My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2024-04-08-minutes-public-works-study-session
>
Meetings
>
2024
>
04. April
>
2024-04-16 10:00 AM - Commissioners' Agenda
>
2024-04-08-minutes-public-works-study-session
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/12/2024 11:58:52 AM
Creation date
4/11/2024 1:08:26 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meeting
Date
4/16/2024
Meeting title
Commissioners' Agenda
Location
Commissioners' Auditorium
Address
205 West 5th Room 109 - Ellensburg
Meeting type
Regular
Meeting document type
Supporting documentation
Supplemental fields
Dept
PW
Item
Approve Minutes
Order
1
Placement
Consent Agenda
Row ID
116716
Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
99
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
complete an application within 120 days, state law allows them to follow certain <br />processes. About 50 cities and counties are also required to publish annual reports <br />on the timeliness of their permit reviews. <br />To determine whether local governments are complying with the 120-day rule, <br />including the annual reporting requirement, we looked at six local governments <br />chosen to represent high -growth areas in the state. <br />Audited governments met state -mandated <br />permitting deadlines inconsistently in some areas, <br />sometimes by wide margins (page 13) <br />State law sets out a 120-day deadline for local governments to process land use, <br />civil and building permits. Performance of the six local governments against this <br />target varied widely and depended on the type of permit being processed. Audited <br />governments met the state -mandated deadline for more than 90 percent of building <br />permits, but some struggled to process land use and civil permits in time — often by <br />wide margins. <br />In the case of land use permits, four governments processed at least 75 percent <br />of applications within 120 days. Key factors for slow processing of these permits <br />included project complexity, staffing shortages and inefficient processes. <br />Washington law gives local governments two ways to make exceptions to the <br />120-day rule. However, none of the audited governments documented the process <br />for extending permit deadlines for specific projects. Two audited governments <br />inappropriately used waivers to eliminate permit deadlines entirely. <br />Almough already using many ieading practices, <br />audited governments could adopt practices to <br />further improve permit review times (page <br />Although audited governments used many leading practices around permit <br />processing, most did not fully apply practices related to continuous improvement. <br />All audited governments used leading practices related to education and outreach. <br />In addition, most had partially implemented staffing flexibility plans for high - <br />volume periods. However, audited governments could also improve their <br />implementation of continuous improvement practices. <br />Growth Management Act Executive Summary 14 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.