HomeMy WebLinkAboutDSD-21-006 - Development Services Review Project Close-out ReportREPORT TO:Community & Infrastructure ServicesCommittee
DATE OF MEETING:February 8, 2021
SUBMITTED BY:Justin Readman, General Manager,519-741-2200 ext. 7646
PREPARED BY:Margaret Love, Manager of Service Coordination & Improvement,
519-741-2200 ext. 7042
WARD(S) INVOLVED:All Ward(s)
DATE OF REPORT:January 21, 2021
REPORT NO.:DSD-21-006
SUBJECT:Development Services Review Project Close-out Report
RECOMMENDATION:
ThatDSD-21-006, regarding Development Services Review Project Close-out Report,
be received for information
REPORT HIGHLIGHTS:
The purposeof this report istopresentthe results of the development services review
andformally close the project.
The key findingof this report isthat the development services review has resultedin
meaningful improvements as evidenced bystrengthening the City’scontinuous
improvement culture, feedback from customers,andearly indicatorsof success.
The financial implicationsarelimited to the existing approved capital budget allocated
to the development services review. The remaining balance will be used on the on-going
implementation of improvement projects.
A detailed community engagementplanwas developedand executedover the
lifecycle of the development services reviewusing a broad range of engagement tactics;
details are summarized in this report.
This report supports Great Customer Service.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Twoend-to-end Lean reviews wereundertaken between June and October 2019on public
engagement processes related to development applications and site plan approvals
processes. Thesereviewsresulted inthe creation ofa customer-informed workplan that
included18Kaizens (i.e. Lean improvement projects/events)that began in October 2019
and concluded in December 2020. Over 111 staff were engaged in these reviews viaa
bottom-up approach to problem-solvingand implementation.A detailed communications
and engagement plan was developed in collaboration with the City’s Corporate
Engagement Consultant and executed using a multi-pronged approach with touchpoints
throughout the entire process. BothLean reviews and resulting improvements wererooted
*** This information is available in accessible formats upon request. ***
Please call 519-741-2345 or TTY 1-866-969-9994 for assistance.
8 - 1
inunderstanding the voices of our customersand finding ways to add more value to the
City’sprocesses from thecustomer’s perspective.For public engagement, this involved
understanding who we’re currently engaging, who we’re not,and where there are gaps so
that equity-informed engagement plans can be created, and subsequently by
implementing improvements that work to addressand removethe identified barriers.For
the site plan process, this involved understanding a complex, multi-year approvals process
from the perspective of the applicant and finding improvements that streamline the
customer experience, ultimately resulting in a decrease in review and approvaltimelines
through better communication,coordination,collaboration, and creative problem-solving.
Early data shows that, on average,there has been a decrease of 60%in the time it takes
to obtain an approval in principle. Satisfaction ratings of 85% and 90% have also been
achieved for thenew pre-submission process and the new onsite certification process,
respectively. A summary of all improvements is provided in the body of this report and in
Attachments B and C.
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of the development services review wasto look at how development
functions interact and are coordinated, and to identify if that coordination can be improved
in a way that results in clearer accountability, stronger collaboration, and ultimately an
even better customer experience.
Fiveobjectives forthe reviewwere identified early in the process:
1.Establish a Shared Vision for Economic Growth, City Building, Sustainability,
and Development Interests:With a variety of disciplines involved in the delivery of
development services, representing functions with competing interests at times, it is
important that staff are working towards common goals and understand how their
contribution supports the results that we are trying to achieve within the city.
Starting from existing strategies, plans and policies, staff will need to establish
shared goals, objectives and principles to guide effective and consistent decision
making.
2.Align Work Processes to Support the Development Services Vision: Selected
development processes will be reviewed end-to-end on a prioritized basis using
Lean methodologies to ensure a clear and consistent focus on delivering customer
value, efficient services, and streamlined customer interactions.
3.Enhance Team Building, Collaboration and Creative Problem Solving:The
most challenging development opportunities require all stakeholders to work
together in trusting and respectful relationships that support the best results for the
community.
4.Take a Coordinated Approach to Development: Support less experienced
applicants to more easily navigate the process. Engage the community in a
coordinated way to build a holistic vision for their neighbourhoods. Coordinate staff
resources to reduce wait-times, hand-offs and work backlogs.
8 - 2
5.Communicate Clearly and Effectively:Applicants and members of the public
should have a clear understanding of the requirements and expectations, the steps,
timelines and costs involved, and how they can engage constructively with the City
in the development process.
Engagement with stakeholders was instrumental in identifying two priority areas for the
review: the full site plan processandpublic engagement processeswithin
development services. These two focus areas and the shared vision for development
services were confirmed through Committee / Council in May 2019 (DSD-19-096).
REPORT:
This report serves asthe project close-outreportfor the development services review, which
commenced in June 2019 and was completed December 2020.
Key Milestones Completedas Part of the Development Services Review
Key project milestones include:
183 internal/external stakeholders engaged (Oct-Nov 2018)
Stakeholder Engagement Report prepared& shared(Jan 2019)
Three staff visioning workshops (Nov 2018 – Jan 2019)
Engage Kitchener staff page launched (Dec 2018)
SWOT analysis & Benchmarking with other Municipalities (Jan 2019)
½ day strategy session with CLT (Jan 2019)
Council Strategy Session (March 2019)
Developer engagement sessions (March 2019)
Community focus group sessions (March / April 2019)
Shared vision and project scope finalized (May 2019)
Committee and Council meetings (May 2019)
Environmental scan (May 2019)
Internal and external subject matter experts identified to participate in the detailed
review (April/May 2019)
Lean orientation and training forimprovementproject teams completed (June 2019)
Lean review completed (June 2019 – Sept 2019)
End to end process mapping of site plan and public engagement
processes
Current state process map complete
Value-added tasks identified
Data collection plans completed
Data collected and analyzed
Future state value stream map completed
Pinch points identified
Problem statements written
Root causes identified
8 - 3
Problem statements and root causes confirmed by external
stakeholders
Joint internal/external solutions generation workshops (Oct 2019)
Organization and prioritization of improvements focusing on high impact/low effort
and high impact/high effort solutions (Oct 2019)
18 improvement projects identified and completed (Oct 2019 – Dec 2020)
Implementation (ongoing)
Data-driven monitoring and iterative improvements (ongoing)
Develop new workplans bi-annually for continuous improvement initiatives in
development services (ongoing)
Strengthening the City’s Continuous ImprovementCulture
Throughout the development services review, staffdevelopedautonomy in multi-
disciplinary team-based problem-solving. Understanding the experiencesof their
customers and working with their stakeholders to find mutually beneficial solutionswere
central tothis review.
The review has helped create a framework, knowledge base, and build momentum for
continuous improvement initiatives in development services. Increasedemployee and
stakeholder engagement in improvementprojects is not only an empowering approach but
a necessary one, asprojects will have the highest chance of succeedingif they involve
those directly impacted by the outcomes. In total,111 staff were directly engagedin
completing 18 improvement (kaizen) projects. Further, 42% of staff volunteered to actively
participateand lead the improvementsto full implementation.In total, eight staff received
their Lean Green Beltcertification and 46staff received their Lean White Belt certification
throughout the reviewperiod.
Staff completed three replicatechange management surveysat the beginning, mid-point
and end of the development services review.This was done to establish a baseline for
change within our development servicesculture and then observe how the baseline
changed throughout the lifecycle of the project.One of the greatest success stories that
emerged fromthe development services review is the strengthening of aculturethat
supports change, which is evidencedbythe survey results.Overall, eight of nine
measures saw an increase in “yes” responsesand six of nine measures saw adecrease in
“no” responsesbetweenthe second andthird surveys. Seven of nine measures in the third
survey resulted in the highest “yes” responses out of all three surveys. Between 82% -
92% of staff responded that they areencouraged to come up with new or better ways of
doing things, they feel safe and supported in continual learning and making suggestions
for service improvements, they believe a continuous improvement culture is important and
that the development servicesreview has the potential to result in meaningful change.The
participant response rate also increased by 46% from the second to third survey.
Three of nine measureswere identified as areas requiring further work in 2021:
1.29% of staff feel that they have the time to explore new or better ways of doing
things within regular work hours(26% answered ‘neutral’). Moving forward,
continuous improvement needs to be viewed as part of core service delivery.
8 - 4
2.55% of staff said that they believe failures are viewed as opportunities to learn
(39% answered ‘neutral’). This needs to be explored further to better understand
how to create safe spaces so that the neutral responses can shift to yes.
3.29% of staff feel that they are provided with the supports they need when
change occurs (61%answered ‘neutral’). Again, this needs to be explored
further to better understand where there are gaps and how to shift neutral
responses to yes.
A summary of the results is presented in Attachment A.
Improvement Highlights
Ahigh-level summary of improvements is providedbelow. Additional informationis
includedin Attachment Bofthis report.
Site Plan Process
Stakeholders were asked whatwould make the review a success, andthe top fivegoals
were:
streamline processes(i.e.improve workflow, reduce rework, reduce lead
time) (55%)
establish a collaborative/coordinated approach to delivering services (50%)
define and articulate processes and service levels (35%)
define roles/responsibilities and ensure there is accountability (34%)
improve communication (30%)
To deliver on these goals, the following list summarizes improvements that have
been made to the site plan processas part of the development services review:
Applicants and staff are spending less time and money pushing paper. The
introduction of BluebeamRevu softwarehas transformed digital submission,
circulation, review, and coordinating/consolidating feedback for the development
community. This improvement equipped staff for resilient service delivery during the
pandemic, and staff were well-positioned for accelerated implementation.
Conflicting comments from subject matter experts can now be eliminated: if
applicants commit to submitting a complete first submission fortheclearance of site
plan conditions, staff will commit to a joint comprehensive review session using
Bluebeam.
A 1-yearpilot Project Manager, Development Reviewposition to help customers
navigate approvals processes, compliance with standards, and issuesresolution.In
2021, this dynamic role will serve as a single point of contact for applicants, while
supporting a cross-section of high-profile/strategic applications as well as less
experienced applicants.
Process clarity will be provided through a new website redesign for site plan
applications. Improvements include articulation of the full site plan process, clear
actions, timelines,how-to format, and will serve as a model for other processes. All
requirements for site plan approval have been consolidated with plain language
descriptions, why it is required, links to detailed information, and the timing of the
requirement. This will help create predictability for customers in their project planning
8 - 5
To deliver on these goals, the following list summarizes improvements that have
been made to the site plan processas part of the development services review:
and management.With a newly redesigned landing page already in place, website
traffic is up 211% over the previous format.
Using AMANDA data, anewdashboardsummarizeskey performance metricsfor
processes and milestones in site plan approvalsprocesses, which will allow
management to settargets for approvals,monitor progressand proactively respond
to files that are not achieving targets, and develop and prioritize future improvement
strategies.
Customerswill be better able to coordinate their clearances throughaccess to a new
daily status report, auto-generated and shared through the AMANDA public portal.
This will provide applicants and their consultants with up-to-date information on the
status of their approvals, including what has been cleared and what hasn’t, the
number ofre-submissions to-date,whether the next step is with the application or the
city, the contact info forthe subject matter expert overseeing each clearance, and
estimated review timeframes.
Increased accountability across allmanagers/directorsinvolved in the site plan
process will be achieved through revisions to job descriptions and the creation of
recurring site plan management meetings, which will focus on issues resolution,
greater collaborationand process improvements.
The pre-submission consultation processhas been reimaginedto createmore
efficient and effective meetingsthat are informative and constructive, resulting in
cleareroutcomesandnext steps for the submission of a complete application – 85%
of customers are satisfied with the new process.
Workflow distribution from onemanagerto ten staff has reduced wait time in the
queuereviewing applications for completenessand increased the amount of time for
the managerto focus on strategic items.
A new streamlined urban design scorecard replaces the former submission
requirement for an urban design report. This new fillable spreadsheet format will
result in streamlining the review process by improving quality and completeness,
minimizing review time/effort, greater collaboration, and a solutions-oriented
approach to meeting urban design guidelines. It is anticipated that this will act as a
model to streamlineadditional report-based requirements.
Moving goal posts have been eliminated from the re-submission process by ensuring
that a consistent staff reviewer is assigned in each area of expertise for their lifecycle
of anapplication.
Re-submissions are prioritized and reviewed within a 7.5-day window – a 25%
reductionin leadtime. Issues are escalated early to management.
To reduce the amount of incomplete submissions across the entire site plan process,
11 improvements were made to better articulate requirementsand streamline
submissions processes.
90% of customers surveyed to-dateappreciate the new proactive securities follow-up
and onsite certification process, helping them certify more quickly and get money
back in their pocket.
Refer to Attachment B for additional details.
Public Engagement Processes
8 - 6
Staffheard specifically from community members that the following goalswere the most
important focus areas for the review:
transparency and access to information (54%)
meaningful, inclusiveengagement (39%)
closing the engagement loop (32%), and
eliminate technical jargon (29%)
To deliver on these goals, the following list summarizes improvements that have
been made to public engagementprocesses as part of the development services
review:
Technical letters for notices of application, neighbourhood information meetings
and public meetings were replaced with simplified, graphical postcards that are
impactful and easy to understand, helping to remove barriers to understanding
and engagement with the community. The postcards include a link to more
detailed information, including studies and reports that are now accessible at the
click of a button.
Consistent withthe council-approved recommendations in the City’s 2017
Community Engagement Review, staff created anew engagement
framework/toolkit with an easy to use 6-step guide and a suite of engagement
tactics that can be customized, supplementing the existing townhall method with
alternative approaches to engagement that are meaningful, inclusive and
equitable.
In an effort to reduce barriers to engagement and promote equity-informed
engagement plans, a post-engagement survey is administered after each
engagement event.The survey includes questions on satisfaction, comfort,
convenience, areas for improvement and demographics.
Outcomes of engagement are sharedwithengaged participantsthrough a new,
visual What we Heard summary after each engagement event.
The community is excited about the new user-friendly approach to access
information on development applications using an intuitive and visual map-based
interface, similar to a google map. With the click of a button, users can drill down
to more detailed information, including access to all studies and reportsand
information on engagement opportunities.
To reduce barriers to engagement, staff are equipping community members
through the creation of anew, easily digestiblePlanning 101 workshop which will
be delivered3 times per year.
Complementary to the Planning 101 content, a new video explainerseriesis
currently under development to help clarify and communicate aspects of planning
processes that often create roadblocks to understanding and meaningful
engagement. Key topicsinclude why zoning and policies change, roles and
responsibilities, and how the community canget involved.
Interactive walking and bike routesare beingdeveloped and integrated into a
digitalAppto create a fun and active way for community members to learnmore
about architecture and cultural heritage within the City of Kitchener, with a planto
build-out additionaltours in 2021.
Ageneral volunteer engagement group was set-upon the City’s Better Impact
platform as part of a 1-year pilot programin 2021.A total of 80deep engagers
8 - 7
To deliver on these goals, the following list summarizes improvements that have
been made to public engagementprocesses as part of the development services
review:
have signed up to participate in focus groups, small group discussions, surveys,
and one-on-one interviews to help inform decisions and provide feedback on
future process improvements,the creation of new processes,policy development
and significantprojects.
Internal relationships have been leveragedthrough a partnership between the
Neighbourhood Development Office and Development Services to pilot 1-2
resident-led placemaking projectsin 2021within corporate capital design projects.
Through these pilots, a streamlined process willbe developed for broader
implementation.
Refer to Attachment Cfor additional details.
Status of Improvements
Table 1 summarizes the public engagement and site plan improvementsundertaken
between October 2019 and December 2020and their corresponding implementation
status. It is important to note that while there were 18 improvement projects undertaken,
some resulted in more than one improvement. For more information refer to Attachments
B and C.
Table 1: Public Engagement and Site Plan Improvement Implementation Status
Measuring the Success of Improvements
Measures of success will be tracked by staff on an ongoing basisin an effort tounderstand
how improvements are impacting processes. This information will be used by managers to
make both iterative improvements andidentify additionalfocus areas forimprovement
projects.
Site Plan
8 - 8
Based on preliminary data from the site plan process, theaveragetimebetween pre-
submission consultation and receiving approval-in-principlehasdecreased by 202 days to
133 days on average – equivalent to a 60% reduction. This further breaks down to 50 days
on average to complete the pre-consultation process and 83 days from application
submission to approvalin principle.Table 2 showsCity of Kitchenerpost-improvement
averagetimelines for approval for key milestones in the site plan approval process. The
footnotes provide a comparison to both current state and best practices inOntario
municipalities.At 2.8 monthson average,Kitchener currently exceeds the best practice of
3-9 months to obtain approval in principle as well as the current state average of 18
months to obtain full site plan approval, which is on average16 months in Kitchener.
Table 2:City of Kitchener Timelines Compared to Current State and Best Practices
for Ontario Municipalities
Surveys were also distributed to customersto obtain feedback on the new pre-submission
andsite certification processesand the results show 85-90% satisfaction, respectively.
Staff have begun to track thenumber of re-submissions required until approval is granted,
which is directly relatedto the quality of submissions (i.e. incomplete applications, drawing
and report submissions).This measure of success will be monitored closely in 2021, with a
goal to achieve 3 or fewer attemptsprior to approval.
Staff will also use the data available through a new dashboard to make informed decisions
when setting approval targets and identifying opportunities for improvement.
Public Engagement
Focus groups were used throughout the review to test improvement concepts and ideas.
Community members unanimously supported multi-pronged diverse engagement options,
access to more information, hands-on and visualtools (e.g. map-based navigation to find
development information),as well as communications that weresimplified through the use
of visuals/graphicsand plain language.As staff and citizens saw value in using focus
groupsas a way to test process improvement ideas, inform the creation of new processes,
develop or amend new policies, or provide feedback on city-wide initiatives, a volunteer
8 - 9
group, opento any City of Kitchener resident, was created and continues to grow in
interest and registrants (80and counting). While a detailedanalysis on the demographics
of this volunteer group has not yet been undertaken, it appearsthat there is diversity in this
growing group(based on a cursory review). Staff will work with the Equity, Diversity and
Inclusion office to continue to develop a roster of diverse individuals that reflect Kitchener’s
demographics.
The overarchingmeasure of success for the public engagement reviewis whether or not a
representative cross-section of the community is activelyengagedin the decisions that
impact them. A post-engagement surveywas launched in late fall 2019 in the
Transportation and Planning divisions. Early data suggeststhat staff are not hearing from
a representative community voiceat community meetings. For example, based on 120
responsesfrom five events:
o 94% of participants spoke English as a first language;
o 82% were white or white European; and,
o 76% said that both they and their parents were born in Canada.
Participants also answeredquestions related to satisfaction, comfort and convenience.
Prior to the pandemic staffhad an opportunity to run several meetings using an open
house format. Responses showed that open houses scored higher in satisfaction, comfort
and convenience when compared to the traditional townhall format. Over 50% of
participants also wanted to see more online engagement opportunities.The post-
engagement surveywas revised based on feedback and formally launched across the
entire Development Services Department in September 2020. The survey will continue to
be administered by all staff in Development Services on an on-going basisand,in
collaboration with the City’s new equity, diversity and inclusion office, staff will workto
identify and remove barriers usingan equity informed approach to engagement.
The focus of the City’s public engagement review has been on increasing the quality of
engagementso that barriers to engagement can be removed, resulting in an inclusive
process. The focus was not on decreasing overall review and approval timeframes for the
processes within which engagement takes place(this was out of scope).In parallel to the
development services review, Regional municipalities have been undertaking a joint
review of approval processes related to Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law
Amendment applicationsin an effort to streamline approval timelines. Topics of discussion
have included the timing and nature of public engagement and the impact on statutory
timelines. This review is ongoingwith recommendations to be finalized and shared at a
later date.
Next Steps
Key next steps are summarized below.
Processes that did not form part of the formal development services review will be
considered as part of an on-going body of continuous improvement work, which will
be consideredandprioritizedby the General Manager of Development Servicestwo
times per yearas part of regular business planning.
It is important to note that, where appropriate, opportunities to replicate the process
improvements identified as a result of these reviews should be identified and
assessed.
8 - 10
Because the pandemic delayedthe development services review by 3 months,
there are two improvements projects that will carryover to 2021:the development of
a lecture series and a review of the feasibility of requiring a compositeand
functionalutility planearly in thesite planreview/approval process.
The public engagement review resultedin a variety of projects, includingbut not
limited to: the development of a new community engagement frameworkfor the
Planning Division; a new post engagement survey that includes demographic
questionsas well as questions on satisfaction, comfort, convenience,and areas for
improvement; increasing public circulationnotices to now include occupants and
owners of residences; doubling the legislated circulation distancefor statutory
notices; reimaginingnotification lettersinto a postcard format; and, reimagining
property signs and newspaper notices.All improvements noted above meet or
exceed statutory requirements for communication and public engagement.As
implementation wasdelayed due to the pandemic,staff will continue
implementation efforts, monitor the outcomes of these projects over the coming
months, and bring forward a recommendation related to Council Policy MUN-PLA-
1095 - Public Participation in the Planning Process. The next review date for the
policy is July 2021.
CONCLUSION:
The development services review hascreated a framework, knowledge base (i.e. through
trained, Lean Green Belt-designated staffand kaizen team members),and momentum for
an on-going body of continuous improvement workin development services.
There is evidencethrough survey resultsthat a continuous improvement culturefrom the
customer’s perspectivein development services has been strengthened throughout this
project, which is arguably one of the most significant outcomes from the review. The
strengthening of ourchange culture in development services is an asset thatwill help build
buy-in, support and momentum for future change initiatives.
STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT:
This report supports Great Customer Service. It was also a 2019/2020 Business Plan
project.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
Capital Budget – The recommendation has no impact on the Capital Budgetbeyond what
was already approved in 2018. A balance has been carried over to 2021 for the
implementation of improvement strategies.
Operating Budget – The recommendation has no impact on the Operating Budget.
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT:
External stakeholders were informed of opportunities to engage in the development
services review through information on Facebook, Twitter, the City’s website, Engage
Kitchener, print form (cards at the front counters of engineering, planning, building,
8 - 11
transportation, economic development), Council-supported outreach, targeted invitations,
emails to neighbourhood associations, and advisory committee meetings.
Figure 1:Photosfrom a cross-section of engagement opportunitiesthroughout the
review
INFORM
This report has been posted to the City’s website with the agenda in advance of the
council / committee meeting.
A project presentation was delivered in Fall 2018 at Advisory Committee meetings
(including a question and answer period).
Project presentations were delivered in 2018and2019 at the AnnualWaterloo
RegionalHome Builders Liaison Workshop.
Project updates wereshared through a public facingEngage Kitchenerproject page
and emailthroughout the course of the project.
Engagement reports wereprepared and distributed, summarizing the outcomes of
the March/April 2019 and October 2019 Community and Development Community
engagement sessions.
CONSULT
30 citizensthrough one-on-one interviews and an online survey
34 members of the development community through one-on-one interviews and an
online survey
Eight organizations (e.g. Region of Waterloo, utilities, government organizations)
through interviews and an online survey
Sevencommittees (Economic Development Advisory Committee, Committee of
Adjustment, Cycling and Trails Advisory Committee, Downtown Action and Advisory
Committee, Environmental Committee, Heritage Kitchener, Arts & Culture Advisory
Committee)
8 - 12
The Engage Kitchener platform wasused to engage stakeholders across the life
cycle of the projectand included the use of the survey tool and ideas boards.25
people engaged on Engage Kitchener through surveys, general comments and
ideas boards.
Attended Waterloo Regional Home Builders Association meetings throughout 2018,
2019, 2020and January2021to provide project updates and request feedback on
site plan and public engagement improvements
3 community members provided feedback on initial concepts for a video explainer
series (focus groups planned for 2021).
COLLABORATE
26 community members participated in three visioning sessions in 2019
15 development community members participated in visioning sessions in 2019
24communityand development community members participatedin joint
internal/external workshops to brainstorm solutions in 2019(80 participants,
including staff). Here’s a summary of whatexternalparticipants sharedabout the
engagement:
o Mix of attendees resulting in great dialogue
o Hearing opinions on all parts of the process – enjoyed moving to different
problem statements
o Understanding the frustrations of other stakeholders
o Learned that we have some similar concerns and challenges
o The amount of staff that attended was great – so many were present from all
departments
o Open conversation
o Rapid ideation
o The “everyone bring your ideas” approach
o Good discussion and collaboration
o The focus on solutions
o Having facilitators to keep us on track
o Transparency is key – more communication
o Meeting new people, sharing ideas, positive atmosphere
o A good way to cover issues in a short amount of time
40 community membersprovided feedback on threeengagement improvements:
Story Map, Postcards/Property Signs, Engagement Framework – there was
unanimous support for all three initiatives.
38 community participants joinedafocus groupand pilotpresentationin 2020 to
reviewPlanning 101 Workshopcontent and provide recommendations and assist in
refining the course content
PREVIOUS REPORTS/AUTHORITIES:
DSD-19-048– Council Strategy Session: Council Input on the Development Services
Review (March 4, 2019)
DSD-19-096– Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee: Development Services Review
Update (May 13, 2019)
CAO-17-001 – Planning and Strategic Initiatives Committee:Community Engagement
Review(January 9, 2017)
MUN-PLA-1095: Public Participation in the Planning Process Policy (Approved July 12,
1996; next review date July 2021)
8 - 13
APPROVEDBY: Justin Readman, General Manager, Development Services
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Staff Change Survey Results
Attachment B – Site Plan Improvement Project Highlights
Attachment C – Public Engagement Improvement Project Highlights
8 - 14
ATTACHMENT A – Staff Change Survey Results
Table 1.Staff change survey results
Survey Questions Observations
(Response Options: Yes, Neutral, No) (n=38)
82% of respondents answered “Yes” and 16%
answered “Neutral”
Question 1. In my work area, I am
Between Surveys 2 & 3, 17% more respondents
encouraged to come up with new or
answered “Yes” (11.5% of respondents moved from
better ways to do things
“Neutral” to “Yes” and 5.5% from “No” to “Yes”)
This also represents a 15% increase from survey 1
87% of respondents answered “Yes” and 8%
answered “Neutral”
Question 2. I feel safe making
suggestions for new or better ways
Between Survey # 2 & 3, 18% more respondents
to deliver service
answered “Yes” (previously answered “Neutral”)
This also represents a 4% increase from survey 1.
29% of respondents answered “Yes”and 26%
answered “Neutral”
Between surveys 2 and 3, this response increased by
6% (“No” responses moved to “Yes”) and 7% (“No”
Question 3. During regular work
to “Neutral”)
hours, I have time to explore new or
Staff shared that their workflow is heavy and that
better ways to do things
time needs to be allocated as part of their core
service to work on continuous improvement
initiatives
This also represents a 9% increase from survey 1.
55% of respondents answered “Yes” and 39%
answered “Neutral”
Between surveys 2 and 3, this response increased by
Question 4. In my work area, we 9% (“No” responses moved to “Yes”)
view failure and mistakes as
Work needs to be done to create safe spaces to try
opportunities to learn
new things, even if they don’t result in the
anticipated outcomes; this is at the heart of
continuous improvement
This also represents an 8% decrease from survey 1.
82% of respondents answered “Yes” and 13%
Question 5. My team (supervisor or
answered “Neutral”
staff) supports the continual learning
Between surveys 2 and 3, this response increased by
and development of our skills,
17% (12% moved from “No” to “Yes”; 5% moved
abilities, and the ways that we do
from “Neutral” to “Yes”).
our work
This also represents a 9% increase from survey 1.
8 - 15
Survey Questions Observations
(Response Options: Yes, Neutral, No) (n=38)
29% of respondents answered “Yes” and 61%
answered “Neutral”
Question 6. In my work area, when
There was minimal change between all three
change occurs (whether initiated by
surveys.
me or others) I am provided with the
Work needs to be done to understand where gaps
supports I need
may exist so that staff feel more supported in
implementing changes.
92% of respondents answered “Yes” and 8%
Question 7. I think a continuous
answered “Neutral”
improvement culture is important in
Between surveys 2 and 3, this response decreased by
the workplace
4% (moved from “Yes” to “Neutral”).
71% of respondents answered “Yes”and 18%
Question 8. Overall, I think my
answered “Neutral”
colleagues believe that a continuous
Between surveys 2 and 3, this response increased by
improvement culture is important in
13% (moved from “Neutral” to “Yes”).
the workplace
This also represents an 8% increase from survey 1.
92% of respondents answered “Yes” and 8%
answered “Neutral”
Question 9. I think the development
services review has the potential to
Between surveys 2 and 3, this response increased by
result in meaningful process
15% (12% moved from “No” to “Yes”; 3% moved
improvements
from “Neutral” to “Yes”).
This also represents a 25% increase from survey 1.
8 - 16
ATTACHMENT B – SITE PLAN IMPROVEMENT PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS
The following attachment provides a summary of the site plan improvements from
the development services review.
=Improvement has been implemented
=Improvement is being piloted/tested
=Improvement is in the process of being implemented
8 - 17
8 - 18
8 - 19
8 - 20
8 - 21
8 - 22
8 - 23
8 - 24
ATTACHMENT C – PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT IMPROVEMENT PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS
The following attachment provides a summary of the public engagement
improvements from the development services review.
=Improvement has been implemented
=Improvement is being piloted/tested
=Improvement is in the process of being implemented
8 - 25
8 - 26
8 - 27
8 - 28
8 - 29