. Customers also requested improvements to consistency in the interpretations made by different inspectors. Internally, there are several paper -based tracking processes that are redundant to electronic processes. Recommendations 1. Assign inspectors by project rather than geographically. This system will allow the customer to have a consistent representative throughout the construction process; other inspectors are still available to cover vacations or for consultation when needed. 2. Provide an opportunity for the assigned inspector to be involved with the commercial plan review before final approval. This system will reduce the occurrence of the field inspectors enforcing codes differently than the plan reviewer. 3. Allow trade permits to be finalized as the work is completed prior to the final building certificate of occupancy. Several customers commented that the current process does not allow them to receive trade finals until the final certificate of occupancy for the building is approved. This practice causes delays in subcontractors being able to close out their contracts and receive final payment. 4. The inspectors should use their iPads to document field inspection notes and results for direct transfer to the NaviLine system. The current process requires the inspectors to hand -write notes and inspection results in the field. The results are then entered by the Inspection Services Technicians into the NaviLine system. To complete this change, a method to electronically link the iPad with NaviLine needs to be identified. This change would free up office staff time and allow inspection results to be posted much more quickly, while not adding additional work for the inspectors. 5. Implement an on-line inspection request system that could interface directly with NaviLine to save considerable staff time. The process of pulling inspection requests from the answering machine, transcribing the information onto "white tickets", and entering data into NaviLine is time-consuming. The current process of attaching the white ticket to the inspection folder and then re -stapling it into the ticket book is 13 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting redundant and should be eliminated as all of the needed information should be transferred to the NaviLine file. 6. Interface the NaviLine system with the website so that inspection results can be viewed on-line by the contractor or owner. G. Miscellaneous Findings During the course of the review, the consulting team noted several other observations, which are addressed in the following recommendations. Recommendations 1. Re-evaluate the need for extended office hours; shift technicians to a standard 8-5 shift with a rotation for one technician to arrive early to pull morning inspection requests. 2. Executed utility reimbursement agreements should be added as an attachment to the relevant water and/or sewer line database file in GIS. This will facilitate tracking, help to ensure proper payments are required of new development, and identify when the full cost has been reimbursed to the initial developer. 3. Establish streamlined street and alley abandonment procedures available under state law; establish a prioritized schedule for systematically abandoning unused rights -of - way, rather than inefficiently responding to ad hoc requests. 4. The duties formerly assigned to eliminated Planning Division personnel should be assigned to specific employees to ensure clear lines of accountability. With the recent reduction of Planning Division personnel, duties of prior employees have been split between the planner and the office coordinator, but specific responsibility for tasks varies on case by case basis. 5. Zoning notification letters and mailing labels should be generated from the notification list by a mail merge function rather than manually. 6. The NaviLine system should be programmed to automatically print water and sewer tap work orders to avoid the delays and manual steps inherent in the current method. Currently, when a work order request for a new water or sewer tap is generated by an Inspections Services Technician, the utility superintendent does not receive an automatic notification. The superintendent has to periodically check the system to see 14 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting if there are new work order requests. Additionally, the superintendent has to perform several administrative steps in order for NaviLine to print the work order. 7. The Survey Party Chief job description should be updated. The job description does not match the current duties of the position. 8. GIS Division: i. The non-GIS tasks assigned to the GIS Manager should be shifted to other staff members so that the GIS manager can appropriately focus on development of the GIS and management of GIS-related personnel. If the efficiency and automation recommendations related to the Inspections Services Technicians are implemented, those individuals should be freed up to assist with more productive work. ii. Provide additional GIS and Laserfiche licenses and training to relevant Inspections Division staff members to allow staff to obtain information more directly without having to involve the GIS Manager. iii. Properly fund and execute the GIS development program to facilitate data availability for customers. A more functional GIS will improve the public's ability to get the information they need to prepare better plan submittals, and will free up staff time currently occupied with manually obtaining that data for customers. Organizational Culture Recommendations This engagement has identified many process issues within the Planning Department. It is believed that making the changes that have been identified in the first part of this report will bring immediate results. It is also believed that to ensure a more complete and more meaningful change in the organization, more than just process should be addressed. In the research many gaps in the Departments' organizational culture were identified. These findings and recommendations are addressed below. It is also believed there is a need to better align the organizational culture of the Planning Department with the philosophy of the City Council. Working together the Department and the Council can place the City on a better tract toward the same goals and ensure success both with these organizational and process changes, but the success of the City. H. Mission & Goals Findings There is an opportunity to enhance the department employee's understanding and buy -in for the mission and goals of the City and Council and management for the department. Developing 15 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting improved processes and procedures will not have full effect unless the organizational culture of the department is addressed and aligned with the City's overall goals. Recommendations 1. Discern a consensus between City Council and management regarding the desired customer service philosophy for the Planning Department. i. The City Council and staff should work together to discuss and develop the economic development philosophy of the City. The result of this discussion should provide staff with better guidance on what development projects are/are not acceptable in the community. This gives better guidance to staff when approached for zoning changes and other development considerations. ii. The City Manager, Planning Director, and City Council should discuss and establish an understanding regarding the degree to which City Council desires staff to interpret codes in favor of customer perspectives and expediting projects. This discussion should give definition to providing "common sense" answers to customers without being too technical, or too liberal with their interpretations. The result of this discussion should encourage staff to make better judgment calls with the security to know they will be supported by the City Council. iii. City Council should establish for themselves guidelines for appropriate Council responses to citizen complaints/concerns. iv. The City Manager and City Council should discuss and agree upon the appropriate channel and method for communicating complaints/concerns including whether or not City Council should coordinate through the City Manager or directly with department employees. These protocols should reduce the feeling by staff they are in a constant state of defense, avoiding the "gotcha" syndrome some feel is present. v. The City Manager, Planning Director and City Council should discuss and come to an understanding regarding the preparation, presentation and process of amendments to the various codes and ordinances (staff has been told by previous councils it is not their job to bring proposed amendments). This should assist the staff in knowing when and how to present needed amendments to meet changes in state law, changes in process and changes in local environment to enhance customer service. vi. Staff should develop meaningful communication opportunities regarding the successes and challenges within the department to enhance City Council's trust that staff is timely and sensibly responding to City Council and customer inquiries. 16 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting 2. Develop an updated mission statement, guiding principals, and goals for the Planning Department and each Division. 3. Encourage a departmental culture of problem solving, assisting all customers with solutions and overcoming impediments, rather than focusing on minor technicalities. Increase the staff's understanding of the customer's schedule and financing constraints; "time is money" is a true adage. Inculcate an attitude of collaboration with citizens and customers, instead of power and control, to overcome the "god syndrome" reported by some customers. i. Conduct periodic all -employee meetings to reinforce departmental philosophies -mission, guiding principals and goals. ii. Conduct periodic employee organizational development exercises to overcome existing internal trust and communication barriers. iii. Use a more structured new employee orientation and training/mentoring system to ensure new employees adopt and express the desired customer service philosophies 4. Establish and enforce a culture of mutual respect between the City Council, Planning Commission, staff, and customers. i. Conduct facilitated sessions between the City Council to determine the Council's collective leadership philosophy regarding economic development within the City. ii. Conduct facilitated sessions between the City Council, Planning & Zoning Commission and staff to deliver that philosophy as well as align the actions the Commission and staff need to take within their respective authorities. iii. Meet periodically with customers to ensure that philosophy is both conveyed and is in line with community needs. iv. Conduct regular follow up sessions with Council, Commission and staff to ensure long-term alignment. 5. Establish an understanding that staff will be supported by City Council and management when making judgment calls consistent with the agreed upon "common sense" parameters. As stated earlier, frank discussions between City Council and staff should allow for the development of common understandings of how flexible the staff can be in interpreting code issues, and better define "common sense" answers to issues that do not overstep authority of the staff or provide the basis for discriminatory decision making. 6. Establish Planning Commission bylaws and rules of procedure including such topics as: i. Conflict of interest, participation, abstentions, and voting. 17 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting ii. Differentiate member roles for zoning, site plan, platting, and administrative functions of the Commission. iii. Define and enforce appropriate protocol and decorum expectations. iv. Ensure Commission members are availed of training and education opportunities. v. Establishing a schedule and process for periodic review of codes and ordinances directly related to the work of the Planning Commission. I. Departmental Cohesiveness Findings There is an internal tension between the divisions of the department that may cause communication errors and process difficulties. A lack of cohesion could easily translate to processes not functioning as efficiently as possible and customers experiencing difficulty. Recommendations 1. Change the name of the department to "Planning and Development" or "Development Services", or similar to better reflect the overall mission and responsibilities of the department. A divide between the Inspections and Planning/Engineering Divisions has been identified. One possible cause for the divide is the name of the department does not represent all aspects of the department. There is a Planning Division, which has only one member, within the Planning Department. There is an Engineering Division that is not identified at all within the department. The name of the department implies that planning is its primary function, which tends to diminish the perceived importance of the other divisions within the department. A different name for the department would be more inclusive of all departmental functions and could serve as a first step in reducing internal tensions. 2. Establish one staff member, with a department -wide focus, responsible for shepherding applications through all phases from inception to final acceptance. This person should be charged with communicating all steps and prerequisite permits, for a particular project at the pre -development meeting. This person should be empowered with the authority to make judgments (common sense decisions), to reconcile conflicting inter -division requirements and to facilitate timely and successful completion of projects. Currently, applicants with complex projects must interact serially with the various divisions and multiple contact persons. This system allows staff members to be more concerned with their individual processes/permits rather than on a department -wide 18 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting focus of achieving an overall successful and timely project for the applicant, further dividing the department. From the applicant's perspective, there is an internal, rules - based focus as opposed to an external project -completion focus. 3. Establish clear lines of responsibility/accountability for the various permitting processes. Define an "approver" and "reviewer(s)" for each major process. Establish and enforce accountability for each employee's role. Enforcing accountability will reduce the need for other employee's to fill gaps. When employees have to fill voids created by others, resentment between employees is generated; process is slowed; and customers experience conflicting guidance, confusion, and frustration. 4. Develop a review and comment system that will resolve all issues prior to meeting with the customer. Recognize that individuals involved with inspections, code enforcement, and engineering generally tend to be more "left -brained" and logically - oriented, and individuals involved with planning -related fields generally tend to be more "right -brained" and creative -oriented. When employees interact with other members of the department, recognizing these different perspectives will facilitate communication and problem -solving. Resolving differences in perspective internally before presenting the department's official interpretations to the customer should both expedite the process and enhance the quality of service to the customer. J. Trust Findings There is a lack of trust between some members of the department resulting in staff members overcompensating for the deficiencies they perceive. This situation becomes evident to customers, creating confusion and uncertainty as to the correct staff direction to follow. Processes are not as efficient as they could be due to the gaps and overlaps caused by ad -hoc modifications made in response to these patterns. Recommendations 1. Establish a culture of greater trust and open communication among the staff members of the department. i. One outward sign of a lack of trust within the department are the examples of one division needing a sign -off from another division before a process can proceed. These situations appear to be based more on self-protection than on actual documented procedural requirements. 19 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting ii. Organizational development exercises to identify gaps in trust with a plan of action on closing those gaps should have the effect of extending better service to the customers. 2. Establish a culture of greater trust and open communication between the staff and City Council. Earlier recommendations spoke to City Council and staff working together to determine their working relationship for customer complaints, code revisions, and overall economic development philosophy. Resolution of these issues through frank discussion and clear directives also allows for open communication and the building of trust between the groups. 3. Revise the monthly and quarterly report format to emphasize communication of successes, problems, and obstacles in lieu of purely statistical data. The statistical portions of the reports should be augmented to provide more context such as current month versus same month previous year; or year-to-date versus same date previous year. This format provides more meaningful benchmark type information to both the management and City Council and helps measure progress and/or provide information on gaps that need to be closed. K. Code Recommendations Findings The zoning code and development ordinance were reviewed in light of opportunities to reinforce improvements recommended under the themes identified during the departmental review. This review was focused on items that may be an impediment to efficient processing of applications and the ease of use from the customer's perspective. This review was not intended to be the exhaustive review that should be conducted to ensure the codes are consistent with the recently adopted update of the comprehensive plan. Recommendations 1. Zoning Code Recommendations: i. 106-62. Planning & Zoning Commission Membership and Structure The current Commission size and appointment method is atypical. Appointment of members by district may promulgate any district tensions that may exist at the Council level and may be an impediment to a city-wide planning perspective. The Commission should be a more typical seven members with the only condition that they are qualified voters of the City and appointments made by a majority vote of the entire City Council. The Commission should select its own chairperson and other officers. The City Council should consider 20 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting advertising vacancies on the Board as broadly as possible, requiring an application form, and conducting interviews of applicants before appointment. Additionally, the City Council and Planning Commission should conduct at least annually a joint, facilitated workshop to ensure the two bodies maintain a shared vision and common goals. ii. 106-64 (10) Bylaws and Rules of Procedure This section permits the Commission to establish bylaws and rules of procedure. The staff should prepare drafts of such documents for review and consideration by the Commission. iii. 106-65 Review of Chapter This section requires an annual review by the Commission of the zoning and development ordinances. The staff should establish an annual schedule and lead the effort to present proposed revisions to the Commission. iv. 106-87 Board of Adiustment Rules If not already in place, the staff should prepare rules of procedure for review and consideration by the Board. v. 106-333 Table B, Residential Area Requirements, footnote 12 It is unclear to which "building setback" (front, rear, side) and to which land use type this opaque screening requirement applies. vi. 106-333 Table B, Residential Area Requirements, footnote 14 This footnote requires an additional 25-foot "buffer" between multi -family and single-family developments. It is unclear if this buffer is intended to be landscaping only or if parking, for example, is allowed within the buffer. vii. 106-334 Special Use Performance Standards; Residential Generally: There are a variety of special conditions in this section that relate back to other underlying zoning districts. These conditions should be cross- referenced back to the underlying districts, so that the reader can be aware of these requirements. viii. 106-334 Special Use Performance Standards; Residential; Subsection (a) Subsection (a) of this section requires landscape buffers, but it is unclear as to when or where this buffer requirement applies. ix. 106-441 Table A, Commercial Uses This table uses SIC codes to delineate uses. Staff should develop an alternate table using NAICS codes for consideration. x. 106-444 Special Use Performance Standards; Commercial; Subsection (a.1) Subsection (a.1) of this section requires planting strips, but it is unclear as to when or where this requirement applies. xi. 106-444 Special Use Performance Standards: Commercial: Subsection (a.3) This subsection requires certain parking lots to be screened; if the requirement is intended to apply to the front of such parking lots, the required six-foot height is excessive. This subsection also requires manufactured housing parks 21 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting and subdivisions to be screened from abutting uses, but it is unclear if the screening requirement is the responsibility of the commercial owner or the manufactured housing/subdivision owner. Additionally, for large commercial lots that are only partially developed, this screening requirement should only apply if the site is developed in proximity to the abutting use. xii. 106-441 Table A, Industrial Uses This table uses SIC codes to delineate uses. Staff should develop an alternate table using NICS codes for consideration. xiii. 106-637 Procedures for establishing a PUD; Subsection (c) The individual items on the list of 12 submittal requirements should be optional if the specific item is not applicable to the scope or context of the project site. xiv. 106-637 Procedures for establishing a PUD; Subsection (h) The code should be modified to allow certain development authorizations to be issued prior to final approval of the PUD and all related general plans and plats. This will facilitate construction phasing on large or complex projects. Examples of early permits that should be allowed include clearing and grading, detention, and utilities, provided that the corresponding subset of the plans have been approved prior to commencement of construction. xv. 106-659 PUD Special Regulations and Procedures; Subsection (b.3) The requirement that "a sufficient amount of useable open space is provided" is ambiguous and should be quantified. Developers generally prefer a specific regulation so they do not have to guess and negotiate the requirement. xvi. 106-678 PUD Building Height The maximum building height limitation should be removed to provide additional flexibility. Surrounding residential properties are still protected via the setback requirements of Section 106-696(c.2). xvii. Article V: Supplementary District Regulations Generally: There are a variety of special conditions in this Article that relate back to various underlying zoning districts. These conditions should be cross- referenced back to the underlying districts, so that the reader can be aware of these requirements. xviii. 106-801 Tree Preservation Various terms should be defined, such as "native tree", "protected tree", and "replacement tree". Subsection (b) prohibits the destruction of any native tree greater than six-inch diameter; however, Section 106-802 allows removal of a protected tree as part of a building permit if the tree is replaced with replacement trees. There is a conflict in this language as it appears all tree removal is prohibited, but also allowed under certain conditions. xix. 106-835 Design Standards This section including all related figures should be consolidated into the Public Improvements Criteria Manual or a new Private Improvements Criteria Manual, 22 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting as applicable. These moves will consolidate technical criteria, allow easier updating as warranted by new conditions or technology, and give the staff greater flexibility in granting "common sense" exceptions when needed to expedite a project. 2. Development Ordinance recommendations: General Comments: 1. The Development Ordinance should be codified to eliminate the need for customers and staff to cross-reference multiple ordinance revisions to determine the full code requirements. 2. Submittal copies: References to submittal or distribution of a specific number of copies of various documents (general plans, plats, etc.) should be removed from the ordinance and established by separate policy so that staff can readily update the requirements based on the latest needs. 3. Submittal dates: References to specific submittal deadlines should be removed from the ordinance and established by separate policy so that staff can readily update the requirements based on the latest needs. Additionally, as previously discussed, submittal and re -submittal deadlines and review time goals should be established and published by staff. References to statutory Planning Commission action deadlines should remain in the ordinance. 4. Appendices: Staff should have the authority to update the appendices (technical specifications and procedures) as new conditions warrant. This can be accomplished by adding a section to the ordinance authorizing staff to update the appendices or by removing the appendices from the ordinance and placing them in the criteria manual. Regardless of which method is chosen, any staff changes to the appendices should only be effective after an appropriate notice and waiting period, say 30 days, after posting the proposed change on the website. 5. Update the references to "Director of Community Development", which is an outdated title. Use "City Manager or designee" to make the reference more generic and flexible. 6. Do not put building setback lines on plats inside the city limits; rely on zoning ordinance to establish setbacks to avoid potential conflicts. ii. 4.00 Sketch Plans The submittal of sketch plans is optional so it should be removed from the code. Additionally, the intent of the sketch plan review process will be accomplished more fully if the pre -development meeting recommendations are implemented. 23 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting iii. 4.01 (D) Official General Plan The code states that an approved general plan expires after one year if a plat has not been filed and upon written notice to the subdivider. This potentially creates a gray area if the city fails to send the written notice. The general plan should simply expire after one year without notice. Further, this section allows the subdivider to request a one-year extension, but does not stipulate if the extension is automatically approved or if the Commission needs to act to approve the request. iv. 4.03 (C) Preliminary Plats: Effect of Approving Authority Action The code states that an approved preliminary plat expires after one year if a final plat has not been filed and upon written notice to the subdivider. This potentially creates a gray area if the city fails to send the written notice. The preliminary plat should simply expire after one year without notice. Further, this section allows the subdivider to request a one-year extension, but does not stipulate if the extension is automatically approved or if the Commission needs to act to approve the request. v. 4.04 (D) Final Plats: Recordation and Construction of Public Improvements The code states that an approved final plat expires after one year if a construction of the public improvements has not commenced and upon written notice to the subdivider. This potentially creates a gray area if the city fails to send the written notice. The final plat approval should simply expire after one year without notice. Further, this section allows the subdivider to request a one-year extension, but does not stipulate if the extension is automatically approved or if the Commission needs to act to approve the request. Additionally, an alternative should be provided to allow the subdivider to submit a performance bond for completion of the public improvements if they wish to record the plat before the public improvements are completed. vi. 5.01 General Street Standards Table 5-2 (Street Geometric Design Standards) should be moved to the Public Improvement Criteria Manual. vii. 5.01 (J) Alleys The City should consider the practice of continuing to allow new alleys to be platted. Based on the prior complications and cost of maintaining alleys, the provision of alleys, at a minimum, should be at the discretion of the City rather than the developer. viii. 5.04 Building Lines The building line requirements in this section should be consolidated into the Zoning Ordinance to avoid conflicts and the need to cross-reference multiple locations to find the same information. Setbacks applicable to the ETJ should be specifically specified. 24 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting ix. 10.00 Fees and Charges The fee schedule should be pulled from this ordinance and combined with other city fees in a consolidated fee ordinance that can be readily revised on an annual basis or as needed. x. 12.00 Open Space and Park Dedication State laws regarding park dedication requirements have been updated subsequent to 1985 when the Development Ordinance was adopted. This section should be reviewed for conformance with current law. Additionally, the fee in lieu of dedication should be removed from this section and combined with other fees for easier updating as needed. 3. Other Code Recommendations: i. Industrial District water and sewer agreements are calculated based on number of employees — Need an alternate method because the number of employees is often not known at the time the agreements are prepared, particularly in the case of companies starting new operations within the City. ii. Comprehensive Plan sidewalk requirements: Develop a specific list of streets to which the sidewalk requirements apply and corresponding sidewalk criteria; place these requirements in the Development Ordinance. iii. Resolve questions about whether or not fill dirt permits should be required for projects involving fewer than five loads. iv. Establishing minimum finished floor elevations for infill development in the floodplain could be accomplished with a pier and beam requirement rather than by utilizing dirt fill to minimize the perception of run-off impacts on neighboring properties. v. Several focus group members suggested the removal of the requirement for gates on dumpster enclosures as being impractical ineffective. vi. Staff has compiled a list of proposed ordinance updates based on recent experiences. This list should be presented to the Commission for review and recommendation to City Council. lll. Conclusion The consulting team believes implementation of these recommendations will move the City toward its goals of improving the customer service responsiveness, efficiency, and effectiveness. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service to the City and we are available for questions or additional engagements to assist with the implementation phase. 25 Planning Department Review Mueller Management/Ron Cox Consulting >0 e2 0/2 ct E> \\> \ ct §\ V) � ) ƒ@ 0 /\f >w 0 § cu C e%//° 2==g 15 \\) <(L) §70 \j \ k*2 k ?\/ _ \ 2 m0 \\\ \ m U) > { �\ )3� % aj 70 77. z�\ 0 Ct 0 0 / U L) U l/ 2 \E-0\ _ 2 E _ _ �2 \\ §\ \) <g /5Mo .0 R$22»] =magma m2G3 e/CL\\' 22- ))cu e22 2 LL I'r & / _ \ / 0 7E £ 2:,E 2{$/ / -®/ 7j§ \m ;, Gk/ @2 @� z�ge 2@/ E 3 _\ f §/ \§ Ln (\\ m; GEe., �\�7 7 �] - ��� � ���� _ ��ct �� -\a= \/\ \\\) \�\��� SEE E \§®E , ±22 �/ E > \ ma)\ \ m7 \ \/ , \/ \j\±\§ \/ \\\ : f » 2 { ;.E ƒ/ // ƒ� ƒ LL EE£zt � /\\}, �m=2 (a\& 2 § `2)/G \&$/� §� `2Er 0 �2 gam z= § »)¥; />2\ RE_= =y�t mg7j g,! zm �§$( .z /$ 0 0 f __- m)) . / a)N / ./ ;n@ f ƒ(k Lu _ C ❑ J N y L d C1 Y o a, c a) s c Q E u Q)N o = .5 E N o CL n Ct O a) (t a ct ❑ Yt 7C3 Q U 7C3 = 6 0 S1 Q Y c c W .o U � V) E U 7C3 N O . oU) U U a c 7 c SZ Q) O a, U a) O N C U U)LO C E 07C3 � Q a c U o o 0 U Q2HOU.� O (t$ O � � a) a�E1� O s C Yam- a O> a LL n J a o a � w � C a) Q) � L Q) � LL O onU c a, a) U tf S O Q O0 O� o 0 .2 a) Q n a 00 c O 2 a y o 0 0 ❑ m c m o c — a Y (u U) ❑ — U n 70 CD U) m u z U,— s C 7 (t N U P O_ w n o (t N Ln c LL) O w U a 76 H v) c (n c O W D-- Q 0 C Q) O C' C LT N a) 7 4 L U a O N Y o Q o( c (a t E c a a U c ='n > E> 0- a) o O o z L a)Lo Y a) c a W o W (a cn � .oc V) O U coU O U to- as 70 Yc ,-'a z a)ai a U la) Fa) O O X U ci a_ E C o O 7 O a o Q, a) o a, S J ZM70 Y c ZM70 ( Y O o O Z C cm C U O O) U a) < O U) C Z O o '.� c6 (t a a, W 0- a, — a) O a a - n.� U H n U a) a, 0 c s a o(. c v, o_ 0 i8 a) o m a E aa) fl '`-' atea,, a5 ni Q a) 7C3 L a) c N o N 7C3 o a)— JO a o 0 co Y nc c .- n" O c tea`, > o c o � of>U.SQ �ooC.'o O- E a) '� E CZ a, a) O O � � O C O V) = (tf m ❑ ❑ LL LL UY Un Un N — U a� o H � Q) (L) ct W v) o= o U CZ Uv T y LL J Y aL 4 C �- O w Q L1 u .� 4 .� ) Un YO o L) y o U a c Z s J p 0 a -o E iLUin N O 5 \/j_ %\ -oom ....... moo-= it� z, aj ±�{ \� \\ :< 0- CL - ` 'T)Lo & E\ \ o aj j ± <=J=J �2u=>=> \ƒ}o W H Q H z 0 F- F- 2 0 W a W J m N z 0 a N W LL LL H N 0 W z Q N N Q Q V LL W z W m H Q a z H V Q W H z U W Q a ii n n ii * *c *c *c * *c *c *c *c *c *c cc cc cc cc cc cc co U U U U W a s d a d a a a a 11 a m U CO CO O m a a a a U o o m o o o o a o U U U o o, (7 O U a a U a� U U U a a a 0 U 0 0 0 O W N U U m m m a a a a O v U 0 0 U D U U v o 0 0 o U (7 O U U U U U U U o o ( U U U U U U U U D N N U U U U U u U U N o o 0 0 U= o N 3 U � a U U c U co co c 06 06 06 06 06 06 06 o2S o 06 06 O 06 co co o U vi vi 06 U vi co 0 0 0 0 0 0 o U a a o o o 0 o a co 0 co d U coU a a COu c Ua , Ln Ln Ln to to to to to 1- r- r- r- r- 00 00 00 00 00 00 Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol Ol O O O f -1 r -I r -I E � L L O � 3 C _ E •� E: a� �n 0 L O � � 'Q z O Q a) 'a .O > . C 7 L L f6 O U N O U C C +� O � m O � 3 u ° n E s aa) •°' s c= 4- c O 'Q . 4, - E N ..p'u Q O u a) c6 Q }� a u _ to U C s a 41 a) C N a) +' L C p O N N o 4- c 4� �, > L c L nz o 3 CL E -a N ..Y E c +� c° Q f6 z> 3 N ° a L a N E � N a ° _ O +� � O C O p' + o c +� nz c O Q° L +� •> •f6 .� 0 u Ul C O C O U .E +, '� '� E ° U f6 0 L > u p �n u .., ca .., ni ��� d .� u L L _ C C: -M tw E _ � a) _ O T * G cc H H g H g g H H H H * H H H H H H H H* g H g* J (n J (n J (n (n (n (n J (n J J a a a 0 Q Y a W N a U Op a a a (n Cao7 0 0 0 co 0 0 O co 0 co a (� O O O O O m m m m Oco U pa O UUOOmUmUUO U co O UUUU co j O,ov OO U Da O co co U U U U U U U O U7 CO U a: W cn a a C O co LUZZ 0 Y O U O 22 O C U co U co U co U co O O U ~~ 0 0 U cocoN U U W W N U co a ( j U co p a U U co a cn � U co U) 0 a� cn 0 cn 0 06 0 U U C 0 0 0 o m m� 0 o O co0 06 o 06 a p a a a D U 0 O J m U U U C D U U C a co co a 0 0 C O c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I c-I N N N N N N N M M M M M �t Rt Rt Rt Rt Rt Rt Ln Ln to I- r 4N N CL Y (✓wiV f6 O 4, 4, (6 Y' CL _a •Q L y N }� N N � Y N m (A tH (6 '''^"y Utio tw u C:bio N aUi N c -a u c c 3 � U a N •0 •> 0 0 i6 i6 0 a i` Y�NJ��„ Q ",'9A� i` 0 t L 0 Y V O 1�1 ������,I a) o o c: u '' " > Lo o c o 3 � f6 a-• 0 C 0 'E f6 CC C Y�...� o L c.W.�,� L .L o L VI 0 0 0 L VI a 0 ri ui 3 3 ' c L a� 'I' 4 ur,„!:.I N ..'i��NJ a Q L a' °m _ s m � c n II a� .' a"i U U N U a N 0 0 0 CO p O 0 a CD p 0 U U U p a a U O 0 0 O 0 p U OD up U U U co co U co p p U p co p w w m m c-1 c-I c-I c-I d E cr'v a) d S (6 a) N � qA U } +;d m OL a) s a E tin + = N +, O = c L O a) s L E > E C, C L O O O U : U +, f�6 d CL 3 hA C > Ol O O c-1 N N 4- f6 :.IIIII;I 4o �j > > E 4- .i.... Ln c^v OL �CL i�.�r^� tw h,o 'a C C C: O C m E C c Ln O +D v +J U U t, S N •C .0 � 7 E U O C = E d d d p p p a a a U U U U U U N N N co co co a a a O M Ln N N N N �+ a) C: V) (1) (1) E U CL N O sz a) > c a) U O O CL -a C: -a f6 C 4O f6 U C O L nz c c L E a) 0 u I? W O C a) I? � > -a a) c N p to O O N 0 O p V N11 O E00 a) E L O � E L N >, M 3 a) II �E E E L N CA 0 a) E L E s° N C: J N J u f6 s C •C U t�: L m L L a) L a) C to 0 m C U L E a -2 s c c u O 'a O ° U a) W a) O E ,} L O m N W > C w U a) N} U U N-a II a L s U � 0 0 II N II ) O U U IpI d II U II C7 w U " II 0 0 O O L1 U p U- c v, O L L E �_ 3 O (6 a) E a) u E +' O N C: O c) N U tin 4' C N � O E a) ate) p a) E L U f6 O — i Q 4 N E CL co N a) U tw p a) U � .- a- u U � II II II c6 N 41 � U co O 2 a II p O = p U N II co p d �