Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Development Process Preapplication topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission backs making pre‑application meetings optional after housing task force testimony

City of Grand Junction Planning Commission
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

After testimony from the Housing Affordability Task Force and practitioners, the commission voted to forward a text amendment removing mandatory pre‑application and general meeting requirements from the code and relying on optional staff services such as planner‑of‑the‑day and checklists.

The Planning Commission on Dec. 23 recommended forwarding a code amendment to remove mandatory pre‑application and general meeting requirements from Title 21 and to treat those meetings as optional customer service tools.

Staff argued the mandatory meetings produced inconsistent results and administrative burden; principal planner Daniella Costasai said the department will continue to offer the services voluntarily through a website, planner‑of‑the‑day counter service, and handouts. "It does not remove it as a service," staff said, noting applicants can still request and use pre‑application assistance.

Kevin Bray, co‑chair of the Housing Affordability Task Force, testified in support and described the task force’s goals: targeted code changes to reduce cost and timelines, increase supply, and remove unnecessary obstacles. Bray said the task force is focused on pragmatic, limited changes rather than sweeping deregulation.

A civil engineer who said he has processed City applications since 1999 also supported the change, describing the mandatory pre‑application process as “really long and clunky” and saying the planner‑of‑the‑day and sufficiency checks have already improved the process.

Commissioners asked whether removing the codified requirement would make the service less visible; staff replied they would publicize the optional service and maintain checklists and front‑counter assistance. After discussion the commission voted to forward the amendment with staff findings.

Next steps: the amendment will be transmitted to City Council for public hearing and final action; staff will continue to provide optional pre‑application services and schedule a workshop on related irrigation/easement standards in early January.