Development Services Review. Final Report. Zucker July 2016

and took 39 days for a PC project. Unlike some other Cities we have studied, Morgan Hill does not consider a project technically complete until the CEQA determination is made, which results in varying determination timeframes. Data on the number of review cycles was not presented, so it is unclear how many review cycles each project underwent. The time frames from completeness to decision were quicker for the PC case shown than for two Director decision cases shown, which is curious, since Director cases are by nature more routine and should take less time. The overall process completion timeframes for projects requiring Council action, varied significantly, from 32 to 404 days. It is not clear whether processing variations are attributable to expedited review, CEQA, multiple reviews, applicant delays or some combination of these. The varying completion timeframes is consistent with feedback we received in that applicants desire more predictability in the approval processes. We understand that processing timeframes can vary by project due to CEQA and other complexities. Nonetheless, many of the California communities we’ve studied have successfully implemented review Performance Standards, which have helped to improve accountability, efficiency and predictability. We believe the City needs to establish and implement performance standards as well to increase accountability and predictability. The Division has not established formal Performance Standards to measure decision time frames for Director Administratively approved applications or Planning Commission and Council Approved Applications. However, a 14-day timeframe has been established for first cycle reviews for all planning application types. Best practice communities establish performance standards for planning application processing so that they can more effectively gauge processing effectiveness and meet customer timeline expectations or needs. Performance Standards are typically established for application completeness (e.g., depending on how an agency interprets “completeness”), staff review time frames for up to three review cycles (e.g., each review following the initial review until the project is accepted for final decision- making) and overall processing time frames (e.g., from submittal to decision). Performance Standards

Table 23 below shows our Suggested Performance Standards.

Morgan Hill, California

151

Zucker Systems