Laserfiche WebLink
`, full range of professionals. He explained the review process and the costs involved <br /> and stated that certain requirements had to be met before any plans could be signed off <br /> by the company. <br /> Tryon suggested a budget amendment to address the rising engineering costs. Casey <br /> noted that she had been advised that one of the problems with getting a project <br /> completed were the layers of bureaucracy at Wilsey and Ham. She thought in-house <br /> engineering should be looked into as she was quite concerned about the expenses <br /> involved. <br /> Jeff Peterson, Wilsey & Ham, explained that there really were not layers of bureaucracy <br /> as 90-95% of the plans were checked by one person. Mr. Peterson also expressed his <br /> support of the second recommended solution which stated: 'After the initial review <br /> and comments, if all issues raised have not been addressed in the resubmittal, no <br /> further review will occur without a meeting between the applicant, both sets of <br /> engineers, and the Public Works Director, or City Manager. A budget and a timeline <br /> will be agreed upon prior to continuing any review. ' He noted that oftentimes <br /> comments on plans were made during the course of review and they were either <br /> ignored or overlooked. He supported a policy whereby if the comments were ignored, <br /> 46/ no further work would be done on the project. This would save everyone involved <br /> time and money. <br /> PASSED BY CONSENSUS: To direct Wilsey and Ham to not proceed on a project if <br /> their initial comments have not been addressed by the applicant. <br /> Another suggested solution called for more specific conditions and more handouts on <br /> ordinances, policies, etc. By making the process as clear as possible in the beginning, <br /> there should be fewer time-delaying questions at a later date. In response to a concern <br /> raised by the Mayor concerning such conditions as those imposed by the Fish and <br /> Game Department and the Santa Clara Valley Water District, the City Manager noted <br /> that progress meetings with all involved worked well. <br /> It was noted that a meeting was scheduled for Friday,October 19th to discuss with <br /> developers and anyone else who was interested the planning and building procedures <br /> in Town, concerns, suggestions, complaints, etc. A written report would be prepared <br /> and distributed on the notes of that meeting. <br /> October 16, 1990 <br /> 2 <br />