For some time the city has been in a quandary. For a number of years, the city’s planning staff was viewed as excessive, particularly for a city that was not growing. However, the anticipated workload with two and possibly three innovation park applications – Nishi, the Hotel Conference Center and more – necessitated that the city figure out a way to increase planning staff.
Staff writes, “Staffing levels in the planning division have been reduced (primarily through attrition) over the past decade, in response to city budget shortfalls and declines in development activity. The division currently has three planners and one-half of the planning/building technician, supervised by a principal planner.”
The city argues this will be cost-neutral, despite the anticipated total compensation being $183,547 with a salary of $107,070 starting December 1.
Staff writes, “Staff’s expectation is that additional planning and building revenue to the Department of Community Development and Sustainability will mean that this change is revenue-neutral for the General Fund.”
The new staff person would be charged with supervision and quality control for the majority of current planning applications.
Staff writes, “The reinstated position would allow reorganization of the Planning Division to free staff resources for increased attention to key advanced planning. Pursuit of additional planning grant opportunities would also be possible.”
How will this be revenue neutral? For starters, the city is expecting to receive a twenty percent administrative fee, around $120,000 for the two innovation parks. Second, over the next six months, the city is anticipating applications for three new medium-sized subdivisions – Drummond at Cowell, implementation/possible amendments of Grande and Chiles Ranch, and the hotel conference center, in addition to continuing activity at Cannery.
Finally, staff notes that two of the three planners, plus the Principal Planner and the Community Development Administrator, are currently eligible to retire. The new principal planner would allow for succession planning and improved continuity as existing staff retire over time.
In further anticipation of the new wave of development, staff is recommending that the city council approve a budget adjustment for $1 million in consulting services with Tschudin Consulting Group and Raney Planning and Management, for project management and CEQA services for the two innovation parks.
These costs will be completely offset by applicant fees from the two innovation parks.
In May 2014, the city issued a Request for Expressions of Interest from parties interested in developing Innovation Centers that will serve the Davis research and technology sectors and create a place for Davis technology companies to continue to grow. Responses to the RFEI were reviewed by the city council in July.
A planning application has been submitted for the “Mace Innovation Center” east of Davis. An application for the “Davis Innovation Center” northwest of the City is anticipated the week of October 6.
Staff adds that it does not anticipate an application for the third site.
Staff notes, “Should an application be contemplated, or received, staff will need to return to the City Council for direction on whether to process such an application. Processing the two innovation center applications concurrently will stretch both staff and consultant resources. A third innovation center application will exceed these capabilities and is not included in these consultant contracts.”
Each of these proposals will require an EIR and the city “contracts for EIRs of this nature to ensure a thorough review and seamless coordination with analyses of traffic, air quality, noise, and greenhouse gases.”
Staff adds, “In July, the City issued a Request for Qualifications for project management, CEQA, and sustainability planning services, for innovation park applications and for Nishi. Staff was very pleased with the quantity and quality of the responding firms. The RFQ was issued in July to afford time to bring consultants on board so that they were ready to begin right away as applications were submitted.”
The EIRs for the Innovation Center applications will include analysis of the full range of potential environmental impacts, as defined during the public “scoping” process.
Costs for the two EIRs is anticipated to total $660,032.
The city reports that the current schedule would be for city council hearings and actions on the applications by late 2015. A potential Measure R vote would occur in Spring 2016.
The city council subcommittee of Davis and Swanson are working with staff to develop a set of guiding principles that will be used as a framework to guide application expectations and review.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
I’ve always wondered why the city consistently hires those same two entities, Tschudin Consulting and Raney Planning.
From my experience observing Heidi Tschudin’s work on the Yolo County Gernral Plan Update (completed in 2009), one of the reasons I personally would hire Tschudin Consulting is the quality and efficiency of the work they do. Add to that their extensive knowledge of Yolo County and its an almost unbeatable combination … as long as they are price competitive.
Matt,
In connection with the work to be undertaken by these outside consultants, do we know if there exists an outline of their work plan and the expected deliverables – as establish by staff, city council, Council Members Davis & Swanson?
How could we determine, in advance, if the scope of their assignment would include parameters as outlined by Frankly in today’s post (see copy below) on Innovation Parks and Economic Models?
“Frankly
October 6, 2014 at 11:04 am
Here is a 2006 analysis of total local (countywide) economic contribution derived from a Wisconsin University Research Park. It is largely populated with the type of companies we would want in our innovation parks
http://legis.wisconsin.gov/lc/seminars/files/urp_handout.pdf.
It is 255 acres and contains 34 buildings and 114 businesses.
It paid $2.8 million in property tax in 2005.
They calculate the total local tax benefit as $28 million per year. Here is how they arrive at that number:
URP Economic Statistics 2006
Total URP Non-Payroll Spending $ 212,909,476
URP Companies’ Local Spending 100,373,993
URP Property Tax 2,828,353
URP Companies’ Employee Income Tax 8,282,121
URP Companies’ Employee Sales Tax 5,926,893
URP Companies’ Employee Property Tax 11,051,456
Total Direct URP Tax Revenue Generated $ 28,088,823
They calculate the local spending by the employees of the business as the largest annual economic benefit ($155 million).
Next is the spending by the businesses. They calculate that at $100 million.”
I’d not only like the the consultant scope of work to include projections of the amounts that will accrue directly to the City of Davis. Figuring the amount of property tax that will end up in city coffers is pretty easy, but distilling the amounts that drop out of the larger and more nebulous spending numbers is a lot trickier, since only a portion of that spending will occur within the City of Davis. (Employee income, sales and property tax figures are largely irrelevant, because new housing isn’t a part of the proposals before the city.)
Good points, however, I do believe that aspect of “net, new employee local spending” (assuming they do not live in Davis) might be a somewhat surprising number. If we consider that Stanford Research Park employs somewhere between 20,000-27,000 (landlords estimate vs Wikipedia), what do these “visiting employees” spend in an average week – on lattes, lunches, dining & entertainment, gas, sundries, maybe a new car every few years? These would be net, new visitor purchases – who without the Innovation Center job would be spending their days elsewhere.
[Delete “not only.”] [Where’s that Edit button?]