Development Services Review. Final Report. Zucker July 2016

Table 23 Suggested Performance Standards for Planning Applications (PA’s)

Existing Staff Review Timeframe Calendar/Business Days

Suggested Deemed Complete to Decision in Calendar Days/Business Days

Suggested Staff Review Performance Standard in Calendar/Business Days

Suggested Submittal to Feedback Processing 14 calendar/ 10 business PC - 21 calendar/ 15 business Council – 30 calendar/20 business

Suggested Goal for % Time Met

Application Types

Cycle One

Cycle One

Cycle Two

Cycle Three

Conceptual Plan Review Applications Preliminary Plan Review (non- Measure C) Applications Director Decision Planning Applications Planning Commission Decision Planning Applications City Council Decision Planning Applications

14 calendar/ 10 business

14 calendar/ 10 business 14 calendar/ 10 business

N/A

N/A

N/A

90%

14 calendar/ 10 business

N/A

N/A

N/A

90%

14 calendar/ 10 business

7 calendar/ 5 business

3 Bus.

1 Bus.

90%

N/A

N/A

CEQA Cat. Exempt. - 35 calendar/ 25 Bus. CEQA Neg. Declaration - 55 calendar/ 40 Bus. CEQA Cat. Exempt or Neg. Declaration – 80 calendar / 58 Bus.

14 calendar/ 10 business

Same

5 Bus.

3 Bus.

N/A

90%

14 calendar/ 10 business

Same

5 Bus.

3 Bus.

N/A

90%

We have suggested a Performance Standard for the overall processing time (e.g., from submittal to feedback) for Conceptual Plan Review and Preliminary Plan Reviews (e.g., non-RDCS) which are likely shorter than typical processing timeframes. The suggested Performance Standards for these processes provides time for DRB review, followed by immediate PC and Council review, when requested. Our suggested staff reviews standards are shorter for Director Decision applications because they are more routine and can typically be processed more quickly. After the first review cycle, subsequent review time frames are further shortened. Staff review time frames for PC and Council Decision applications are 14 calendar days for the first review, which is the existing review time frame, so that the project can be considered by the DRB to help flush out major issues, which is an important

Morgan Hill, California

152

Zucker Systems