Tips for Timely and Predictable Local Government Permitting

Editor's note: This blog has been updated since it was first published to note the title change of an MRSC webpage. 

Cities and counties strive for timely and predictable processes for permitting land development; it’s an important goal. Smooth and consistent permitting can be key to supporting local economies, housing, and environmental protection, as well as promoting trust in local government.

In 1990 the Washington State Legislature included it as one of the original goals of the state’s Growth Management Act (GMA) stating explicitly in RCW 36.70A.020(7), “Applications for both state and local government permits should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability.”

However, there are many challenges to achieving this goal, including:

• Matching staff resources to the amount and complexity of permit applications;
• Serving the needs of a wide variety of customers;
• Coordinating multiple permit reviews and comments by local, state, and federal agencies, and the public; and
• Integrating technological improvements

This blog shares examples of practices that can help local governments meet these challenges. It builds on a recent MRSC webinar in which three local governments shared their local permitting improvement processes. To access the webinar, visit On Demand Webinars and scroll down to Practical Tips for Local Government Permitting.

State Requirements and Guidance for Local Permitting

The Local Project Review Act (RCW 36.70B) requires most cities and counties to coordinate land use and environmental review processes.

In 2023, SB 5290 made several changes to RCW 36.70B that place increased emphasis on local development project review. Recommended by the GMA Collaborative Road Map Task Force, these new requirements apply to local governments planning under the GMA and are intended to increase the timeliness and predictability of local development project review and decision-making. MRSC highlighted these statutory changes in two previous blogs: 2023 Legislative Updates to Modernize and Streamline Local Project Review and Impending Deadline of January 1 to Address SB 5290’s New Development Timelines.

The Washington State Department of Commerce (Commerce) provides a lot of helpful information on its Local Project Review webpage about the full range of changes required under SB 5290 and additional resources. Commerce will also be providing broader guidance and assistance for local project review, along with a template for annual performance reports required of some jurisdictions.

In 2008, the Governor’s Office of Regulatory Assistance published Local Government Permitting: Best Practices, which continues to offer valuable advice for local governments.

The Washington State Auditor’s Office offers free LEAN process improvement services to local governments. LEAN is a process improvement methodology that leads to innovative ways of making existing work more efficient, services more customer-focused, and change more empowering for staff. Mason County, Kittitas County, and the cities of Lakewood and Wenatchee are examples of jurisdictions that have used LEAN methods to improve their permitting processes.

Tips for Local Permitting

This section builds on the resources mentioned above and provides tips and examples of local permitting practices in several key areas. MRSC’s webpage Planning and Development Permit Review provides many other useful ideas and examples.

Integrating software

Choosing the right permitting software can be one of the most impactful decisions a local government can make for its permit processes. It’s important that the software fits well with local needs (including an easy-to-use public portal), can track permit review cycles and timing, and can be reconfigured internally rather than requiring the software company to make changes.

MRSC has provided additional information on permitting software systems in two previous webinars: The Ins and Outs of Online Permitting & Plan Review and Making the Switch to Paperless Permitting.

Some jurisdictions dedicate an overall manager for their software and how it integrates with the permit team’s workflow steps. For example, Kitsap County and Olympia created a Business Operations Specialist/Analyst position to fill this role.

Commerce has convened a digital permitting work group to make recommendations for modernizing local government permit systems. The work group’s report will be available soon on Commerce’s Local Project Review webpage.

Pre-application materials & assistance

Probably the biggest hurdle to timely and efficient permitting is receiving permit applications that are unclear or incomplete, or the applicant submitted the incorrect type of application. This is understandable — most people do not read development codes and regulations regularly.

Consistent, easy-to-access communication and assistance is key to helping potential applicants understand which type of permit is required for their project and what information is needed to submit a complete application. Below are a few examples of how different local governments have worked to improve the permit application process.

• Lynnwood Permit Guides: The city has developed written guides, manuals, and checklists that are jargon-free.
• Renton Virtual Permit Services Appointments: Applicants can request appointments with city staff to get clarifications on questions about zoning, building, and development requirements.
• Wenatchee
  • Glossary of terms: City staff identified confusing and interchangeable terms (e.g., preapplication vs. presubmission; zoning vs. land use) and worked to ensure all written materials, codes, permit portal text, and verbal communications use the same terms consistently.
  • Shared email address for permit center staff: A single e-mail address helps ensure that all department staff are notified of applications and customers seeking permits receive a unified response.
  • Staff ‘point person’: A permit center supervisor coordinates permit workflow, responds to questions from the community, and distributes applicant questions to appropriate department staff.
• Spokane Middle Housing Support Team: This team assists applicants interested in developing middle housing, a key goal of the city’s Housing Action Plan.
• Lewis County Presubmission Conference and Master Site Review: The county offers a free consultation with key development staff to help identify if a proposed project is feasible, as well as a single master application for land use review.

Reviewer coordination and training

Offering ongoing as well as cross-training for all staff involved in permit review is essential for efficient permitting processes. Permit staff should all have a clear understanding of the entire process — not just their portion of the review. This helps ensure that comments delivered to an applicant are consistent and do not provide conflicting information. It also helps minimize differences in approach to reviews due to staff turnover.

Redmond’s Planning Academy is a good example of dedicated ongoing training for all permit staff. It is developed and conducted by staffmembers and includes fun activities to help staff retain the information. It also results in written standard operating procedures that help ensure consistency.

Requests for revisions from applicants

When review comments are sent back to a permit applicant requesting revisions, it is critical that these requests be very clearly stated. If requests are confusing or full of incomprehensible jargon, it can result in unnecessary delays.

Duvall provides comments in an easy-to-understand format and will also offer meetings with development staff to go over the comments with an applicant. It also clearly shows how many days the application has been under review, which is critical for jurisdictions required to publish reports on their permitting timelines under SB 5290.

It may be necessary to contact an applicant or schedule a meeting with an applicant’s design team to further explain requested revisions. In such cases, a local government should make sure to document the outcomes of any discussion and then share this information in written correspondence with the applicant. While this may seem like extra work, it can help prevent confusion and significant delay later.

Staffing and budgeting

The volume of permit applications fluctuates with economic cycles, making it very difficult to predict. However, it can be extremely helpful to base future projections on detailed historical data. Such data should include, at a minimum, the volume of various types of permits, staffing levels, cost of review, and economic conditions (such as interest rates for construction loans, rental vacancy rates, and the numbers of home sales).

Some jurisdictions establish a separate fund for permit application fee revenues and expenditures within their adopted budget, including the cities of Spokane, Bainbridge Island, Olympia, and Medina.

Commerce’s recent publication Navigating Permit Fees: Guidance on Cost Recovery provides more detailed guidance for budgeting and staffing.

Conclusion

There are many practical tools that, if implemented consistently, will help meet the ongoing challenges of maintaining effective permit processes. Timely, predictable, and transparent permit processes are key to achieving local economic, housing, and environmental protection goals. Such processes also contribute to broader community goals by building trust in local government and helping ensure equitable treatment for all.