Grand Junction reviews expedited-review recommendations to fast-track affordable housing

Grand Junction City Council on March 3 heard a detailed review from Baker Tilly of the city’s development review process and a set of recommendations intended to let the city meet Colorado’s expedited-review requirements for affordable housing.

The work—commissioned by the city and funded in part through the state’s Proposition 1-2-3 program—was described by Isaac Bales of Baker Tilly as an assessment of internal processes, workload data and stakeholder interviews. “We were focused on the city's portion of this process,” Bales said, noting the team spoke with staff across departments and with local applicants.

Why it matters: Colorado’s legislation that created the state affordable housing fund requires participating jurisdictions to adopt an expedited review path for projects where more than 50% of units are affordable. The statutory timetable calls for a decision within 90 days after an application is deemed complete. City staff told the council that Grand Junction must have a compliant process in place by Nov. 1, 2026 to access those funds.

Key findings and recommendations presented by Elaine Costello and Isaac Bales included: - Require a sufficiency review before an application is declared complete so the 90-day statutory clock starts only when materials are actually sufficient for technical review. “One of the most important ones to be able to meet the fast track requirements … is to revise the current submittal process to add a step for sufficiency review,” Elaine Costello said. - Provide clear checklists and example submittals so applicants know what constitutes a complete package up front. Consultants said examples reduce follow-up cycles. - Front-load issue identification during pre-application meetings and eliminate or reduce a separate “general meeting” that staff and consultants said is staff-intensive; instead, focus on a robust pre-application meeting and use ad-hoc phone/email work where possible. - Set a goal of no more than two additional review cycles after the initial comprehensive review, and require interdepartmental coordination so comments are consolidated in that first round. - Assign an experienced planner to serve as a project manager for each qualifying affordable project to track timelines, convene reviewers and keep issues moving. - Form an empowered interdepartmental team (planning, public works/engineering, fire, city attorney and others) to determine eligibility for expedited review, resolve cross-departmental issues, and decide how to administer limited extensions allowed under the state statute. - Use EnerGov data and other technology to track cycle times, send automated notifications to applicants, and produce reports that highlight held-up applications.

Consultants emphasized scale and current volumes: Baker Tilly reported that the city receives roughly one to two applications per year that would meet the state’s >50% affordable-unit threshold; EnerGov historical reporting showed roughly 100 closed applications per year across types and a wide range of application cycle times.

Council members probed resource implications and trade-offs. Cameron (staff member) told council: “The intent here is to help this council understand the progress we’re making … and certainly be compliant with that state law come 11/01/2026.” City staff cautioned the council that implementing the recommendations will require time and likely resource commitments for training, process changes and possible additional staffing in planning and related review areas. Mike (staff member) said recruiting and training—particularly for engineering and planning positions—has been time-consuming and will factor into capacity to meet faster turnaround goals.

Several councilmembers expressed support for the consultants’ emphasis on front-loading and clearer submittal requirements. Councilmember Randall said the sufficiency step and stronger project-management roles could produce significant reductions in overall processing time.

There was no formal vote; council provided feedback, raised staffing and sequencing questions, and asked staff to continue work with Baker Tilly. Next steps announced by the consultants: meetings with the planning commission and development stakeholders over the next two weeks followed by a draft implementation action plan that will prioritize recommended steps and identify resource needs.

Ending: The city will use the implementation plan to develop timelines and to determine what additional staff or budget adjustments are necessary to meet the state deadline and pilot an expedited-review workflow before November 2026.