Supervisors move forward with options to streamline discretionary permits

The San Diego County Board of Supervisors' members desire to streamline the discretionary permit process while maintaining public review safeguards, and the Feb. 12 board of supervisors meeting provided direction to county staff to move forward with several measures.

Multiple 5-0 votes gave direction to staff to continue bringing to fruition seven options for self-certification of project components, two California Environmental Quality Act review timing options, one option on final engineering changes, three checklist exemption options, and one recommendation to continue the existing land development technical working group.

No formal board vote was needed to accept the staff recommendations on the project issue resolution process and on increasing coordination and accountability between departments.

"What we're doing today I think makes a lot of sense," Supervisor Dianne Jacob said.

A 5-0 board of supervisors vote July 24 directed the county's chief administrative officer to return within 180 days with recommendations for implementing a self-certification process for engineers, implementing permit and CEQA evaluation requirements, increasing final engineering flexibility, increasing opportunities to expand checklist exemptions for certain permit processes, implementing a project issue resolution process, and increasing coordination and accountability between departments.

The motion also included the formation of a working group of industry members and other stakeholders.

Ministerial permits are for projects which are considered "by right"; the facilities are not truly by right but are contingent upon compliance with a checklist. Such permits include building permits, electrical permits and well water permits. Ministerial permits are exempt from CEQA and are for the most part flat fee permits which can be processed relatively quickly.

Discretionary permits are subject to CEQA. Any rezone, general plan amendment, or specific plan amendment is a discretionary action which must be approved by the board of supervisors.

The county's Planning Commission has the authority to approve subdivision maps and Major Use Permit requests, although the decision may be appealed to the board of supervisors. A Minor Use Permit or a design review permit such as a site plan would also undergo the discretionary process.

As part of the process for providing recommendations county staff held meetings with local professionals and reviewed the policies of the county's 18 incorporated cities, 16 other cities and counties in California, and seven jurisdictions outside of California.

The county's Department of Planning and Development Services met with industry groups, community planning and sponsor groups, other community members and environmental stakeholders. The county's Planning Commission reviewed the recommendations Dec. 13 and provided input, although no formal Planning Commission vote was taken.

The Planning Commission recommendations included the ability to self-certify private roads beyond the four lots recommended by PDS staff, initially beginning self-certification with small projects and expanding to larger projects or reducing self-certification based on the success or lack thereof of the initial self-certifications and not including structural changes for tenant improvements among the self-certification items.

The Planning Commission also recommended a review committee to provide a forum for the articulation of issues and recommended that PDS staff track which options approved by the board are or are not effective.

Although licensed professional engineers must prepare technical analyses, the studies are submitted for peer review. The potential improvements would eliminate the peer review to ensure that the project complies with county codes and other standards.

The self-certification would apply to such items as landscape plans prepared by licensed landscape architects, grading or improvement plans prepared by licensed civil engineers, and building plans prepared by licensed civil engineers or architects.

The actual construction and development would still be inspected and certified by county staff to ensure that it matches the plans and meets code requirements, and the self-certification options would not replace fire district, water district, or other jurisdictional plan review requirements.

The county already allows self-certification for roof, water heater, plumbing and other piping, air condenser and window replacement for single-family buildings along with demolition permits, fencing and walls, interior drywall, exterior siding and plastering, and manufactured home foundation retrofits for single-family structures.

The seven additional proposed options would allow self-certification for landscape plans, private roads which are constructed on-site and remain privately owned and maintained, minor grading permits which displace no more than 2,500 cubic yards of soil or 200 cubic yards of import or export (one option is for pads only without structures and a second option would cover single-family structures), residential driveways, traffic control permits required for construction, and commercial tenant improvements with no structural changes and occupancies less than 50 people.

PDS staff believes implementation of the self-certification options can return to the board of supervisors with specific language within 18 months.

"It does put a heavier onus on the applicants," Supervisor Greg Cox said.

The investigation of permit and CEQA evaluation requirements would allow technical analysis to answer questions pertaining to CEQA while separating the construction-level detail which would not be required until final engineering.

CEQA information must be adequate and complete but does not require the level of detail required at final design development or construction, so the schematic design phase of a project would likely provide enough information to identify the required technical studies and allow a determination of the project's environmental impacts.

One CEQA review timing option would allow a schematic flood analysis to address CEQA review requirements during the discretionary phase rather than after recording a final map while the other timing option would allow that for stormwater analysis. Those changes could also be returned to the board of supervisors with specific language within 18 months.

"The work is still done. It's just the timing of the work that changes," Building Industry Association of San Diego vice president for government affairs Matt Adams said.

"There is still an appropriate evaluation," Adams said. "We're trying to address the time it takes to conduct these evaluations."

If unforeseen modifications are required during the final engineering due to regulatory processes and a finding of substantial conformance cannot be made the project currently must return to the discretionary process.

Changes of no more than 10% can be approved administratively through a minor deviation, and the proposed change would allow exemption to additional county review if the changes are solely to comply with requirements of outside regulatory agencies and there would be no impact to parks, trails, or other project features which would substantially affect the project. The timeframe to return this option to be board of supervisors is between 18 months and three years.

The potential increased checklist exemptions would require findings to be met for those exemptions, and some of the permits could be shifted from the discretionary to the ministerial process.

A planning or sponsor group can recommend a waiver of a site plan, and one option encourages the use of site plan waivers and checklist exemption options for such projects before submitting an application for a site plan; that can be implemented immediately.

A second option would allow checklist exemptions for projects which require a site plan but not design review; implementation for that is expected to take 18 months to three years.

The third checklist exemption option would shift some discretionary administrative permits to ministerial. Those would cover an additional story for a main residence, animal raising, a borrow permit to excavate material for use at another location, a host home used for rental income, fence height, a mobile finance business office, on-site and off-site signage, oversized accessory structures and small day care for less than 14 children.

Time extensions for tentative maps with no project changes could also be shifted from discretionary to ministerial. The implementation estimate for those shifts is 18 months to three years. Those projects would still be subject to PDS review.

PDS formed a Land Development Technical Working Group to obtain input from professional practitioners. The working group consists of architects, civil engineers, contractors, developers, and environmental and planning practitioners.

The working group members utilize their experience with other jurisdictions as well as their experience with the county to provide input. PDS gave the county supervisors the option of retaining the existing working group or transitioning to a formal land development advisory committee, although PDS did not recommend the latter and the county supervisors chose the former.

The project issue resolution component of the potential improvements will implement a project resolution process so that issues can be resolved faster. If an applicant requests a project issue resolution meeting both sides are heard and a designated executive-level arbitrator provides a final determination.

The issues subject to resolution include Zoning Ordinance or County Code interpretation, requests for additional information or studies, and differences of opinion on project-related processing. PDS staff and executive management will review the issues and determine how to resolve the differences.

Increased coordination between departments would provide a timelier and more complete project review. Projects involve not only PDS but also the Department of Public Works, the Department of Parks and Recreation, the Department of Environmental Health, County Counsel, and the San Diego County Regional Fire Authority.

"Something that's really holding us back is working in silos as departments," Supervisor Kristin Gaspar said. "We need to work on that."

Jacob noted that the county has undertaken previous initiatives to reduce delays in projects while still protecting county standards and public review. "This is one step further," she said.

"The proposals this morning are a great effort to move forward," Adams said. "These efforts will help improve the ability to bring projects from conception to construction."