|
thinking that eventually leads to more im-
<br />provements overtime, especially to the "flow"
<br />of yourteam's work. Case in point: Our team
<br />found immediate success with their new pro-
<br />cess, hitting all benchmarks effectively. A few
<br />cycles into the effort, they began to capitalize
<br />on the rest of our case management software
<br />to standardize certain comments for certain
<br />case types. This was another big gain in ef-
<br />ficiency. Now all conceptual review comments
<br />are easily delivered on time —with plenty
<br />to spare. This gives us the chance to either
<br />lower the time standard from 14 days to io or
<br />expand capacity by raising the cap on weekly
<br />meetings from four to six, having shorter,
<br />more efficient, use of the meeting time. With
<br />more refinements to our case management
<br />software, we suspect we'll simply do both.
<br />In this mindset of continuous improve-
<br />ment, we've applied our approach to many
<br />other cases and processes. For example,
<br />with our other target process —building
<br />permits —we have further capitalized on our
<br />software capabilities to create what's known
<br />as the E-Permit Center. At this web portal,
<br />clients now submit their applications for all
<br />building permits and many other permits and
<br />applications online in a paperless system.
<br />This system is designed so that we can de-
<br />liver all plan reviews within 10 days. This is a
<br />200 percent improvement in efficiency from
<br />past efforts. Additionally, with these and
<br />other processes, we've begun to assess our
<br />performance from the client's standpoint. In
<br />our monthly polling, we achieve an average
<br />90 percent customer satisfaction rating per
<br />month —a first for our organization.
<br />We monitor these and other such pro-
<br />cesses each month with a performance report
<br />that highlights the effectiveness of our work.
<br />These reports are something of a scoreboard
<br />for our staff, letting them know when and how
<br />we're winning the game —and the work often
<br />does feet like a game when you have feedback
<br />of this sort. We also communicate these re-
<br />ports to the public so they can see how we're
<br />best serving them.
<br />CONCLUSION
<br />Though it often appears that the major impact
<br />of zoning is felt on the policy side, there is
<br />little doubt that much of the pain is felt —es-
<br />pecially by practitioners —on the administra-
<br />tive side. And though policy can take years to
<br />develop and more years to truly apply, there
<br />is much we can do on the administrative side
<br />today that can create benefits almost immedi-
<br />ately. Anything that allows our staff to do their
<br />jobs quicker, better, and easier is positive for
<br />all. And quite gratifying, too. Practicing pro-
<br />cess improvement can alter the public's view
<br />of our work, can build credibility in our profes-
<br />sion, and can lead to great decisions.
<br />To that point, there is one final improve-
<br />ment we've noticed in our efforts. As high-
<br />lighted in the White House report, the greater
<br />quality and timeliness of our procedural work
<br />extends benefits to our non -procedural work.
<br />In the past year, we've gained more time for
<br />the analysis of public hearing cases and ma-
<br />jor development decisions. This process has
<br />led to greater influence with our boards and
<br />elected bodies so that over 90 percent of their
<br />decisions are in agreement with our recom-
<br />mendations. We thus have more credibility.
<br />And elsewhere, we now have better relation-
<br />ships with developers, community leaders,
<br />and the broader public. It's been a surprise,
<br />all this fanfare.
<br />Most surprising of all, the approach
<br />detailed here has made the work exciting,
<br />too —especially when it involves actions we
<br />can take quickly, on our own, with immediate
<br />feedback. This is something we all need in our
<br />zoning practice.
<br />ABOUT THE AUTHOR
<br />Norman Wright, AICP, is the director for
<br />community and economic development for
<br />Adams County, Colorado. A past contributor
<br />to Zoning Practice, his work has also been
<br />featured in Planning, Planetizen.com, and
<br />Better! Cities and Towns.
<br />Cover: Geratt/Pixabay.com, CCo
<br />Vol. 34, No. 5
<br />Zoning Practice is a monthly publication of the
<br />American Planning Association. Subscriptions
<br />are available for $95 (U.S.) and $izo (foreign).
<br />James M. Drinan, Jo, Chief Executive Officer;
<br />David Rouse, FAICP, Managing Director of
<br />Research and Advisory Services. Zoning Practice
<br />(ISSN 1548—o135) is produced at APA.
<br />Jim Schwab, FAICP, and David Morley, AICP,
<br />Editors; Julie Von Bergen, Senior Editor.
<br />Missing and damaged print issues: Contact
<br />Customer Service, American Planning
<br />Association, zo5 N. Michigan Ave., Suite
<br />1200, Chicago, IL 60601 (312-431-9100 or
<br />subscriptions@planning.org) within 90 days of
<br />the publication date. Include the name of the
<br />publication, year, volume and issue number or
<br />month, and your name, mailing address, and
<br />membership number if applicable.
<br />Copyright ©2017 by the American Planning
<br />Association, zo5 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 1200,
<br />Chicago, IL 606o1-5927. The American Planning
<br />Association also has offices at 103015th St., NW,
<br />Suite 75o West, Washington, DC z0005-1503;
<br />planning.org.
<br />All rights reserved. No part of this publication
<br />may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by
<br />any means, electronic or mechanical, including
<br />photocopying, recording, or by any information
<br />storage and retrieval system, without permission
<br />in writing from the American Planning
<br />Association.
<br />Printed on recycled paper, including 50-7o
<br />recycled fiber and 10 % postconsumer waste.
<br />ZONINGPRACTICE 5.17
<br />AMERICAN PLANNING ASSOCIATION 1 page 7
<br />
|