Laserfiche WebLink
Request for Council Action continued <br />Page 2 of 8 <br />May 21, 1996 <br />Report Regarding Expediting the Planning Application Review Process <br />7. Perception by the applicant that staff is. or should be, an advocate for the <br />applicant, which is not the case. <br />8. Costs incurred by the applicant to provide complete information. <br />Nfaior Obstacles to Accomplishing the Customer Service Elements <br />1.Length of the planning application review process (applicants believe the <br />shoner the process the better.) <br />2.The high number of applications generally overloads both staff and the <br />Planning Commission. <br />3.Lack of policy guidelines makes it difficult for staff to play a role in <br />expediting the application review process. <br />C. Causes of an Extended Planning Application Review Process <br />1.Delay between discovery that an application is needed and the next <br />application deadline. <br />This occurs when a property owner reque?^% a buiUj.iig permit for a <br />project and is advised that a planning *»n*h as a variance, is <br />required. <br />2.The need for thorough application review by staff (including city engineer <br />when applicable.) <br />3. Requests for additional information by staff. <br />a. To make the application complete. <br />b. To clarify information regarding the proposal. <br />c. <br />d. <br />To resolve questions. <br />To resolve issues regarding feasibility. <br />I <br />■