3. Optional Best Practices and Advisory Guidance

This section of the Proposition 123 Fast Track Guidance contains optional best practices that DOLA encourages local governments to consider implementing to help streamline the review process. These best practices are not required to achieve compliance with the expedited review requirements of Proposition 123.

3.1 Avoid Extensive Pre-Application Requirements

When development review timelines apply to specific types of development applications, some local governments respond by "front-loading" multiple rounds of informal development review before accepting an application. They want to ensure that a development is "perfect" and approvable before starting the time-limited development review period. This often does not speed up development review and approval, because any time "savings" achieved during the 90-day formal review period are offset by the significant investment of time required by the applicant before the application is submitted. Although the Prop. 123 90-day timeline begins at the time a completed application is received, requiring multiple rounds of informal pre-application development review is not the best way to meet the intent of Prop 123. Instead, local governments should meet the intent of the 90-day review requirement by streamlining, clarifying, and simplifying development review requirements so that extended pre-application reviews are not necessary.

3.2 Clearly Define Complete Applications and Require Only Necessary Detail

Local governments should define what a complete application entails by establishing a thorough completeness check process. In addition, communities should think carefully about the level of detail needed for each type of application in light of the scale and complexity of the project and whether it represents a preliminary or final approval. Over time, many communities increase the level of detail involved in the early stages of development review even when it is likely that any related impacts can be addressed later in the process, or when it is likely that smaller projects will not create any impacts of that type. The best development review systems phase the levels of detail required in application materials to match the size and complexity of the project and the stage of the development process and avoid requiring the applicant to incur very significant expenses before the general feasibility of the project has been established.

3.3 Enable Concurrent Review of Multiple Permits

The Guidance allows local governments to apply a separate 90-day Fast Track Review Process to each type of permit or approval required for the project, rather than requiring that all permits and approvals be completed in a single 90-day period. However, local governments should allow concurrent review and approval of all permits and approvals required for an Affordable Housing project whenever possible, rather than applying 90-day review periods one at a time in a linear fashion. For example, if a conditional use approval and site plan approval are both required, the intent of Prop. 123 would be best achieved by allowing joint review of both required approvals during a single 90-day review period.

3.4 Coordinate Early with External Review Agencies

Process improvement efforts should always involve external agencies that must review or approve aspects of affordable housing projects. Failure to include those agencies can significantly undermine intended process improvements. Intentional coordination, particularly early in the process, can prevent delays caused by missing documentation or duplicative requests.

3.5 Consider Expanding Eligibility Beyond Minimum Requirements

The Fast Track Review Process can be modified to apply more broadly than defined in statute. Local governments may establish a Fast Track Review Process that applies to projects with lower percentages of affordable housing (i.e., less than 50% of the units), or that applies to projects that include higher AMI restrictions (i.e., above the 60/100% AMI requirements). See section 2.1A of the Fast Track Guidance for examples.

3.6 Plan for Continuous Process Improvement

Good planning and process improvement work takes time to complete. Process improvement work should begin well before the Prop 123 deadlines.

Process improvements are not a one-time effort. Improvements designed to streamline the review and approval of Affordable Housing development projects should be tested and continually refined to meet the local government's intended goals.

Even those local governments that already comply with the Prop. 123 expedited review requirements should review their processes, consider potential improvements, and adopt language that aligns with DOLA's Proposition 123 Fast Track Guidance.

3.7 Consider Extending Improvements to All Development Types

After identifying development review process improvements for Affordable Housing projects, local governments should also consider whether the same clarifications, efficiencies, and streamlining should be extended to other types of projects to improve overall community governance.

3.8 Look for Opportunities to Streamline or Expedite the Appeals Process

Any appeal of the project approval or denial does not need to be completed within the 90-day period leading to the final decision. However, to align with the spirit of the law, local governments are encouraged to consider opportunities to streamline or expedite the appeals process for affordable housing projects.