Prop 123 Expedited Review�Guidance and Strategies Webinar

April 2024

Webinar Agenda

• Welcome and introductions
• Process to develop the guidance materials
• Organization of the online guidance materials
• Overview and applicability
• Prop 123 expedited review analysis
• Strategies to consider
• Community examples overview
• Wrap-up

Introductions

• DOLA – DLG and DOH Team
• Robyn Difalco
• Andy Hill
• Maulid (“Mo”) Miskell
• Melissa Nereson

​

• Consultant Team
• Josh Olhava, AICP, PCCP, Ayres Associates
• TJ Dlubac, AICP, Community Planning Strategies

​

Process

Partner Agencies and Stakeholders

Local Government Representation:

• More than 65 planners from every region of the state.

Tribal Partners:

• 6 tribal representatives from around the state.

Developers (for profit & nonprofit):

• More than 30 developers with affordable housing expertise, including housing authorities.

Online Guidance Materials

1. Introduction
• Guidelines Overview
• Process Overview
• Summary - Prop. 123 Interpretations
• Summary - Strategies Overview
2. Prop 123 Expedited Review Analysis
• Statute Language and Interpretations
• FAQ Style Analysis
3. Strategies
• Side by Side Analysis - Challenges and Strategies
• Community Examples

Overview

This Guidance is only for the expedited review requirements of Prop. 123.

• First Commitment Cycle (2023-2026): expedited process is not required until 2027.
• Second Commitment Cycle (due Nov. 01, 2026): expedited process is required.
• Local Planning Capacity grant program: supports policy adoption and implementation of an expedited review process.
• Start early and evaluate for continuous improvement.
• Review current processes and adopt language aligned with Prop. 123.
• Template Resolution
• A developer can opt out of the local expedited review process for any reason.

Program Applicability

Expedited review processes are not required for every project.

Expedited review is required for projects that have 50% or more units as “Affordable”.

These guidance materials are not related to:

• Compliance criteria for other Prop. 123 requirements
• Local government baseline or commitments
• Prop. 123 funding program requirements

Definitions of Affordable under Prop. 123 means:

• Rental housing at or below 60% AMI.
• For-sale housing at or below 100% AMI.
• And costs less than 30% of household monthly income.

Prop. 123 - Paragraph (2)(a)

Overview

Paragraph 2(a) establishes the basic requirements and criteria for an expedited review process. In order to be eligible to receive Prop. 123 financial assistance, a local government must establish an expedited review process for certain application types with housing projects that contain at least half (50%) of the units as affordable. A final decision of a complete application must be made within 90 calendar days.

Let’s analyze these requirements further...

Prop. 123 Takeaways - Paragraph (2)(a) - 1 of 2

• The 90-calendar day time frame is from a complete application submittal to a final decision on specific application types. (see next slide for common application types)
• There is a separate 90-calendar day time frame per application.
• A complete application submittal is determined by the local government completeness check process.
• Note: submitted does not always mean complete.
• A final decision includes approval or denial, and does not include the following:
• a recommendation from a recommending body; or
• post approval steps like obtaining signatures or recordation.
• 90-calendar day time frame does not stop, but can be extended. (more on that in a bit)

Prop. 123 Takeaways - Paragraph (2)(a) - 2 of 2

Common Application Types (expedited review required, possibly required, not required)

Expedited Review Required:

• Admin. Modification
• Alternative Compliance
• Building Permit
• Conditional Use
• Development Plan
• Site Plan
• Special Use / Use by Special Review
• Variance or Waiver

Possibly Required:

• Accessory Use Permit
• Civil / Construction Drawings
• Master Plan
• PUD and PUD Amendment

Not Required:

• Annexation
• Appeals
• Comprehensive Plan Amendment
• Concept / Pre-App.
• Rezoning
• Subdivision/Plat/ Division of Land
• Subdivision Exemption
• Zoning Establishment

Prop. 123 - Paragraph (2)(b)

Overview

Paragraph 2(b) states that local governments’ policies and procedures can allow developers additional time (up to 90 days) to address comments from an agency that has approval authority over the application, in addition to the rare instances of state law or court order.

Let’s further analyze this optional extension...

Prop. 123 Takeaways - Paragraph (2)(b)

This is an optional 90-calendar day developer extension tool local governments can incorporate as part of their process.

• Serves as a one-time developer request per application.
• Extension is added to the overall 90-calendar day time frame.
• It can be less than 90 days, but is still only one request/extension.
• Additional time to address comments from an agency with approval authority over the application.

Prop. 123 - Paragraph (2)(c)

Overview

Paragraph 2(c) states that local governments’ policies and procedures can allow the local government, working with the developer, to enact extensions during the development review process for the developer to address comments or requests for additional information or project revisions, and for local government staff to review modifications to an application. These 30 day extensions start once the applicant responds with the requested information.

Let’s further analyze these optional extensions...

Prop. 123 Takeaways - Paragraph (2)(c) - 1 of 2

As a tool, local governments can include optional 30-calendar day extension(s).

• Extension provides additional time for both parties to address substantial comments.
• How this works in practice:
• Step 1: Local governments notify the developer of the intent to extend the process.
• Step 2: Developer is encouraged to respond within 5-business days acknowledging the extension.
• Step 3: The extension is implemented and includes the full 30-calendar days, plus the time to communicate with the developer.

Prop. 123 Takeaways - Paragraph (2)(c) - 2 of 2

Best practice: the optional 30-calendar day extensions should only be used for unique circumstances and delays that are outside the control of the developer or local government.

Prop. 123 Analysis Review and Questions

Strategies Guidance Structure

Strategy Development:

• From stakeholder and partner agency input, survey results, and best practices.
• Aligned common process and review challenges with potential solutions.
• Focused under three topic areas.

Strategies - Topic #1

Topic # 1: Quality of Submission Materials.

​

Strategies - Topic #2

Topic #2: Review Timelines

​

Strategies - Topic #3

Topic #3: Staff Capacity

​

Strategies Overview

1. Affordable Housing Plan
2. Affordable Housing Expedited Review
3. Application Checklists & Guides
4. Assessment or Update
5. Contracted Planning Support
6. Dedicated Staff Planner/Liaison
7. Development Review Committee
8. Intergovernmental Agreement

9. Level of Approval
10. Post-Review Meeting
11. Pre-Application Meeting
12. Prioritize Affordable Housing Projects
13. Process Improvement
14. Public Meeting Schedule

15. Training

a: Reviewer Training

b: Developer Training

General strategies to consider to work towards the 90-day time frame…

Strategy #1: Affordable Housing Plan

• Purpose
• Develop a plan that establishes clear guidance to developers on the local housing needs and market variabilities.
• Measure of Success
• Increased synergy between community needs and housing supply.
• Pro Tip
• Go the extra mile to speak to potential developers on how to comply with the community priorities in the housing plan.

Strategy #2: Affordable Housing Expedited Review Process

• Purpose
• To design a unique process within the local land use regulations which creates a fast track process for projects which meet or exceed community housing goals.
• Measure of Success
• Affordable housing projects meeting the established criteria have a clear process which meets or exceeds the 90-calendar day requirement.
• Pro Tip
• Streamlined process should include higher level of collaboration between internal and external referral agencies.

Strategy #3: Application Checklists & Guides

• Purpose
• To clarify the expectations, submittal requirements, responsibilities, and roles of the developer and local government.
• Measure of Success
• These are clear enough for a developer to understand the expectations of what a complete application includes.
• Pro Tip
• Provide names, contact information, and links to additional resources to support applicant success with meeting all requirements.

Strategy #4: Assessment or Update

• Purpose
• Internal evaluation of the land use regulations to identify standards and provisions which are not aligned with community policies, values, and goals and develop strategies to better align them.
• Measure of Success
• Community values are aligned with code requirements and standards.
• Pro Tip
• Draft standards that are clear enough to allow administrative approvals.

Strategy #5: Contracted Planning Support

• Purpose
• Increase staff capacity through developing a relationship with contracted planning support.
• Measure of Success
• Develop a relationship with a firm or individual who will help expand knowledge and capacity of in-house staff.
• Pro Tip
• Include clear community values, desired approach, and what a successful partnership would entail in the RFP.

Strategy #6: Dedicated Staff Planner/Liaison

• Purpose
• Develops subject matter expertise in application types as well as a single point-of-contact throughout the planning process.
• Measure of Success
• Increased knowledge and understanding of each individual application.
• Pro Tip
• Align staff members with their professional goals, where possible, to create internal excitement over projects.

Strategy #7: Development Review Committee (DRC)

• Purpose
• Regularly scheduled meeting between reviewing agencies to allow an opportunity to discuss the application and coordinate review comments.
• Measure of Success
• Comments are more comprehensive and don’t conflict between agencies.
• Pro Tip
• Schedule these at close enough intervals to allow an opportunity to discuss each application after it is submitted, but before comments are due.

Strategy #8: Intergovernmental Agreements

• Purpose
• IGAs between a municipality, county, special district, or other referral agency established cooperative planning activities across entities.
• Measure of Success
• Review timelines are realized through coordinated review comments and clarified roles and responsibilities.
• Pro Tip
• Establishing cooperation allow application types to more smoothly move through the review process.

Strategy #9: Level of Approval

• Purpose
• Using a process that engages the community, permit affordable housing projects to be approved administratively.
• Measure of Success
• Community priorities are aligned with the level of approval will increase community support and collaboration on projects.
• Pro Tip
• When a project meets identified community goals and all technical standards are met, administrative approvals are advisable.

Strategy #10: Post-Review Meeting

• Purpose
• Commenting agencies discuss review comments with applicants in greater detail.
• Measure of Success
• Reduces the amount of time for review of the second submittal.
• Pro Tip
• Include all agencies or departments who provided comments.

Strategy #11: Pre-Application Meeting

• Purpose
• Opportunity to discuss submittal requirements, review process, standards, criteria, and any “red flags”.
• Measure of Success
• Applicant receives clear guidance and knows what to expect from the review process.
• Pro Tip
• Include general review timelines so applicant understands what to expect.

Strategy #12: Prioritize Affordable Housing Projects

• Purpose
• Review of affordable housing projects are prioritized over other application types.
• Measure of Success
• All referral agencies must agree to a similar policy to make this strategy a success.
• Pro Tip
• These applications are processed and reviewed within a shorter period of time.

Strategy #13: Process Improvement

• Purpose
• Evaluate review process to identify inefficiencies or methods of improvement in order to reduce the overall review process timeline.
• Measure of Success
• The length of time it takes to complete the review process is reduced.
• Pro Tip
• Extend evaluation beyond the jurisdiction’s review and approval process, and consider how this process supports or hinders referral agencies.

Strategy #14: Public Meeting Schedule

• Purpose
• Evaluate internal policies related to public meeting schedules and noticing subsequent meetings.
• Measure of Success
• Time between public meetings is reduced.
• Pro Tip
• Allow affordable housing project to be noticed early enough so the request can be considered at subsequent meetings.

Strategy #15a: Reviewer Training

• Purpose
• Training sessions for in-house staff who may lack extensive experience in reviewing certain types of applications.
• Measure of Success
• Staff become experts in the review of projects typically submitted.
• Pro Tip
• Seek training assistance from contractors, developers, and neighboring jurisdictions to understand the overall workflow of the project type.

Strategy #15b: Developer Training

• Purpose
• Create an opportunity for local governments to clarify submittal materials, review processes, and interpretation of standards.
• Measure of Success
• Reviewing agencies and applicants develop more cordial relationships resulting in more collaborative process.
• Pro Tip
• Regular listening sessions will build collaborative environment

Community Examples - Topic #1

Topic #1: Quality of Submission Materials

• Broomfield, CO (urban)
• Strategies: Pre-App. (staff level), Online Guides and Application Materials
• Fort Collins, CO (urban)
• Strategies: Online Guides and Application Materials, Expedited Process (2 week staff reviews)
• Steamboat Springs, CO (small/rural)
• Strategies: Pre-App., Pre-Submittal Process, Online Guides and Application Materials, Staff Liaison, Expedited Process (8-10 week application to decision target timeline)
• Windsor, CO (small)
• Strategies: Pre-App./Concept Review (staff level), Online Guides and Application Materials

Community Examples - Topic #2

Topic #2: Review Timelines

• Colorado Springs, CO (urban)
• Strategies: Staff Liaison/Rapid Response Team, Expedited Process
• Commerce City, CO (urban)
• Strategies: Expedited Process (administrative review, 7-10 week average review time frame)
• Salida, CO (small/rural)
• Strategies: Inclusionary Zoning, Expedited Process (administrative review in certain zone districts)
• Steamboat Springs, CO (small/rural)
• Strategies: Pre–App. / Pre-Submittal Process, Online Guides and Application Materials, Staff Liaison, Expedited Process (8-10 week application to decision target timeline)

Community Examples - Topic #3

Topic #3: Staff Capacity

• Aspen and Pitkin County, CO (small/rural)
• Strategies: Pre-App, Developer Support during entitlements and permitting (Aspen Pitkin County Housing Authority)
• Denver, CO (urban)
• Strategies: Pre-App Meeting, Liaison during entitlements and permitting (Affordable Housing Review Team)
• Multiple Communities, CO (all)
• Strategies: Contract Planning Support

Strategies Review and Questions

Program Contact:�Robyn DiFalco�Robyn.Difalco@State.co.us �720-682-5202��For more information, please visit:

• General: https://engagedola.org/prop-123
• Guidance Materials: https://cdola.colorado.gov/prop123fasttrack