HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLN 03-25Report to
Planning & Development Committee
Report Number: PLN 03-25 Date: February 3, 2025
From: Kyle Bentley
Director, City Development & CBO
Subject: Streamlining the Development Application Review Process (DARP)
File: D-1100-109
Recommendation:
1.That Report PLN 03-25, regarding the City of Pickering Streamlining the Development
Applications Review Process, be received;
2.That the City of Pickering Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process Final Report prepared by Dillon Consulting dated December 20, 2024, and provided as Attachment 2, be endorsed;
3.That the Implementation Work Plan prepared by staff, and provided as Appendix I, be
endorsed and considered through future budget processes; and,
4.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions as indicated in this report.
Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to provide information on the recently completed Streamlining the Development Application Review Process (DARP), to highlight key implementations proposed to improve the City’s planning approval process, and to obtain
Council approval to carry out the Implementation Work Plan, as appropriate.
On December 4, 2023, the Executive Committee received Report PLN 38-23, which sought Council’s approval to hire a consultant to conduct an in-depth review of the City’s development application review process. As a result of Resolution #356/23 (see Attachment 1), Dillion Consulting Limited and Performance Concepts Consulting Incorporated were retained to
undertake a comprehensive review to identify and examine opportunities for improvements to
develop a more efficient and consistent DARP and improve service delivery, both internally and externally.
This report summarizes the DARP review that was undertaken, summarizes the contents of the December 20, 2024 consultant report (see Final Report, Attachment 2 to Report PLN 03-25),
and discusses proposed key implementations and tasks to improve DARP. Staff recommend
that Council endorse the City of Pickering Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process Final Report, as set out in Attachment 2, and authorize staff to carry out the Implementation Work Plan, as set out in Appendix I, as considered through future budget processes.
PLN 03-25 February 3, 2025
Subject: Streamlining the Development Application Review Process Page 2
Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Advance Innovation & Responsible
Planning to Support a Connected, Well-Serviced Community.
Financial Implications: City staff can implement most action items in the proposed 2025
Work Plan with no direct financial cost. However, items like reviewing Engineering, Legal and
Planning fees and conducting a detailed review of the AMANDA system will require hiring
consultants. These consultant costs will be funded through the 2025 Building Reserve Fund. Costs related to future action items will be considered through future budget processes.
Discussion: The purpose of this report is to provide information on recently completed efforts to streamline the City’s development application review process (DARP), to highlight key implementations proposed to improve the DARP, and to obtain Council approval to carry out the corresponding Implementation Work Plan, as appropriate.
1. Background
The City of Pickering is undergoing significant changes, bringing both new opportunities and challenges for its growth and development. In addition to traditional greenfield development, the City is transitioning towards high-density, mixed-use development and redevelopment in key areas, including the City Centre, major corridors like
Kingston Road and Brock Road, and Seaton, where extensive development is
expected, and under construction. Given the current and anticipated development activity, as well as the future build-out of these areas, a review of the City’s existing DARP was deemed necessary.
The DARP is a core regulatory service provided by the City Development Department,
in collaboration with other City departments and external agencies. The process is
primarily guided by legislative requirements under the Planning Act and Building Code
Act. The purpose of the review was for the Consultant to identify gaps, challenges and opportunities, and to propose recommendations for the City to consider implementing.
2. The DARP Study
On December 4, 2023, the City retained Dillion Consulting Limited and Performance
Concepts Consulting Incorporated (‘the Consultant’) to undertake the DARP study, which began in January 2024 (Resolution #356/23). The study included the following phases:
• Phase 1 – Project Kick-Off and Data Collection
• Phase 2 – Current State DARP – Engagement Consultation Sessions
• Phase 3 – Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats Evaluation of
Current State of DARP
• Phase 4 – Case Studies
• Phase 5 – Interim Summary of Key Findings and Gap Analysis
• Phase 6 – Future State Validation Sessions
PLN 03-25 February 3, 2025
Subject: Streamlining the Development Application Review Process Page 3
The following sections of the report will provide a discussion and summarize the key components of the above phases.
2.1 Project Initialization and Data Collection
The City established a Steering Committee, consisting of 28 representatives from various City departments and divisions, involved in the development application review. These included:
• City Development (Planning & Design, Building Services, and Sustainability)
• Community Services
• Corporate Services (Clerks, Legal Services, and Information Technology)
• Economic Development & Strategic Projects
• Engineering Services
• Fire Services
• Finance
• Operations
A Project Kick-Off Meeting was held on February 7, 2024, to introduce the Consultant
to the Steering Committee, present the DARP model, confirm project methodology and key milestones, and discuss expected deliverables. The Consultant reviewed existing City documentation, including organization charts and an inventory of current staff levels involved in DARP. They worked closely with staff to evaluate the City’s current
development application process maps and related data.
The Consultant analyzed application data from 2019 to 2023 to identify trends in application volume, staff overtime across departments, and application processing timeframes. The Consultant also assessed the City’s existing technologies (including AMANDA, Bluebeam SharePoint and PRISM [My City online portal]) that support the
DARP review and workflow, to evaluate their capabilities in supporting future DARP
needs, particularly for data tracking and performance measurement.
Additionally, a Best Practices review was conducted, examining the DARP of other municipalities including Ajax, Toronto, Vaughan, Brantford, and Clarington. This review identified best practices in areas such as resource allocation, organizational design,
process streamlining, technology modernization and cost recovery.
2.2 Current State DARP and Engagement Sessions
In addition to consulting the Steering Committee, engagement sessions were also conducted with the following key stakeholders:
• Mayor and Members of Council
• Chief Administrative Officer (CAO)
• Senior Management Team
• External Agencies (e.g., Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, and the Region of Durham)
PLN 03-25 February 3, 2025
Subject: Streamlining the Development Application Review Process Page 4
• Development Industry (high-density residential developers, low-density residential
developers, and institutional, commercial and industrial developers)
In total, over 74 key stakeholders participated in 19 working sessions. Key highlights from these consultations are included in Appendix D of the Consultant’s Final Report (see Final Report, Attachment 2).
The Final Report identified the City’s strong commitment to maintaining robust internal
and external relationships as the central theme emerging from the consultations. This
includes a focus on delivering a high-performing DARP model.
The Consultant’s data review and engagement sessions identified several observations regarding organizational design and staffing:
• the development community praised DARP staff for their collaborative approach to
advancing applications
• stakeholders described staff as communicative, friendly, cooperative, and solution-focused
• some overlap in departmental responsibilities
• inconsistent levels of technological training across departments
• high workloads for staff involved in DARP, contributing to processing delays
• delays further exacerbated by staffing shortages during periods of increased application volume
• challenges in attracting and retaining new staff, and
• insufficient staffing capacity to process development applications associated with anticipated growth in the near future
While the engagement sessions highlighted areas for improvement within the DARP process, they also commended staff for their excellent customer service and
availability.
The Consultant also conducted a Strengths, Weakness, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis with the Steering Committee to assess the DARP’s current state. The analysis provided insights into the benefits of the current state model, performance challenges, and opportunities for improvement in the future.
2.3 Analysis and Interim Reporting
Based on the analysis and findings, the Consultant developed key themes to guide recommendations for improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the development application review. These themes included:
• Collaboration for Increased Efficiencies
• Measuring Performance and Setting Target
• Modernizing Technology to Support DARP
• Process Improvement
• Resourcing Capacity
PLN 03-25 February 3, 2025
Subject: Streamlining the Development Application Review Process Page 5
On July 5, 2024, the Consultant presented these themes and preliminary findings to the Steering Committee to validate their analysis, confirm the general direction, and
formulate recommendations.
2.4 Future State DARP Model
Between September and October 2024, the Consultant delivered a draft set of recommendations to the Steering Committee and Senior Management, seeking feedback and input. These recommendations resulted in the City of Pickering
Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process Final Report, dated
December 20, 2024.
The Final Report included 50 recommendations categorized into:
• Strategic Recommendations: Large-scale initiative requiring a significant amount of
effort, resources, or support.
• Tactical Recommendations: Smaller-scale improvements that require minimal resources and can be implemented quickly.
The recommendations were aligned with the key themes from Section 2.3 of this report
and included an implementation timeline.
The Consultant also proposed draft Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to monitor and evaluate the success of the implemented actions. Currently, there is no formal performance management framework or associated KPIs in place for the City to measure the effectiveness of the existing DARP. The KPIs would apply to Official Plan
Amendments, Zoning By-law Amendments, Site Plan Control, and Draft Plan of
Subdivision, as well as post-draft Plan components of the DARP. The KPIs are intended to integrate with the City’s data workflow tools, ensuring automated data collection and reporting to avoid time-intensive manual processes.
3. Implementation of the DARP Recommendations
Staff reviewed the Consultant’s 50 recommendations and condensed them into a work
plan of 22 key tasks categorized under Process Improvements, Communication, and Resourcing and Strategic Initiatives. These tasks, their benefits, and proposed timelines are detailed in the Implementation Work Plan set out in Appendix I of this report.
3.1 Process Improvement
Key implementation tasks include:
• developing Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for Planning Act applications and the release of letters of credit for Site Plans and Draft Plans of Subdivision
• implementing regularly scheduled Pre-Consultation Meetings and updating the SOP for these meetings
• standardizing circulation memos generated through the AMANDA system
PLN 03-25 February 3, 2025
Subject: Streamlining the Development Application Review Process Page 6
• reviewing the City’s existing workflow steps in the AMANDA system to ensure they
align with current processes and critical dates
• establishing KPIs to track application review timelines and providing annual monitoring reports to Council
• working with IT to develop:
• an application submission portal with fillable application forms
• an online payment calculator and tracker for all Planning Act applications
• that Delegation By-law 6763/07 be amended to enable the Director, City Development & CBO to approve minor rezoning applications and lifting of holding provisions
3.2 Communication
Key implementation tasks include:
• circulating a bi-monthly (once every two months) memo to Council summarizing newly submitted development applications
• establishing a bi-monthly meeting between City Development and Engineering
Services to coordinate the review and comment on development applications
• establishing regular meetings between City Development and Economic Development to discuss key priority projects and new and/or potential development initiatives
• updating Open House and Statutory Public Meeting notices with plain language
• updating the City’s website to provide clear information about the City’s DARP, and public participation opportunities
• finalizing a Site Plan Approval Manual, outlining the City’s technical standards
• preparing Terms of Reference for required studies, detailing technical standards
• updating application forms and creating a Development Application Review
Guideline
• developing a program and associated SOP to identify Strategic Priority Projects and associated criteria that can qualify for expedited development review
3.3 Resourcing and Strategic Initiatives
Key recommendations and implementation tasks include:
• reviewing fees for Building, Engineering, Planning and Legal services to ensure full cost recovery
• assessing staffing levels in City Development, and Engineering Services to accommodate increased development activity in the coming years
• hiring an Associate Solicitor focused on development and planning matters
• hiring an Administrative Assistant in City Development to support staff
• conducting a detailed review of the AMANDA system to determine whether it remains the best workflow tool or if further optimization is needed
• exploring the feasibility of geographic-based review teams, that include planners and engineers for areas like Seaton and other strategic priority projects
PLN 03-25 February 3, 2025
Subject: Streamlining the Development Application Review Process Page 7
• exploring the feasibility of implementing a series of successive adjustments in
organization design to secure a fully end-to-end DARP model across Planning,
Development Engineering, Building, and Sustainability
Should Council endorse the Implementation Work Plan, provided as Appendix I, an Implementation Team, led by the Division Head, Development Review & Urban Design, will be formed to monitor progress, prepare a multi-year work plan, and report
to the Director, City Development & CBO, and the CAO.
4. Conclusion
Implementing these recommendations will improve the City’s DARP, making it more consistent, effective, and efficient for the development industry, while supporting the City’s broader city-building objectives.
The Consultant noted that the effort required to execute the implementation plan will
yield significant long-term benefits, including:
• increased efficiency in the DARP
• faster development approvals
• enhanced collaboration between City departments and external agencies
• greater transparency, accountability, and trust with the development industry and the public
• a streamlined and modernized DARP
Appendix
Appendix I Implementation Work Plan
Attachments
1. Resolution #356/23 2. Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process – Final Report
PLN 03-25 February 3, 2025
Subject: Streamlining the Development Application Review Process Page 8
Prepared By:
Amanda Dunn, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner, Development Review
Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Division Head, Development Review & Urban Design
Approved/Endorsed By:
Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP
Chief Planner
Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, City Development & CBO
AD:NS:ld
Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council
Marisa Carpino, M.A.
Chief Administrative Officer
Original Signed By
Original Signed By
Original Signed By
Original Signed By
Original Signed By
Appendix I to Report No. PLN 03-25
Implementation Work Plan
Page 1 of 9
Implementation Work Plan: Process Improvement
Key Tasks Expected Benefit Proposed
Timeline
Create Standard Operating
Procedures (SOP) for Official Plan
Amendments, Zoning By-law
Amendments, Draft Plans of
Subdivision and Condominium, and
Site Plans, as well as for releasing
letters of credit for Site Plans and
Draft Plans of Subdivision.
•Ensures all staff follow the same
steps, reducing the risk of errors or
omissions.
•Streamlines processes by outlining
clear, step-by-step instructions.
•Reduces time spent training new
staff by providing a comprehensive
reference.
•Clarifies roles and responsibilities
for each stage of the process.
•Fosters better communication with
stakeholders (e.g., applicants,
council, and the public) by clearly
outlining procedures and timelines.
•Ensures adherence to municipal,
provincial, and federal regulations.
•Enables monitoring of timelines,
bottlenecks, and outcomes for
continuous improvement.
•Helps in setting benchmarks and
measuring success.
•Will assist in staff onboarding and
training
2025 – 2026
Q2 – Q1
Create standardized circulation
memos for internal departments,
external agencies, and Council and
have them generated from AMANDA.
•Ensures all relevant stakeholders
(departments, agencies and
Council) receive consistent and
complete information about
submitted applications.
•Ensures all memos have a uniform
structure and format reducing
administrative time to finalize these
memos.
•Staff can quickly generate and
distribute these memos by pulling
data directly from AMANDA,
streamlining the circulation
process.
2025
Q2 – Q3
Review existing AMANDA workflows
for all Official Plan Amendments,
Zoning By-law Amendments, Draft
Plans of Subdivision and
Condominium, and Site Plans
ensuring they mirror the existing
•Ensures AMANDA workflows
accurately reflect the real-world
review process, eliminating gaps
and redundancies, and aligning
system processes with
departmental standards and
2025 – 2026
Q3 – Q2
Page 2 of 9
Key Tasks Expected Benefit Proposed
Timeline
review process, and configure
AMANDA to provide automatic
notifications of upcoming commenting
deadlines.
regulatory requirements, prompting
a uniform approach.
•Alerts city staff of upcoming
deadlines, allowing them to
prioritize their workload and
reduce delays.
Develop a set of key performance
indicators (KPIs) to measure
application review timelines, and
provide a yearly monitoring report to
Council.
•Allow staff to analyze trends and
identify bottlenecks in review
timelines that can help allocate
resources more efficiently and
prioritize process improvements.
•Allows for data-driven decisions
that can enhance service
deliveries.
•Monitoring KPIs over time provides
evidence to assess whether
current policies and strategies are
achieving desired outcomes. This
can help inform the need for
changes, such as updates to
review procedures, staffing levels
or technology improvements.
2025 – 2026
Q4 – Q2
Work with IT to develop an application
submission portal with fillable
application forms.
•Ensures a streamlined application
intake process, providing a simpler
user interface for applicants when
submitting materials and reducing
the time staff spend creating file-
share links and following up on
submissions.
2025 – 2026
Q4 – Q2
Work with Finance and IT to
implement an online payment
calculation and submission tracker for
all Planning Act applications.
•Improves the overall efficiency of
the fee calculation process,
reduces calculation errors,
provides clarity for applicants, and
allows staff to focus on high-value
tasks instead of confirming
application fees.
2026
Q1 – Q2
Implement a regularly scheduled Pre-
Consultation Meeting date (bi-weekly)
and update the current Standard
Operating Procedure (SOP) for Pre-
Consultation Meetings.
•Pre-scheduled pre-consultation
meetings provide a predictable
timeline for staff and external
agencies to prioritize the review of
pre-consultation requests and
attend these meetings.
•Predictable dates will help
applicants, plan their submissions
2025
Q2 – Q3
Page 3 of 9
Key Tasks Expected Benefit Proposed
Timeline
effectively and know when their
meetings will be held.
•Creating an SOP will ensure a
standardized approach, reducing
delays and enhancing
communication between
applicants and staff.
Bring forward an updated delegation
by-law to delegate the approval of
minor rezoning applications, the lifting
of holding provisions and temporary
use by-laws to the Director, City
Development & CBO.
•Delegating these approvals, will
streamline the review and approval
process, reducing the time
required for the Planning &
Development Committee and
Council involvement in routine or
minor matters.
•This improves service delivery
timelines, benefits applicants by
expediting approvals, and
optimizes staff and Council
resources for strategic priorities
and more significant complex
applications.
2025 – 2026
Q4 – Q1
Page 4 of 9
Implementation Work Plan: Communication
Key Tasks Expected Benefit Proposed
Timeline
Circulate a bi-monthly (every two
months) memo to all members of
Council summarizing the recent
development applications received
by the City Development.
•Ensures members of Council are
informed of ongoing and new
development applications.
•Fosters open communication and
transparency between City
Development staff and Council.
2025
Q2 – Q3
Establish a bi-monthly (every two
months) meeting between City
Development & Engineering
Services to coordinate the review
and comment on development
applications.
•Regular meetings will foster
collaboration and ensure
consistent communication between
City Development and Engineering
Services, helping to identify and
resolve issues early in the review
process and prioritize workloads.
•This reduces delays, ensures
alignment on technical matters,
and provides applicants with more
timely, comprehensive feedback,
and consistent comments,
ultimately improving the efficiency
and quality of development
reviews.
2025 – 2026
Q3 – Q1
Establish regular meetings between
City Development & Economic
Development to discuss key
development projects and new or
proposed development initiatives.
•Regular meetings will foster
collaboration and cross-
disciplinary collaboration and
ensure consistent information is
being provided to internal and
external stakeholders.
2025 – 2026
Q3 – Q1
Review Open House and Statutory
Public Meeting Notices to ensure
they are written in plain language.
•Plain language notices make it
easier for residents and community
members to understand the
purpose, implications and process
of development proposals or policy
changes.
•Clear communication fosters
greater participation ensuring
feedback is more informed.
2025
Q2 – Q3
Update the City’s website to provide
information regarding the City
Planning review and approval
process, and how the public can be
involved in the process.
•An updated website will help
residents and community
members understand the planning
approval process, timelines, and
opportunities for participation.
2025
Q2 – Q4
Page 5 of 9
Key Tasks Expected Benefit Proposed
Timeline
•This builds trust by demystifying
the process, encourages
meaningful public input, and
reduces confusion, ultimately
leading to more effective
communication engagement.
Finalize a Site Plan Approval Manual
outlining the City’s technical
standards to help assist the
applicant in preparing a complete
site plan submission; and
Prepare detailed Terms of
References for required Studies and
Materials, outlining the City’s
technical standards for preparing
site plan, as well as other applicable
development applications.
•Providing clear technical standards
and expectations reduces
uncertainty for applicants,
minimizes incomplete or non-
compliant submissions, and
reduces delays ensuring
submissions meet the City’s
technical requirements.
2025
Q2 – Q4
Update the City’s Application Forms •An update to the City’s
development application forms
would ensure that key
development information is
identified and consistent with
required material when inputting
data (i.e. AMANDA workflow tool).
2025
Q2 – Q4
Create a Development Application
Review Guideline
•A Development Application Review
Guideline for all Development
Application types would outline the
application process and general
timelines, general submission
requirements and submission
procedures as well as public notice
sign requirements.
•Although staff strongly encourage
Pre-Consultation Meetings, it is no
longer a mandatory requirement
as per Bill 185. Having a
Development Application Review
Guideline would provide additional
guidance on the development
process and requirements that
staff may not be able to provide
through a formal Pre-Consultation
meeting.
2025 – 2026
Q4 – Q2
Page 6 of 9
Key Tasks Expected Benefit Proposed
Timeline
Work with Economic Development to
develop a program to identify the
types of Strategic Priority Projects
that can qualify for an expedited
review.
•By prioritizing development
projects that align with the City’s
strategic goals – such as job
creation and economic growth –
the expedited review process
ensures that critical development
proposals move forward quickly
and efficiently.
•This fosters a business-friendly
environment, attracts investment,
and supports the timely delivery of
projects that provide significant
social or economic benefits to the
City. It also provides transparency
and consistency in providing
direction to Staff (internal and
external) along with the Applicant
to determine whether an
application should be prioritized
differently from others.
2025 – 2026
Q3 – Q2
Page 7 of 9
Implementation Work Plan: Resourcing and Strategic Initiatives
Key Tasks Expected Benefit Proposed
Timeline
Review staffing levels in City
Development, and Engineering
Services to ensure there are
sufficient staff complements to
accommodate the expected increase
in development review activity.
Prioritize the hiring of an Associate
Solicitor in Legal Services focusing
on development and planning
matters.
Consider hiring an Administrative
Assistant to support City
Development staff.
•Ensuring adequate staffing levels
in City Development (inclusive of
appropriate administrative staff),
Engineering Services and Legal
Services enables the City to
improve service standards, and
reduce delays in the review of
development applications. It allows
effective workload management,
ensuring timely approvals and
outcomes for applicants and
stakeholders.
2026
Q3 – Q4
Complete a review of the Building,
Engineering, Planning and Legal
fees to ensure the City is recovering
the full cost of the review of
development applications.
•Reviewing and adjusting fees
ensures that the City recovers the
full costs associated with the
processing and review of
development applications,
preventing underfunding of
services.
•This ensures that development-
related activities are adequately
funded, allowing the City to
continue delivering high-quality
services without negatively
impacting other municipal
priorities.
2025 – 2026
Q2 – Q1
Conduct a detailed review of the
AMANDA system / process and data
workflow management tool to
identify opportunities for further
optimization. This includes
automating key aspects of the
planning application process
(document submission, tracking, and
routing for review), enabling
applicants and stakeholders to track
application status in real-time, and
developing robust reporting tools to
analyze trends, identify bottlenecks
and generate performance metrics.
•By automating key aspects of the
planning review process, the City
can reduce manual tasks,
streamline workflows, and ensure
faster processing times. This leads
to improved efficiency, reduced
delays, and a more consistent user
experience for applicants and
stakeholders
•Enabling applicants and
stakeholders to track application
statuses in real-time, enhances
transparency and reduces the
need for follow-up inquiries.
2025 – 2026
Q3 – Q2
Page 8 of 9
Key Tasks Expected Benefit Proposed
Timeline
•This will ensure that key
milestones in the planning review
process can be monitored, and
provide reports as required to
evaluate that targets/key
performance indicators are being
met.
•Timely and accurate data entry is
critical for the evaluation of KPIs,
and there must be shared
accountability from the full
corporation involved in the DARP
process to ensure a results-driven
culture.
Review the feasibility of geographic-
based review teams that include
planners and engineers for Seaton
and Strategic Priority Projects.
•Geographic-based review teams
combine the expertise of planners
and engineers familiar with specific
areas and project types, enabling
more efficient and context-specific
decision-making.
•Integrated teams ensure all
aspects of a project are reviewed
holistically, reducing delays and
improving outcomes.
•Dedicated teams focused on
specific geographic areas or
projects streamline workflows,
leading to quicker turnaround
times.
•Aligning planners and engineers to
geographic areas or specific
projects ensures efficient resource
allocation, enhances teamwork,
and leverages area-specific
knowledge, leading to faster
decision-making and better
outcomes.
2027
Q1 – Q4
Review the feasibility of
implementing a series of successive
adjustments in organization design
to secure a fully end-to-end DARP
organization design (Planning,
Development Engineering, Building
and Sustainability).
•It has been identified that
municipalities that combine
Planning, Building and Engineering
Staff into one Development
Department have significantly
reduced approval times.
•A combined department can
provide an internal ‘one window’
2027
Q1 – Q4
Page 9 of 9
Key Tasks Expected Benefit Proposed
Timeline
perspective on development
approvals with the key
departments working under the
same direction and understanding
priorities and timelines.
•The coordinated and focused
attention on applications will
reduce the amount of municipal
resources and time needed to
approve applications.
Legislative Services Division Clerk’s Office Directive Memorandum
December 15, 2023
To: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO
From: Susan Cassel City Clerk
Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Meeting of City Council held on
December 11, 2023
Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 38-23 Streamlining the Development Application Review Process -RFP 2023-4
Council Decision Resolution #356/23
Please take any action deemed necessary.
Susan Cassel
Copy: Director, Finance & Treasurer
Chief Administrative Officer
1.That proposal for Request for Proposal No. RFP 2023-4 submitted by Dillon
Consulting Limited, for the Streamlining the Development Application Review
Process, in the amount of $214,669.00 (excluding HST), be accepted;
2.That the net project cost of $218,447.00 (net of HST rebate), be approved;
3.That Council authorize the Director, Finance & Treasurer to finance the net
project cost of $218,447.00 for these consulting services in the amount from theApproved 2023 Current Budget from Property Taxes; and,
4.That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take such
actions as are necessary to give effect to this Report.
Attachment 1 to Report 03-25
City of Pickering
Streamlining the Development Applications Review
Process
Final Report
December 20, 2024
Attachment 2 to Report PLN 03-25
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 i
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction 1
2.0 DARP Review Methodology 2
2.1 Project Kick-off and Data Collection 2
2.2 Current State DARP – Engagement Consultation Sessions 2
2.3 Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats Evaluation of Current State DARP 3
2.4 Case Studies 3
2.5 Interim Summary of Key Findings and Gap Analysis 4
2.6 Future State Validation Sessions 4
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model 5
3.1 Development Application Volume Trends 6
3.2 Organizational Design and Staffing Resources 9
3.3 Engagement Session Findings 10
3.4 Staffing Effort 11
3.5 Progression of the DARP Regulatory Framework 11
3.5.1 Bill 13: Facilitating Greater Delegated Authority to Municipal Staff 12
3.5.2 Bill 23: Development Charges, Role of the Upper Tier Municipalities and Housing 12
3.5.3 Bill 109: Streamline Timeframes and Refunds 12
3.5.4 Bill 185: Elimination of Fee Refund Framework 13
3.6 DARP Process Execution 13
3.6.1 Pre-consultation to Deemed Complete 14
3.6.2 Technical Review Cycles to Approval 15
3.6.3 Post Draft Plan Approval Workload – A Major DARP Risk Factor 16
3.7 Technology and Workflow Tools 17
3.8 Version Control and Document Storage 18
3.9 DARP Cost Recovery Model 18
3.10 Measuring DARP Performance and Setting Targets 19
4.0 SWOT Findings, Gap Analysis, and Foundation for Success 21
4.1 Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats Findings 21
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 ii
4.2 Gap Analysis 23
4.3 Strong DARP Team with a Desire to Improve: An Excellent Foundation for Success 24
5.0 Recommended Future State Pickering DARP Model 25
5.1 Collaboration for Increased Efficiency 26
5.2 Measuring Performance and Setting Targets 28
5.3 Modernizing Technology 28
5.4 Process Improvement 31
5.5 Resource Capacity 35
6.0 Roadmap to Recommended Implementation 37
6.1 Implementation Roadmap 37
6.1.1 Ongoing Monitoring and Evaluation 38
6.2 Further Advice on Tools and Tactics to Implement High-Performing DARP 38
6.2.1 LEAN Thinking 38
6.2.2 Pickering DARP Requiring KPI Driven Performance Targets: Throughputs and Controllable
Timeframes 39
6.2.3 Embracing a Modernized DARP Workflow Tool 44
6.2.4 Pickering’s Housing Pledge Tracker 47
7.0 Conclusion 49
Figures
Figure 1: Applications Received by Type (2019 to 2023) ......................................................................... 6
Figure 2: Application Volume by Application Type (2019 to 2023) .......................................................... 7
Figure 3: Pickering's Annual Housing Forecast ........................................................................................ 8
Figure 4: City of Pickering Organization Design .................................................................................... 10
Figure 5: Staff Overtime 2022 to 2023 ................................................................................................. 11
Figure 6: Target Timeframes Compared to Actual Timeframes ............................................................. 14
Figure 7: Fees and Deposits Derived from Full-Cost Hours Mirroring Tracked Effort Across Files .......... 19
Figure 8: SWOT Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 22
Figure 9: Characterization of Key Gaps in Pickering’s DARP .................................................................. 23
Figure 10: The Future State is the Envisioned People, Process, and Technology ................................... 25
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 iii
Figure 11: Future State Recommendation Themes ............................................................................... 26
Figure 12: LEAN Principles .................................................................................................................... 39
Figure 13: Core DARP Service Channels for KPIs ................................................................................... 39
Figure 14: Countdown Clock Functionality ........................................................................................... 40
Figure 15: Core DARP Processing Outputs ............................................................................................ 41
Figure 16: Potential Post-Draft Plan Related KPIs to Consider .............................................................. 43
Figure 17: Sandbox World Functionality ............................................................................................... 43
Tables
Table 1: Case Study Overview ................................................................................................................ 3
Table 2: Collaboration for Increased Efficiencies Recommendations .................................................... 26
Table 3: Measuring Performance and Setting Targets Recommendations ............................................ 28
Table 4: Modernizing Technology Recommendations .......................................................................... 29
Table 5: Process Improvement Recommendations ............................................................................... 31
Table 6: Resource Capacity Recommendations .................................................................................... 36
Table 7: KPI Design Concepts ............................................................................................................... 41
Table 8: Potential KPIs for Consideration ............................................................................................. 42
Table 9: Functionality Checklist for a High-Performing DARP Workflow Tool ........................................ 45
Table 10: Durham Housing Pledge Tracker ........................................................................................... 47
Appendices
Appendix A: Case Studies
Appendix B: Process Map Recommendations
Appendix C: Implementation Timeline
Appendix D: Engagement Feedback Summary
1.0 Introduction
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 0
1.0 Introduction
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 1
1.0 Introduction
Dillon Consulting Limited (“Dillon”) and Performance Concepts Consulting Incorporated (“Performance
Concepts”) have been retained by the Corporation of the City of Pickering (“Pickering” or “the City”) to
assess the Development Applications Review Process (“DARP”) and provide recommendations to
improve and modernize the currently existing DARP model. In response to an active development
community and provincial-wide changes to the DARP regulatory process, Pickering must identify and
implement efficiencies in the development approvals model moving forward.
The Dillon/Performance Concepts team have conducted an objective and evidence-informed review of
Pickering’s DARP model to identify efficiencies, constraints, and areas for optimization throughout a
range of technical areas, which include but are not limited to process execution, modernizing
technology, performance measurement, collaboration, and resource capacity. The findings and
recommendations put forward in this report encompass the findings from a review of background data
and numerous engagement sessions held with members involved in Pickering’s development approvals
process. A review of best practice case studies of similar fast-growing Ontario municipalities also
informed the findings of this report. The findings and recommendations are intended to meet
Pickering’s objectives in making informed investment decisions regarding the adoption and
implementation of options for an improved Pickering-specific DARP model.
The Dillon/Performance Concepts team is appreciative of the professional engagement and insights
offered by Council, Pickering staff, and external stakeholders throughout this DARP review. These
contributions have shaped our third-party analysis and informed our portfolio of recommendations.
This report documents the DARP review and presents the resulting recommendations alongside an
implementation program.
2.0 DARP Review Methodology
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 2
2.0 DARP Review
Methodology
2.1 Project Kick-off and Data Collection
The project kick-off meeting was held on February 7, 2024, and served to introduce the Pickering DARP
team to the Dillon/Performance Concepts team, introduce the interconnected DARP model, confirm
project methodology and key milestones, discuss expected deliverables and identify specific challenges
that are unique to Pickering.
The Dillon/Performance Concepts team worked closely with Pickering to identify an inventory of
available DARP data sets, background material, organization charts, process maps and other
appropriate information sources related to Pickering’s DARP model. The project initialization phase
provided the Dillon/Performance Concepts team with valuable background data to inform the current
state DARP model. The background review findings also informed the subsequent execution of the
engagement sessions and the development of a suite of future state recommendations.
2.2 Current State DARP – Engagement Consultation Sessions
Following the project initialization and a review of the data collected in the initial project phase, the
Dillon/Performance Concepts team facilitated 19 engagement sessions over 20+ hours with a range of
City business units, members of Regional and City Council, staff of Durham Region and Toronto and
2.0 DARP Review Methodology
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 3
Region Conservation Authority, and members of the local development community. These
engagement sessions generated a fundamental understanding of Pickering’s current state DARP model
and identified preliminary opportunities for DARP improvement. The insights gained through the
engagement sessions were subsequently investigated by the Dillon/Performance Concepts team and
have contributed to the future state findings and recommendations.
2.3 Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats Evaluation
of Current State DARP
Using insights gained through the data collection and engagement sessions, an interactive Strengths,
Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (“SWOT”) working session using Google Jamboard was
executed with the Pickering DARP staff and management team on May 13, 2024.
The SWOT session both confirmed and expanded the Dillon/Performance Concepts team’s
understanding of the currently existing DARP model, opportunities for improvement and desire to
implement strategic changes in the transition to a future state DARP model. The results of the SWOT
analysis were used to inform and contribute to the development of the future state findings and
recommendations. A summary of the SWOT session can be found in Section 4.0 of this report.
2.4 Case Studies
The Dillon/Performance Concepts team conducted a review of industry best practices to understand
the DARP model of other fast-growing Ontario municipalities. This case study review was conducted in
conjunction with the background review of Pickering’s DARP data and current state engagement. The
case studies have helped shape the recommendations prepared by the Dillon/Performance Concepts
team in support of DARP improvements by understanding what other municipalities are doing well to
support a high-functioning DARP model. Table 1: Case Study Overview identifies the case studies
which were conducted based on a best practice review of Ontario municipalities. A full summary of the
case study findings can be found in Appendix A of this report.
Table 1: Case Study Overview
Theme Municipality Overview
Resourcing
Levels
Town of
Ajax
Assess responsibilities and appropriately assign staff to the right
aspects of a file
Organization
Design
City of
Toronto
Redesign from classic organization design model to cohesive
development application review teams
Streamlining
Process
City of
Brantford
Enhanced front-ending of process to facilitate a fast-tracked post-
intake process
Streamlining for
Higher Density
City of
Vaughan
Specialized resources (people, practices, tools) for consistent,
speedy reviews
Technology
Modernization
Town of
Clarington
Resources committed to IT improvements to push through rapid
transformation and investment
Cost Recovery Multiple Full-cost DARP revenue streams to resource an effective system
2.0 DARP Review Methodology
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 4
2.5 Interim Summary of Key Findings and Gap Analysis
The Dillon/Performance Concepts team consolidated the insights gained from the data review,
stakeholder engagement, best practices review and SWOT analysis phases, identified six thematic
areas of concern, and created five thematic opportunity areas for improvement1. These themes
account for all the information reviewed relating to the current DARP model in Pickering and directions
to achieve DARP improvement. These five thematic categories are: Collaboration for Increased
Efficiencies, Measuring Performance and Setting Targets, Modernizing Technology, Process
Improvement, and Building DARP Resource Capacity.
The Dillon/Performance Concepts team presented an overview of the work completed to date, a
summary of emerging themes and preliminary findings and the thematic areas to the Pickering DARP
team on July 5, 2024. The purpose of this presentation was to validate the preliminary findings,
confirm the general direction of the themes, and transition toward the future state phase of the DARP
review. The valuable feedback provided by Pickering staff throughout the Interim Reporting
Presentation was noted and integrated into the future state project phase.
2.6 Future State Validation Sessions
Following the Interim Reporting Presentation, the Dillon/Performance Concepts team provided
Pickering staff with the full suite of preliminary recommendations for review and comment through
Future State Validation Sessions. These sessions served as an opportunity to receive feedback on the
initial recommendations, understand areas where staff believed additional focus may be beneficial,
and incorporate feedback into the final recommendations. Following comments from Pickering staff,
the Dillon/Performance Concepts team revised the draft recommendations to finalize the future state
recommendations for Pickering’s DARP model, as included in this report.
1 Although six thematic issues were identified, one of them is due to external forces that Pickering itself cannot resolve,
which therefore results in five thematic areas for improvement; see Section 4.0 and Section 5.0 of this report for further
information.
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 5
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s
Existing DARP Model
Pickering is expected to experience a growth in population and employment within the current
planning horizon, with an anticipated growth of 50,000 people by 2041 and a growth in industrial,
professional services, and retail employment growth.2 The majority of the anticipated growth will occur
in the South Pickering and Seaton areas, where extensive development is expected, planned and under
construction. The build-out of these communities will result in extensive DARP efforts in the near
future. The following section of the report characterizes the existing situation of DARP in Pickering.
2 City of Pickering (2024). Community Profile. Retrieved from: https://www.pickering.ca/en/business/resources/Pickering-
Community-Profile-acc.pdf
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 6
3.1 Development Application Volume Trends
Between 2019 and 2023, the City of Pickering received a total of 141 major planning applications.3 The
majority of development applications received by Pickering are Site Plan Approval applications (45% of
all applications), with Zoning By-law Amendment applications following (23% of all applications), as
indicated in Figure 1: Applications Received by Type (2019 to 2023) below.
Figure 1: Applications Received by Type (2019 to 2023)
Population within the City has grown by over 11,000 people and 5,200 households since 2006. Most of
the housing stock in Pickering is single and semi-detached dwellings, although a variety of housing
types have been constructed throughout this time. Figure 2: Application Volume by Application Type
(2019 to 2023) below represents an annual breakdown of major application types received by the City
between the same 2019 to 2023 period.
Despite a decline in overall applications received in 2020 and 2021, which is likely a result of decreased
development approval activity over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a slight year-
over-year increase in the amount of overall development applications. The historical volume of
applications received by the City, as well as current trends within 2024, are indicative of an active and
growing development industry within Pickering.
3 Excluding Minor Variance and Consent applications.
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 7
Figure 2: Application Volume by Application Type (2019 to 2023)
In addition to historical development application trends, it is important to understand growth forecasts
for both residential and non-residential uses in Pickering. The 2022 Development Charges Background
Study – City of Pickering prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. on behalf of the City
indicates a constant growth of housing unit supply and population growth between 2022 and 2039.4
Specifically over this planning horizon, the City of Pickering is expected to grow by over 80,000 people
and 28,000 households. This rate of growth is significantly greater than that of the 2006 to 2021
planning horizon, indicating a considerable growth of people and jobs in the City.
The anticipated housing stock is projected to span across all housing types, ranging from low to high-
density housing types, with over 60% of all future growth occurring in the Seaton area of Pickering
(Figure 3: Pickering's Annual Housing Forecast). Whereas the majority of previous residential
developments within the City focused on the construction of lower-density housing types, the
anticipated growth forecast indicates a significant mix of housing types. The Seaton area is also
anticipated to accommodate over 70% of all non-residential growth in the City over the 2022 to 2039
planning horizon.
4 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. (July 13, 2022). 2022 Development Charges Background Study – City of Pickering.
Retrieved from https://www.pickering.ca/en/city-hall/resources/2022DevelopmentChargesBackgroundStudy.pdf
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 8
Figure 3: Pickering's Annual Housing Forecast
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 9
The overall growth of housing supply, non-residential development, and the focus on a mix of housing
density greatly reflects an evolving planning landscape defined by growth. Based on this data, it is clear
that Pickering is a fast-growing municipality and will be processing a significant amount of
development applications to facilitate the anticipated growth. The need for a review of Pickering’s
DARP model is ultimately fueled by the anticipated increase in workflow for City departments involved
in application processing and is warranted to support the continuation of a high-functioning DARP
model in Pickering.
3.2 Organizational Design and Staffing Resources
The City of Pickering contains a total of nine departments, which together constitute the complete
organization structure of the City: City Development, Community Services, Corporate Services,
Economic Development and Strategic Projects, Engineering Services, Finance, Fire Services, Human
Resources and Operations (Figure 4: City of Pickering Organization Design). Each department is
involved in the DARP model and is responsible for various aspects of the development approvals
process.
The two departments that are most actively involved in DARP are the City Development Department
and the Engineering Services Department. The City Development Department at the City of Pickering
consists of the Development Review & Urban Design, Building Services and Sustainability Divisions. The
Engineering Services consists of the Capital Projects and Infrastructure, Water Resources and
Development Services, Landscape and Parks Development, and Transportation and Traffic Divisions.
While all City divisions are involved in the review and advancement of development application files,
the Development Review & Urban Design Section is generally the file manager for development
applications that are received.
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 10
Figure 4: City of Pickering Organization Design
3.3 Engagement Session Findings
Throughout the Dillon/Performance Concepts team data review and engagement sessions, the
following observations have emerged:
• Overlap of departmental responsibilities;
• Varying degrees of technological training depending on the department;
• Pickering has experienced difficulty in attracting and retaining new staff;
• Current workload for staff involved in DARP is high, leading to processing challenges;
• Difficulties associated with staffing shortages are further exemplified during periods of increased
application volume; and
• Lack of processing capacity for anticipated growth in the near future.
A full summary of each engagement session can be found in Appendix D.
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 11
3.4 Staffing Effort
The engagement sessions with City staff involved in DARP highlighted the inadequacies of current
staffing levels to efficiently process development applications and the volume of which are received by
the City. This feedback received by staff is also supported by data identified in the background review.
Specifically, there is a considerable amount of overtime utilized by DARP staff to keep up with current
application volumes. Figure 5: Staff Overtime 2022 to 2023 below indicates that all departments have
utilized more overtime hours in 2023 compared to 2022 to accommodate processing demands, aside
from Engineering Services which utilized a comparable amount of hours between the two years.
Figure 5: Staff Overtime 2022 to 2023
As Pickering continues to experience growth and an increase in planning application volumes, it is
imperative to ensure that City departments are adequately staffed to be able to efficiently process
development applications in a timely manner while avoiding overburdening staff with excessive
workloads. Despite the temporary issues which contribute to the current process not yet reaching
optimal efficiency, Pickering has many favourable features within the current organization which
support a positive basis for change.
3.5 Progression of the DARP Regulatory Framework
The evolving planning regulatory framework under the Ontario Planning Act provides a range of both
opportunities and problematic constraints to Pickering as it seeks to modernize and improve DARP
execution. The Dillon/Performance Concepts team conducted a review of the changing regulatory
framework and considered the regulatory contexts which impact the development review process
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 12
across Ontario throughout the Pickering DARP review. These regulatory frameworks include Bill 13, Bill
23, Bill 109 and Bill 185, which are described in greater detail below.
3.5.1 Bill 13: Facilitating Greater Delegated Authority to Municipal Staff
On December 2, 2021, the Province passed the Supporting People and Businesses Act, 2021 (Bill 13),
which amended the Planning Act to allow Councils to delegate the authority to pass minor Zoning By-
law Amendment, Temporary Use By-law, and Holding Removal applications to a committee of Council
or municipal Planning staff.
Delegation of approval authority allows for greater flexibility and has generally been seen as an
opportunity to reduce application processing timeframes without compromising governance
accountability. The implementation of Bill 13 can reduce the number of decisions that local Council
must make on non-controversial applications, alleviates Planning staff time from preparing detailed
reports on routine files, and enables Councils to focus on more strategic priorities of the municipality.
Many municipalities in Ontario have amended their Official Plans and Delegation By-laws to capitalize
on the benefits of this delegated authority.
3.5.2 Bill 23: Development Charges, Role of the Upper Tier Municipalities
and Housing
The More Homes Built Faster Act (Bill 23) was passed on November 28, 2022 and is tied to the
Province’s plans to achieve building 1.5 million residential units by 2031. Bill 23 follows
recommendations from the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force Report. Most of homes will be
built in 29 large municipalities, with Bill 23 allowing each of these municipalities to develop a Council-
approved pledge on how they will meet their assigned housing targets.
Bill 23 also introduced changes to the Development Charges Act by reducing the role of Regional
governments in planning approvals and reducing development charge funding for infrastructure. The
changes introduced in Bill 23 will impact how municipalities like Pickering manage growth and could
mean that current taxpayers will have to pay for new infrastructure to support the rapid construction
of housing.
3.5.3 Bill 109: Streamline Timeframes and Refunds
On April 14, 2022, the Province passed the More Homes for Everyone Act, 2022 (Bill 109) to enact the
recommendations of the Ontario Housing Affordability Task Force. The Act amended the Planning Act
and aimed to reducing red tape, accelerate development timeframes, and streamline approvals. The
overall objective of the act is to increase housing supply in Ontario. Specific changes to the Planning
Act included, but were not limited to, the following:
• Requiring municipalities to provide refunds for Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan application
fees where no decision or approval is delivered during the statutory timeframe;
• Municipalities can mandate mandatory Pre-consultation for Site Plans and apply complete
application “deemed complete” requirements for Site Plan applications (s. 41(3.4));
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 13
• The introduction of a new Ministerial zoning tool, referred to as the Community Infrastructure and
Housing Accelerator;
• An established review process for Community Benefit Charge by-laws;
• Amendments to parkland requirements on lands designated as Transit-Oriented Communities;
• Empowering the Minister with new powers regarding certain Official Plan Amendments and new
Official Plans; and
• Empowering the Minister to make regulations for the use of surety bonds as a security for
conditions imposed by a municipality on planning approvals.
At the time Bill 109 was passed, municipalities across Ontario were nowhere near meeting the
statutory timeframes for Site Plan, Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment
applications. Ontario’s municipal sector had been at risk of being compelled to provide mandatory
Planning fee refunds which would have eroded DARP revenue streams and triggered significant
municipal property tax impacts.
Municipalities across Ontario adopted a range of process adaptations to meet the timelines imposed
by Bill 109, including an expanded Pre-consultation model. Pickering specifically adopted a two-stage
development review model that consisted of a Pre-submission stage and an Application Package stage.
This adaptation conducted a preliminary technical review of submission quality as part of the Pre-
consultation process instead of within the stringent timelines for formal application review.
3.5.4 Bill 185: Elimination of Fee Refund Framework
Bill 185, the Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act received royal assent on June 6, 2024, which
introduced a number of amendments to the Planning Act, including but not limited to the removal of
appeal rights for Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment approvals, the reversal of
the fee refund structure of Bill 109 (including the elimination of mandatory pre-consultation), and the
elimination of certain development charges discounts. Municipalities across Ontario had already
implemented changes to DARP models to accommodate the stricter decision timelines associated with
Bill 109. Although the introduction of Bill 185 has removed the legislative obligation of these timelines,
it is still beneficial for application processing efficiency to continue the DARP related efficiencies that
were introduced as a response to Bill 109.
In response to Bill 185 and the removal of refund timelines, Pickering has retracted the two-stage Pre-
consultation review model and returned to a more traditional single-stage Pre-consultation model.
Despite the Bill 185 model permitting applicants to bypass Pre-consultation meetings and directly
submit applications without prior consultation with staff, the City strongly encourages applicants to
continue requesting Pre-consultation meetings to strengthen and avoid incomplete applications.
3.6 DARP Process Execution
The City of Pickering currently operates a conventional DARP delivery model despite a growing
application volume that is comparable to other fast-growing Ontario municipalities. Although the City
has target application turnaround timeframes across all core Planning application categories, the City is
significantly exceeding target timeframes across all application types (Figure 6: Target Timeframes
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 14
Compared to Actual Timeframes). Timeframe tracking is completed on an ad-hoc basis and executed
manually outside of any technology-driven standardized reporting.
Coordination with external agencies, particularly with respect to receiving timely input from Regional
government and Conservation Authorities (CAs), is a challenge experienced on all applications
requiring this external involvement. The Region of Durham and the local CAs have their own workflow
or technology tools and are not participating directly in Pickering’s systems, which inherently results in
a duplication of effort. Most coordination of files between Pickering and external agencies is done by
email or SharePoint coordination.
The following subsections provide a summary of key observations compiled through the current state
review phase of the project.
Figure 6: Target Timeframes Compared to Actual Timeframes
3.6.1 Pre-consultation to Deemed Complete
The City of Pickering has undergone recent changes to the Pre-consultation model after having
previously modified the process to accommodate timeline constraints imposed by Bill 109. The current
Pre-consultation model in Pickering reflects a typical Pre-consultation model. There does not currently
exist a consistent approach for receiving Pre-consultation requests. Applications can be received by the
Administrative Assistant, Division Head of Development Review and Urban Design, or directly to a file
Planner. Once assigned to the appropriate file Planner, the application request is then processed, and
the application materials are circulated to internal departments and external agencies for comments.
The file Planner then conducts their review and consolidates comments prior to the applicant meeting,
which takes approximately two to three weeks to complete. The file Planner typically resolves
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 15
conflicting comments, with an internal vetting meeting held on an as-needed basis. Preliminary
comments are not issued to the applicant prior to the Pre-consultation meeting. A discussion of the
development concept and process requirements occurs with the applicant at the meeting.
The Pre-consultation meeting is scheduled on an ad-hoc basis without a regular meeting schedule. Files
are prioritized based on the order that they are received. It has been noted by the Dillon/Performance
Concepts team that this lack of regularly scheduled Pre-consultation meetings creates time constraints
for reviewers to manage workflow, deliver comments in a timely and on-time manner, and can lead to
scheduling constraints where reviewers may not be able to attend the applicant meeting. Following the
Pre-consultation meeting, the file Planner then compiles any outstanding comments and finalizes the
Pre-consultation report for review and sign-off by the Division Head, Development Review & Urban
Design before issuing the package to the applicant.
The package provided to the applicant consists of technical comments in a chart format and a checklist
of applicable studies or reports required for a full application submission. Due to the lack of a
technology-based workflow platform, comments are manually inputted into a pre-formatted template
as opposed to having technical comments inputted by the reviewer directly into the technology tool
(i.e., AMANDA) and having the software produce an automatic template.
Following the Pre-consultation process, the applicant submits a full application package to the City by
email due to the lack of an application submission portal. A shared link to the application materials is
typically provided by the applicant, although the City may create a SharePoint link for larger or more
complex applications. Pickering relies on the assigned Planner to process the application through
intake, coordinate with Geomatics and Finance, prepare an acknowledgement letter and decide on
application completeness. The Planner conducts the completeness review based on a review of the
technical reports submitted compared to the Pre-consultation checklist of required studies and it is
signed off by the Chief Planner. A review of submission materials for quality is not conducted as part of
the completeness decision, as such depth of review may complicate departmental timing and
workflow.
Through the engagement held by the Dillon/Performance Concepts team, it is evident that there is a
strong reliance on the assigned Planner to conduct a range of administrative duties such as processing
file payments, manually circulating notification letters, manually consolidating comments, and more.
The Administrative Assistant position is currently underutilized in the Pre-consultation; if effort is
reallocated from the assigned Planner to the Administrative Assistant, the assigned Planner is free to
focus on value-added work such as technical review and the Administrative Assistant can advance tasks
which together optimizes throughout of the process. Furthermore, considerable effort is spent
throughout the deeming complete process on items that can be automated with a technology solution.
3.6.2 Technical Review Cycles to Approval
Following the submission of a development application (Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law
Amendment, Site Plan Control, Plan of Subdivision, and others), the assigned Planner oversees
application intake and circulation to technical reviewers and external agencies. The Planner can use
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 16
discretion to include or exclude certain reviewers depending on the nature of the application and
applicability of certain agencies, although a wide range of technical reviewers are notified by default of
the need for technical review, even if their input is not required for the application in question. The
circulation of application materials to technical reviewers is done via email and SharePoint. Delayed
comments typically come from external agencies, although internal commentors such as Engineering
Services are frequently delayed depending on available capacity or competing workload priorities
outside of DARP.
Following notification to commenters, the Planner assumes administrative custody of the file and is
responsible for emailing acknowledgement letters, issuing deemed complete notices, updating the City
website, coordinating open house details, preparing notices of the public open house and statutory
public meetings, preparing public meeting development signs, preparing information reports related to
public meetings, receiving all technical review comments, vetting the various comments and
consolidating comments into a single document for issuance to the applicant. There is inefficient
deployment of effort by the Planner in conducting a range of administrative activities through DARP
that would be best suited for the Administrative Assistant. These responsibilities take the assigned
Planner away from providing a technical lens onto a file. Furthermore, the lack of consistent
automated software has led to an overabundance of manual tasks that could be automatically
completed.
Following a technical review, a series of meetings are held between the Planner and Division Head or
Senior Management to discuss the application and consolidate a direction. The Planner then prepares
an information report related to the Statutory Public Meeting, a presentation for the Statutory Public
Meeting, and a staff recommendation report. In some cases, and if requested by Ward Councillors, the
Planner may also be responsible for organizing and hosting an Open House Meeting. The staff
recommendation report is subject to extensive senior review prior to final sign-off. Approval decisions
are made by the Planning & Development Committee as well as City Council. Pickering’s use of
delegated authority is limited and does not realize the full range of processing efficiencies available to
Ontario municipalities.
3.6.3 Post Draft Plan Approval Workload – A Major DARP Risk Factor
Forecasted Planning application volumes represent an important workload burden and execution
challenge for Pickering’s DARP model. Draft Plan approved Subdivisions require Pickering and Durham
Region to coordinate infrastructure design approvals prior to development agreements being executed
and lot registration. Only registered lots can subsequently receive building permits. Infrastructure
design approvals for an approved Draft Plan of Subdivision typically proceeds in multiple phases of lots,
creating various workflow processes for Development Engineering staff.
These Post Draft Plan infrastructure review phases represent a high-stake undertaking for developers.
Timeframes are tight since development may already have been sold “on spec” with a legally binding
future closing date. Any surge of required infrastructure design approvals over a relatively compressed
timeframe, initiated by developers responding to market timing signals, represents a major DARP
performance risk factor for Pickering.
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 17
3.7 Technology and Workflow Tools
The City of Pickering has not committed to a corporate-wide technology and workflow tool software.
Although there are various software solutions currently being utilized such as AMANDA, PRISM,
BlueBeam and SharePoint, there is an inconsistent use of a single technology tool between internal
departments. Staff are trained on technology tools based on their departmental usage, which has
resulted in inconsistent technology training and gaps in workflow management. To accommodate this
fragmentation of technology tools, the City primarily utilizes emails to communicate and SharePoint as
a document management solution. File processing timelines are not currently tracked and reported on,
aside from informal tracking in AMANDA, which is a sub-optimal process moving forward. Although
Pickering has partially adopted various technology tools, the current technology-based solutions are
insufficient to support a high-functioning and efficient DARP model. Pickering’s DARP management and
staff teams clearly understand the need for technology upgrades, corporate-wide consistency and
modernization of workflow solutions.
As will be discussed later in this report, it is recommended that Pickering adopt a robustly configured
AMANDA solution based on the current usage, ability to act as a document and workflow management
solution and availability for timeframe tracking tools. Numerous Ontario municipalities have also
adopted AMANDA as their technology solutions, and the history of this can be understood as follows:
• Building departments across Ontario fully committed to AMANDA between 2005 and 2010 in
response to provincially imposed mandatory building permit decision timelines introduced through
Bill 124 and changes to the Building Code Act. Timeline deadlines around building inspection
execution were also embedded in Bill 124. A workflow tool like AMANDA was imperative to ensure
legislative compliance and triage which building permit applications and inspections needed
priority. Building departments adopted zero tolerance to incomplete application submissions –
exempting such applications from legislated timeframes and only dealing with them outside of
formally tracked timeframes.
• Historically, Planning departments across Ontario did not deal with the reality of these compressed
imposed legislative timeframes faced by Building departments. There was no cultural consensus in
the Ontario Planning DARP world around imposed timeframe deadlines, as the focus was primarily
centred on public consultation and collaborative solutions with applicants. Application quality and
completeness problems were typically addressed in an ad-hoc manner throughout the review and
approval process. Whereas Building departments historically adopted technology solutions and
Planning departments generally did not adopt them at the same pace, the disparity between DARP
methods between the two departments grew and has had lasting impacts.
Ultimately, a properly configured and corporate-wide technology solution is required to improve
Pickering’s current state DARP model, minimize inefficiencies regarding file management and
coordination, track timeframe targets and key performance indicators and fully transition to a high-
functioning DARP model.
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 18
3.8 Version Control and Document Storage
Throughout the engagement sessions held with City staff, the Dillon/Performance Concepts team
repeatedly documented a fragmented corporate approach to the storage of application information
and file management. Specifically, an applicant submits their application package to City staff by email
and the assigned Planner will download these documents onto a SharePoint link. For larger
applications, the City will create a SharePoint link for the applicant to submit their documents.
Application documents are currently being stored by a combination of SharePoint, email, hardcopy and
local files due to the lack of a corporate-wide adoption of a primary workflow management tool such
as AMANDA, the lack of an online application submission portal and informal naming conventions for
application materials.
Additionally, application documents are inconsistently circulated to technical reviewers, external
agencies or the applicant, as such circulation occurs by issuing a SharePoint link or sending documents
over email. This format of multiple circulation methods can lead to improper storage of application
materials, lost documents and version control issues.
This fragmented approach has a significant negative impact on Current State DARP performance.
Inconsistent file management disrupts efficient application processing, generates uncertainty when
attempting to report or analyze DARP performance, limits access to files for staff who are not assigned
to a specific project and hinders information sharing with external agencies. Additionally, this sub-
optimal approach may lead to the loss of data or documents in the event of a departing staff member
solely storing information on local drives. Version control problems within any given file are an ongoing
risk.
3.9 DARP Cost Recovery Model
Pickering has undertaken multiple full-cost DARP fee reviews since 2006. These DARP fee reviews have
supplied end-to-end cost recovery opportunities based on the policy objective of “growth pays for
growth”. Planning, Development Engineering and Building DARP channels have all benefited from
rigorous reviews of cost-recovery under statutory compliance requirements.
Properly executed DARP fee reviews in Ontario follow an activity-based costing methodology. Full cost
fees are composed of staff direct costs and indirect overhead costs. Processing effort estimates
(billable hours) are allocated across fee categories by the staff performing the work, organized by
activity according to detailed process maps for each application category. This method allows Pickering
to distribute processing costs based on staff effort measured in hours. The activity-based costing
methodology is illustrated in Figure 7: Fees and Deposits Derived from Full-Cost Hours Mirroring
Tracked Effort Across Files below.
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 19
Figure 7: Fees and Deposits Derived from Full-Cost Hours Mirroring Tracked Effort Across Files
As Pickering updates its DARP processes to reflect future state improvements, the DARP fee model will
need revision to provide the financial resources necessary for enhancing processing performance and
ensuring consistent throughput timeframes.
3.10 Measuring DARP Performance and Setting Targets
Pickering’s DARP team recognizes the pressing need for Key Performance Indicators (“KPIs”) to
measure DARP execution timelines across all core application categories. Timeframe driven KPIs,
countdown clock targets and results-based reporting have not yet been implemented as part of
Pickering’s DARP model.
Pickering’s future state DARP performance measurement model needs to be based on controllable file
processing days and tracked by a countdown clock that toggles between municipal control and
applicant control of a file at a given point in time. This countdown clock should support everyday DARP
operations and assist Pickering in creating realistic service level standards and approval timeframe
targets. Tracking and reporting DARP performance using this model is essential for Pickering and is
directly tied to a software configuration for workflow that can feed meaningful KPIs and provide insight
into ongoing DARP improvement.
It is recognized that Pickering currently utilizes a variety of software tools and has not fully committed
to the rollout of AMANDA as the sole DARP technology platform. Once fully implemented, the
AMANDA system could provide the ability to track progress against established targets and generate
consistent automation in reporting.
Fees/Deposits Derived from Full-Cost “Billable” Hours Mirroring
Tracked Staff + Consultant Effort Across File Buckets
Direct
Indirect
Staff + Consultant
Application
Processing Hours
Complex
Re-zoning
files
Standard
Site Plan
files
Building –New Houses
Hourly
Rate
Sub-division
Draft Plan files or Post-
Draft Plan Eng. phases
Building –Commercial
Buildings
3.0 Exploring Pickering’s Existing DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 20
A commitment to the AMANDA workflow tracking and KPI derived processing time targets will be
necessary to secure the benefits of a high-performing DARP model in Pickering. Although there are
internal discussions related to the full adoption of AMANDA as the sole DARP management tool, an
AMANDA based management solution would help deliver the enhanced business insight that
management needs through well designed KPIs.
4.0 SWOT Findings, Gap Analysis, and Foundation for Success
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 21
4.0 SWOT Findings, Gap
Analysis, and Foundation
for Success
4.1 Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats Findings
The SWOT analysis is a useful diagnostics tool for understanding the current state performance of
Pickering’s current state DARP model. Specifically, it identifies the Strengths (S), Weaknesses (W),
Opportunities (O) and Threats (T) that impact the overall DARP performance, as indicated below in
Figure 8: SWOT Analysis.
The Dillon/Performance Concepts team facilitated a SWOT working session with the City’s DARP staff
and leadership team on May 13, 2024, to evaluate the performance characteristics of Pickering’s
current state DARP model. The SWOT analysis provided insights into the benefits of the current state
model, performance challenges currently faced, desires and opportunities for change in the future
state model and external challenges that transitioning to and maintaining control of the future state
model may bring. The results of the SWOT session have directly informed the findings and
recommendations of this report, as they relate to achieving a high-performing future state DARP
model.
4.0 SWOT Findings, Gap Analysis, and Foundation for Success
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 22
Figure 8: SWOT Analysis
The SWOT working session utilized pre-populated Google Jamboard slides to capture the positive
outcomes of the current model and complexities related to the performance issues within Pickering’s
current model. The pre-populated information was informed by the data collection, background
material review and current state engagement sessions held prior to May 13, 2024. Pickering staff
were able to comment on and provide real-time feedback directly into the collaborative Google
Jamboard platform to further populate the slides with additional information.
Based on facilitated dialogue with the DARP staff team, the SWOT analysis identified numerous high-
level findings which translate into performance improvement opportunities in the transition to a future
state DARP model. SWOT Weaknesses can be converted into Strengths, and SWOT Threats offer the
chance to pivot and capitalize on new Opportunities.
The SWOT discussion and input from staff were framed around the performance themes of Resourcing,
Process Execution, Technology Tools and Use and Role Clarity. The key insights gained through the
SWOT session are contextualized below:
• Strengths:
o Knowledgeable staff with collaborative working relationships with internal departments,
external stakeholders and the development community.
o Customer service is a priority in Pickering’s corporate culture.
o Staff have generally adopted the use of technology and understand the importance of
technological reliance for streamlined DARP improvements.
• Weaknesses:
o Planners spend considerable effort on administrative activities.
o Lack of corporate-wide technology tools and inconsistent technological training.
o Outdated standard operating procedures, process guides and terms of references.
o Lack of formal development application status tracker (internal or external).
o Overlap in departmental responsibilities.
o Complicated application fee payment model.
4.0 SWOT Findings, Gap Analysis, and Foundation for Success
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 23
• Opportunities:
o Current adoption of AMANDA can support a reformatting to expand the use of the software
and integration with other technologies for DARP.
o Willingness to develop a roster of consultants to assist with application review.
o Continue to expand positive relationships with the development community.
o Update process map and application review guides in conjunction with this DARP review.
o Chance to further educate the public about the planning process.
• Threats:
o Increased application volume increases demand on already busy staff.
o Staff retention and attracting new staff.
o Constantly changing regulatory framework creates internal challenges.
o Many applications require high priority.
o Delay of technical input from external agencies or internal departments.
o Lack of corporate-wide use of a single technology tool – various departments use different
technology tools.
4.2 Gap Analysis
The results of the preceding SWOT findings culminate in a characterization of key gaps in Pickering’s
current state of DARP that need to be closed to achieve the desired future state of a more effective
and more efficient DARP. This characterization is illustrated in Figure 9: Characterization of Key Gaps
in Pickering’s DARP.
Figure 9: Characterization of Key Gaps in Pickering’s DARP
4.0 SWOT Findings, Gap Analysis, and Foundation for Success
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 24
4.3 Strong DARP Team with a Desire to Improve: An Excellent
Foundation for Success
Consultation with Pickering’s DARP team and the local development industry has yielded a wide variety
of feedback on the current state DARP model (see Appendix D). The most underlying theme to emerge
from consultation relates to the City’s commitment to maintaining strong internal and external
relationships, including the willingness to deliver a high-performing DARP delivery model. Staff
involved within the DARP model demonstrate a positive attitude in implementing LEAN-style process
improvements, adopting technology tools to complement existing processes, desire to learn from the
benefits of DARP models utilized by comparable Ontario municipalities, and are aware of the DARP
workload challenges associated with the ever-evolving planning horizon.
Consultation completed as part of engagement with the local development community rank the City’s
DARP staff highly in working collaboratively in finding mutually beneficial solutions to advance
development applications and further describe staff as communicative, collaborative, friendly and
cooperative. Although the findings of these engagement sessions with the development community
also highlight areas for improvement within the DARP process, members of the development
community praised the customer service and availability of Pickering DARP staff.
Pickering therefore finds itself in an advantageous position to move forward successfully with DARP
improvement. The SWOT is sufficiently balanced that enough strengths and opportunities exist to
overcome weaknesses and threats to the organization. Coupled with the high calibre of staff observed,
there is an excellent foundation for successful DARP improvement.
5.0 Recommended Future State Pickering DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 25
5.0 Recommended Future
State Pickering DARP
Model
Following the current state review phase and validation session held with Pickering DARP management
staff, a full suite of findings and recommendations for a high-performing future state Pickering DARP
model has been prepared. Preliminary feedback received from City staff through the Interim
Presentation process has strengthened and assisted in refining the initial recommendation framework.
The future state recommendations have also been informed by the Dillon/Performance Concept’s
team experience and knowledge of DARP best practices across similar Ontario municipalities.
Figure 10: The Future State is the Envisioned People, Process, and Technology
The suite of proposed
recommendations is organized
into five key themes5, as shown
in Figure 11: Future State
Recommendation Themes
below. Recommendations are
also categorized as Strategic
(large-scale recommendations
that typically require a
significant amount of effort,
resources or support) or Tactical
(smaller-scale improvements
that demand little resources and
can be implemented quickly).
The impacts of the changing
regulatory framework, and
Pickering’s adaptation to these
changes, have been considered.
5 Although six thematic issues were identified, one of them is due to external forces that Pickering itself cannot resolve,
which therefore results in five thematic areas for improvement.
Process
Technology
People
5.0 Recommended Future State Pickering DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 26
Figure 11: Future State Recommendation Themes
Collaboration for Increased
Efficiency
Measuring Performance
and Setting Targets Modernizing Technology Process Improvement Resource Capacity
5.1 Collaboration for Increased Efficiency
Role alignment is critically important in a high-functioning DARP model. Clarifying roles and responsibilities will reduce redundancies in DARP processes, improve processing consistency, reduce overall timelines, promote
accountability and foster stronger collaborative working relationships between DARP business units. For example, optimizing the role of the Administrative Assistant in processing development applications will provide
meaningful growth opportunities for staff in that role and will also preserve the Planner’s time to focus on technical inputs into a file as opposed to conducting administrative tasks.
Acknowledging opportunities to improve clarity around roles and responsibilities can also provide a safe space for participating City staff to raise concerns about recurring inefficiencies or expending excessive amounts of staff
time and capacity on low-value processes. Resolving these matters collaboratively within the DARP team will contribute to a better performing DARP model. Unlike an airing of grievances, this transparent improvement
process is centred around creating a forum to engage in productive discussion about the DARP transformation in Pickering and optimizing roles. The following recommendations align closely with Future State process map
recommendations in Appendix B which document where specific staff members should be responsible for executing certain processes.
Table 2: Collaboration for Increased Efficiencies Recommendations
No. Strategic/Tactical Current State Finding/Observation Recommendation Expected Benefit
CL 1 Tactical Inconsistent notification of Council members of ongoing
development applications or development trends.
In addition to existing circulations to the Mayor and local Councillor
offices, circulate a monthly memo to all members of Council
summarizing the various development applications received over
the last month, including information on the contentious or
complicated applications.
Ensures that Council is informed of ongoing development
applications.
CL 2 Tactical
Lack of clarity regarding which technical reviewer is
responsible for providing comments can lead to duplication
of effort. Inconsistencies regarding the identification of
which external agencies/internal business units to circulate
Pre-consultation applications to for comment.
Develop a regularly updated list for file planners to identify which
internal business units and external agencies should be circulated in
technical review and what type of information is required to be
commented on (i.e., Urban Design – Identifies applicable OP
policies and provides detailed design comments to help implement
a municipality’s urban design vision). Planning staff should
reference this list and use their discretion in circulating review
requests for Pre-consultation and technical review (i.e., Can exclude
circulating to the school board if the project relates to an industrial
site). Can be tied into the application Standard Operating Procedure
and can specify that missing deadlines for commenting will result in
an assumed 'no comment'.
Clarifies which department is responsible for providing what
type of information, acts as a tool for new or junior staff to
guide who is circulated on technical review requests and
limits the circulation of technical review requests to only the
applicable reviewers (reducing unnecessary workload for
uninterested business units).
5.0 Recommended Future State Pickering DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 27
No. Strategic/Tactical Current State Finding/Observation Recommendation Expected Benefit
CL 3 Tactical
Regular meetings with development engineering to discuss
applications and issues stopped occurring, leading to
community services and operations receiving review
notifications too late in the process and timelines not being
met.
Re-introduce mandatory meetings on a regular schedule between
Engineering Services, City Development and Community Services to
regularly discuss workflow, upcoming development applications,
and potential issues with any specific applications. Pickering can
also supplement these meetings by developing and maintaining a
dashboard integrated within AMANDA to track the status of
applications.
Promotes collaboration and communication between
departments throughout the life of an application, such as
Park’s review of Post Draft Plan submissions. This ensures
that both infrastructure and park reviews are coordinated
and a development agreement can be efficiently produced in
a timely fashion. Additionally, such regular collaboration is
intended to improve information sharing on application
statuses, discuss application updates, avoid inconsistent
messaging in technical comments/direction and further
solidify the existing collaborative Pickering DARP culture.
CL 4 Tactical
There have been many changes to the planning process in
Ontario which has had an impact on Pickering DARP. The
development community and members of the public may
not be familiar with the changes and how they impact
Pickering DARP.
Host two Public Information Centre (PIC) format sessions in 2025
(spring and fall) to inform the public and the local development
community on changes to the Ontario planning process,
improvements to the Pickering DARP model, development trends
and objectives, and more. Ensure that records of these meetings
are published on the City's website for those who cannot attend
and for those who wish to learn more about the process. Further,
update the notice of public meeting to include the type of
information that the City is looking for public input on and what
kind of information is up to the City to review/assess (i.e., the public
can comment on land use matters but cannot comment on matters
related to people zoning); plain language must be used.
Build on the public education initiative and increase public
awareness regarding their role in the DARP system. Builds
new and strengthens existing relationships between the City
(various departments and Council Offices) and the
development community.
CL 5 Tactical
The quality of application materials related to the
development engineering review is not always sufficient,
which leads to delays in the review cycle.
Mandatory requirement for Development Engineering to be
involved in the preliminary document review related to the deemed
complete/incomplete decision (i.e., quality check). In addition to
ad-hoc coordination, it is recommended that Planning and
Development Engineering meet on a regular schedule to ensure
that applications are not delayed at the intake stage.
Ensures a high-quality standard of documents submitted as
part of review cycles and reduces staff time in collaborating
with applicants to revise materials.
CL 6 Tactical
Some technical reviews, typically external agencies, are
unfamiliar with nuances or specific development
constraints on development applications and could benefit
from a summary of the application.
File planner to draft a project summary to be included in technical
review circulation request to inform reviews of the application type,
proposed amendments, development constraints, political
contexts, or other site-specific information.
Provides technical reviewers with key contextual information
to support the review of application materials.
CL 7 Strategic
Pickering DARP features a positive degree of collaboration
but has not yet secured the benefits of an optimal "form
follows function" DARP organization design. Organization
silos exist outside of the DARP umbrella.
Implement a series of successive adjustments in organization design
to secure a fully end-to-end DARP organization design (Planning,
Development Engineering, Building, and Sustainability).
Promote continuous improvement by providing an exclusive
focus on DARP execution and results; eliminate silo-based
organizational drag; and promote accountability, efficiency,
cross-disciplinary collaboration, and transparency.
5.0 Recommended Future State Pickering DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 28
5.2 Measuring Performance and Setting Targets
DARP is best understood from a systems perspective, where service delivery inputs are organized into activities and processes that produce outputs (products). These outputs generate value-added outcomes (approvals) for
applicants and new taxable assessments for the City of Pickering. The perspective of this DARP system transcends traditional vertical organizational structures, by instead fostering a homogenous integration of Pickering’s
DARP team across various departments.
Table 3: Measuring Performance and Setting Targets Recommendations
No. Strategic/Tactical Current State Finding/Observation Recommendation Expected Benefit
MP 1 Strategic
Absence of formalized DARP KPIs and annual performance
targets to drive internal continuous improvement and
promote external accountability reporting.
Create a "DARP Performs" KPI working group to identify a
core portfolio of KPIs, establish transparent performance
targets and design a reporting framework tied to the annual
budget cycle. Coordinate with the AMANDA Optimization
Project. DARP KPI selection should be informed by the KPIs
Case Study submitted with Dillon Consulting Limited’s Final
Report. End-to-End DARP KPIs should encompass
Planning/Post-Draft Plan Development Engineering/Building
Permit delivery channels.
KPIs promote a measurable and results based DARP
execution culture and support continuous improvement in
annual DARP operational/budget cycles. KPIs also create an
external accountability framework where DARP results can
be compared to target results. Engagement of the
development industry when creating the KPIs will help these
metrics align to the customer’s perspective (note: see Table
8 of this report for suggested KPIs).
MP 2 Tactical
AMANDA configuration does not provide "clock on/clock off"
time tracking, so staff's workflow and developer's
responsiveness can not be disaggregated to identify real-
time performance issues and setting performance targets,
including better insight on cycles of review/resubmissions.
Utilize AMANDA "Attempt" functionality from the Pre-
consultation stage through the Building Occupancy stage to
measure DARP processing timelines, automate staff
interactions, and ultimately improve efficiency and
economize effort. DARP processing timelines and targets are
to be measured in controllable file processing days (i.e.,
business). On-and-off chess clock style tracking is required to
reflect custody of the file between the City and the applicant.
Implement milestone notifications to appropriate staff to
ensure tracking of application progress and transitions
between City business units. Require DARP staff to
frequently update file progression status changes in
AMANDA to ensure data tracking integrity. Apply end-to-end
AMANDA tracking accountability requirements across
Planning, Engineering and Building DARP components.
Enables DARP business intelligence data stream to drive
workload priority setting and secure continuous
improvement. Promotes a measurable and results based
DARP execution culture and supports continuous
improvement in annual DARP operational/budget cycles.
5.3 Modernizing Technology
It is critically important for Pickering to commit to a robust configuration of AMANDA as the exclusive software platform for managing DARP workflow processing; including access to documents, triaging updates regarding
upcoming and competing file processing deadlines, processing throughput timeframe tracking and managed routing of technical communication between City business units and applicants. Executing DARP outside of
AMANDA is inefficient from a LEAN processing perspective, leading to sub-optimal organization of files, redundant staff processing and reporting effort and erosion of timeframe reporting data accuracy.
The implementation of AMANDA can vary significantly across municipalities. For instance, one municipality may depend on manual staff interventions in AMANDA to document the timing of process milestone achievement
whereas another municipality may adopt more dependable automation of AMANDA by using “attempts” to document milestone achievement across files. Our team supports the “attempts” driven automated AMANDA
configuration approach due to the consistency and standardization benefits generated when measuring timeframe results and setting targets. Up-front commitment and resourcing for a robust configuration of AMANDA will
ultimately yield significant DARP improvements around application processing and KPI target setting and reporting.
5.0 Recommended Future State Pickering DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 29
Efficient document management within an AMANDA-based technology solution must replace the current use of multiple document storage platforms. Document management consolidation focused on AMANDA and
SharePoint is imperative for a high-performing DARP model in Pickering. AMANDA and SharePoint should be the central document management hub to ensure consistent document management across all DARP business
units. Such configuration will ensure version control, reduce the probability of misplaced files and staff effort in tracking down these files, provide automatic receipt data and improve searchability and historical references for
future City staff.
Pickering has yet to adopt a consolidated corporation-wide technology tool to be used across business units, which has led to a fragmentation of technology tools used across the corporation and varying document processing
and management tools used by different departments. As a result, there currently exists a corporation-wide acceptance of the necessity for a single DARP workflow tool and the elimination of inefficiencies related to
fragmented document management, limited AMANDA staff training and optimizing automation driven consistency across DARP. Such technological and workflow management shortcomings have meaningful negative impacts
on the overall DARP performance. Adoption of a consolidated DARP technology solution leveraging an AMANDA and SharePoint hub will significantly improve workflow management, results-based performance reporting and
consistent and standardized processing timelines. A high performing DARP workflow solution is critical for Pickering considering the current and forecasted workload looming over the current and near-future planning horizon.
Table 4: Modernizing Technology Recommendations
No. Strategic/Tactical Current State Finding/Observation Recommendation Expected Benefit
MT 1 Tactical Lack of standardized naming conventions for application
submission documents and other application materials.
Prior to the adoption of a wide-spread application intake tool,
require both staff and applicants to follow naming conventions
for application files. Once an application intake tool has been
implemented, this can be done automatically through the portal.
Ensures consistency between applications and improves
the organization of documents.
MT 2 Tactical
Overlap of effort between Finance and Planning for intake and
confirmation of planning fees (Finance receives fees, asks
planning for confirmation, then approves).
Automate fee calculation and collection into workflows and
create software linkages between the DARP workflow platform
and payment processing software.
Automate fee collection and reduce the amount of staff
effort that goes into confirming application fees.
MT 3 Tactical
Multiple formats of circulation memos drafted, formatted, and
issued to various departments (i.e., engineering,
council/department heads and all other technical reviewers).
During the transition to an end-to-end DARP technology
solution, consolidate the existing three different circulation
memos into a single document outlining key information and
include business unit specific notes regarding key information or
individual staff required actions. With the deployment of
AMANDA end-to-end across DARP, automated circulation
memos will be prepared and circulated, including notifications
and timelines related to commenting due dates.
Reduces effort in drafting, formatting and issuing
circulation memos.
MT 4 Tactical
There is no formal method of deadline notification for review
timeframe dates or upcoming application milestones (i.e.,
Council meetings, community meetings, appeal period, etc.) and
Pickering staff must contact the file planner to obtain this
information.
In conjunction with the recommendation for the widespread
adoption of AMANDA, configure the software to provide
automatic notifications to the file planner and technical
reviewers for upcoming statutory deadlines, missing
information, key upcoming dates and any other appropriate
information.
Ensures that all appropriate staff are notified of
upcoming deadlines or application milestones and
alleviates the need for inefficient conversations to
determine deadlines.
5.0 Recommended Future State Pickering DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 30
No. Strategic/Tactical Current State Finding/Observation Recommendation Expected Benefit
MT 5 Strategic
Applicants, members of the public, City staff or Regional staff
are unable to track the ongoing status of a DARP application
without having to contact the assigned planner.
Update the City's online DARP portal to feature an application
progress tracker with functionality that mirrors high performing
DARP municipalities (i.e., City of Mississauga). Tracker
configuration to include spatial mapping of the site, a summary
of the application, a URL connection to appropriate application
materials, dates of any upcoming public meetings and a go-live
timeline of file processing milestones achieved and upcoming.
The enhanced web presence ensures that all
stakeholders (agencies, proponents, the public, etc.) have
access to and are aware of development application
information. For the public, this can streamline where
their involvement is required/adds value, and what
information they can comment on. This also limits the
number of inquiries that come into planning staff, allows
stakeholders to be more educated on application files
and supports public involvement and transparency in the
planning process.
MT 6 Strategic Multiple methods of circulating the documents of an application
can lead to document storage and version control issues.
Standardize document sharing through an AMANDA-based
technology solution instead of email.
Consolidates a centralized document storage and sharing
location between departments and technical reviewers.
MT 7 Strategic
There is a lack of a corporate-wide software for development
application review, meaning that various departments and
individuals within the same department utilize different
document storage/transfer platforms to process development
applications. This inconsistency in file management leads to
poor continuity of file information (searching for approval
history and transfer of file ownership in the event of departing
staff members), wasted effort in tracking down files and
coordinating between staff members/departments, and poor
document management or versioning practices.
On a corporate scale, and in conjunction with other
recommendations through this exercise, adopt the widespread
implementation, training and acceptance of AMANDA as the
sole development application review software. Require that all
technical reviews input comments directly into AMANDA and
ensure that all file management is conducted in an AMANDA-
related document storage solution to avoid version control
issues.
The corporate roll-out consolidates corporate wide use of
technology tools, improves consistency in document
management and storage, consolidates application
history and information and ensures all staff are trained
on AMANDA.
MT 8 Strategic
The City has implemented a digital readiness strategy (8 year
timeframe) and an IT capability study was also conducted;
however, the DARP and the Digital Strategy initiatives have not
been meaningfully aligned and integrated so far. To date,
AMANDA workflow tool configuration and deployment in
Pickering has not secured LEAN DARP performance results.
There remain multiple methods of circulating the documents of
an application, which can lead to document storage and version
control issues. The level of AMANDA investment is not aligned
with the high stakes of DARP performance and the Housing
Pledge target of 13,000 units.
Initiate a robustly funded/resourced AMANDA Optimization
Project (delivering a Future State DARP configuration surge). The
project needs to deliver consistent implementation/rollout
across all DARP participating business units. The project
objective is to maximize the functionality of AMANDA with the
requisite document management tool to deliver LEAN processes
and measurable DAP tracking. The AMANDA Optimization
Project should be coordinated with the new "DARP Performs"
KPI Working Group.
The AMANDA Optimization Project will achieve the
breakthrough needed at Pickering to fully streamline
DARP collaboration and tracking, while positioning the
City for future automation possibilities. Will create DARP
business intelligence capabilities and drive continuous
improvement necessary to meet upcoming Housing
Pledge performance challenge of processing 13,000 new
units. A centralized document storage and sharing
location between departments and technical reviewers is
created thereby eliminating duplication and optimizing
document risk management.
5.0 Recommended Future State Pickering DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 31
No. Strategic/Tactical Current State Finding/Observation Recommendation Expected Benefit
MT 9 Strategic
The City Development Department has many AMANDA folders,
many of which are overcomplicated. Despite the abundance of
folders, no existing documentation or flowcharts are detailing
their procedures or workflows. The complexity of these folders
leads to maintenance issues and user errors, which can have
long term effects.
Conduct a comprehensive review of AMANDA folders, including
observation and brainstorming sessions with key users, to
identify problem areas and potential improvements. As part of
this exercise, clearly redefine the objectives for each folder,
ensuring that each one has a focused purpose. Emphasize the
needs of the end users when reviewing and revising folders,
ensuring they are straightforward, efficient and user-friendly.
Improves the quality and organization of AMANDA
folders, ensures ease of maintenance and update and
improves user-friendliness to avoid errors and maintain
adequate organization.
MT 10 Tactical Technical review comments are not circulated amongst
technical reviewers, which may lead to conflicting comments.
Establish a portal where all comments are to be uploaded and
where all technical reviewers can see the comments of other
reviewers (i.e. similar to the City of Mississauga's portal).
Ensures consistency of tone and direction throughout the
technical review comments and relieves that the
assigned planner from conducting the bulk of the quality
review.
5.4 Process Improvement
Once DARP fees have been updated and the City’s resourcing capacity has been optimized, superior DARP performance hinges on process execution. Pickering’s DARP processes should be standardized and consistent, with
uniform application processing milestones featured across Planning, Engineering and Building channels. Optimally configured AMANDA workflows should be based on Pickering’s updated future state DARP process maps.
Repetition, consistency and timeframe predictability are integral to LEAN style DARP process execution. These improvements will enable predictive forecasting of future DARP timeframes once processes are streamlined,
documented and subjected to rigorous tracking in AMANDA.
Process improvement will correct and ultimately replace sub-optimal activities within any given DARP processing channel, enhancing value relative to the effort expended. LEAN process improvement is iterative over time and
across repetitions. LEAN process improvement is iterative, with even small incremental changes having a significant cumulative impact when combined, especially when implemented in tandem with improved clarity around
roles and responsibilities.
The Dillon/Performance Concepts have developed more than two dozen incremental DARP process improvements via our suite of future state recommendations set out in this Report.
As part of the Process Improvement recommendation, the Dillon/Performance Concepts team have provided recommended modifications to the current state operational process maps for Pre-consultation, Zoning By-law
Amendments, Official Plan Amendments, Site Plan Control and Draft Plan of Subdivision/Condominium. These process map modifications were based on the current processes for the above-mentioned applications. The
Dillon/Performance Concepts team have provided revised processes in Appendix B of this report.
Table 5: Process Improvement Recommendations
No. Strategic/Tactical Current State Finding/Observation Recommendation Expected Benefit
PI 1 Tactical
Current digital versions of application forms do not allow the
applicant to fill-in the fields with text, instead requiring the
applicant to insert text boxes which may lead to formatting
issues.
Ensure that fields in application forms are text fillable for all
PDF readers. Once a fully functioning portal has been
implemented, require all DARP applications (including Post-
Draft Plan infrastructure design drawings) to be submitted
digitally through an online portal that is linked to AMANDA
(digital-only submissions).
Provide a universal and simpler user interface for application
forms and ensure high-quality formatting for application forms
received by the City.
PI 2 Tactical
Pre-consultation meetings are scheduled on an ad-hoc basis
without a standardized meeting schedule, oftentimes
prioritizing certain significant applications that are received.
This short notice and shifting of prioritization has led to a
rushed review of Pre-consultation packages and effort being
diverted from other applications that are already underway.
On a monthly basis, implement a regularly scheduled day
for all Pre-consultation meetings to occur.
Ensures that all technical reviewers are aware of the occurrence
of Pre-consultation meetings to adequately prepare and provide
comments. Ensures that external agencies can remain involved in
development applications, are involved in the local planning
process, and can work around meeting dates so they can
participate and maintain collaboration between the City and
external agencies.
5.0 Recommended Future State Pickering DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 32
No. Strategic/Tactical Current State Finding/Observation Recommendation Expected Benefit
PI 3 Tactical
Different documentation provided to the applicant following a
Pre-consultation meeting for a standard application and a land
severance application.
Establish a standardized template for Pre-consultation
comments across SPC, DPOS, OPA, ZBA, and complex
severances with servicing requirements/land conveyances.
Helps ensure that all Pre-consultation processes can occur within
the proposed Pre-consultation schedule, reduces staff effort in
differentiating/tailoring comments to different templates or
processes and promotes consistency and clarity for applicants.
PI 4 Tactical Pre-consultation comments shared with the applicant for the
first time at the Pre-consultation meeting.
In those circumstances when it might foster improved
dialogue, provide a selected set of pre-consultation
comments to the applicant to foster collaboration during
the Pre-consultation meeting. Full pre-consultation
comments can then be formally issued in their final form
after the meeting.
Informs the applicant of main themes prior to the meeting and
ensures that the meeting can be a discussion of the comments or
technical issues as opposed to a review of the comments. The
final pre-consultation written comments fosters a technical "on-
ramp" to the subsequent application.
PI 5 Tactical
Preliminary planning inquiries occasionally go beyond the
scope of a high-level zoning/land use designation review
without advancing to Pre-consultation.
Formalize standards of what information can be disclosed
through a phone/email inquiry, a Zoning Compliance
Report, and when Pre-consultation is encouraged and
communicate this through the City's website. Limit an
inquiry to the identification of the applicable zone category
and/or Official Plan designation, and definition clarification;
limit a Zoning Compliance Report to identifying the
applicable provisions and/or site plan compliance review;
and encourage a Pre-consultation for policy interpretations
or to discuss development plans.
Ensure that the effort of responding to planning inquiries,
conducting Zoning Compliance Reports, and engaging in Pre-
consultation is scoped to standardized and predetermined
metrics. Also ensures fee recovery for the City to ensure that the
level of effort is appropriately accommodated.
PI 6 Tactical Lack of tracking of inspections and condition clearance.
Ensure that an adequate schedule and tracking model are
implemented for post-occupancy planning inspections. Prior
to the widespread adoption of a corporate-wide application
such as AMANDA, this can be tracked through workflow
calendars or shareable spreadsheets. Once corporate-wide
software is implemented, schedules and status tracking can
be automatically implemented into the technology tool
where reminders are issued.
Ensures that the City fulfils the statutory inspection requirements
on time and further consolidates the process into a single
corporate-wide software tool.
PI 7 Tactical
The applicant is not required to identify if, and to what extent,
their development proposal was modified between Pre-
consultation and formal submission to accommodate Pre-
consultation comments.
Require that the applicant submit a cover letter and
comment response matrix with the submission of a formal
application (ZBA, OPA, etc.) to identify if, how, and to what
extent the technical comments from Pre-consultation have
been accommodated. The formatted matrix will be provided
by the City automatically through AMANDA where the
applicant can provide their response in the appropriate
field.
Saves staff effort from compiling Pre-consultation comments
during the technical review, ensures that the applicant is
implementing and/or interacting with the comments from Pre-
consultation, and ensures consistency in the transition from Pre-
consultation to formal submission if file planners change.
5.0 Recommended Future State Pickering DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 33
No. Strategic/Tactical Current State Finding/Observation Recommendation Expected Benefit
PI 8 Tactical
Multiple roles involved in the administrative effort, general
underutilization of administrative assistants, and often overlap
in the responsibilities of planning and administration. There
currently exists a large reliance on the Planner to do
administrative tasks such as fee calculations, notice mailouts,
and website updates. The Administrative Assistance position is
currently underutilized, especially in the Pre-consultation
process.
Fully leverage the Administrative Assistant to relieve the File
Planner from conducting a range of lower value-added
administrative tasks (e.g. application intake, fee calculation,
circulation, notice mailouts, website updates, etc.). Planning
and Development Engineering are to conduct a shallow
quality check of submission items prior to the deemed
complete decision. Marked-up process maps provide a
detailed "who does what" guideline for specific
administrative activities the Planner can be relieved from to
focus on a higher value-added workload.
Reduces the amount of staff involved in application intake and
circulation, improves efficiency, and ensures that only the
applicable technical reviews are circulated to ensure that the
review is efficient.
PI 9 Tactical The assumption process varies between applications despite
conditions which could be standardized.
Develop a set of standardized conditions of assumption that
can be applied consistently to various applications, with a
prioritized focus on Site Plan Control, Draft Plan of
Subdivision, and release of securities.
Ensures consistency between applications and reduces the
amount of back-end staff effort.
PI 10 Tactical
Inconsistent notification to Finance of incoming payments and
EFT payments does not indicate which application the payment
is for, leading to wasted staff effort and coordination between
departments to track down where to assign the payment.
Update the EFT payment form to include an additional field
where the applicant is required to note the address of the
property or planning application number and require the
Planning Department to notify finance of expected
payments.
Reduces wasted communication effort to confirm which
applications an EFT is tied to, ensures consistency, and ensures
that payments are deposited quickly.
PI 11 Tactical Inconsistent training on technological roll out between
staff/departments.
Compliment the increase in staffing effort with additional
training (use and implementation of technologies such as
AMANDA and BlueBeam) for all staff members.
Ensures that all staff are capable of involvement in the DARP
process.
PI 12 Tactical City staff are responsible for creating notice boards, leading to
increased responsibility and coordination.
Require the applicant to draft notice boards based on pre-
established templates, limiting the role of the planner/clerk
to only reviewing the graphic for clarity and conformity with
City standards.
Limits staff effort to a position of reviewer, not sign creator.
PI 13 Tactical
The process of building permit review and issuance in the
current state is sufficient, but not yet optimized for timing and
accommodating market factors.
Develop consistent standards for the issuance of conditional
building permit approval and when to utilize conditional
building permit approval.
Fast-track the building permit process for items that are already
finalized to begin components of construction earlier.
PI 14 Tactical
Although not regular, there are occurrences of conflicting
comments between internal departments and external
agencies.
Assigned file planner to screen pre-consultation or technical
review comments as they are received to identify and
resolve any conflicting comments prior to issuance to the
applicant.
Pre-emptively resolves conflict in comments or technical review
direction early in the process and ensures that the comments
issued to the applicant are meaningful, so time is spent resolving
comments as opposed to clarifying them.
PI 15 Tactical Lack of clearly defined securities release timeline.
To support an end-to-end DARP performance measurement
initiative, develop a guideline and standardized milestone
tracker for securities release (applicable to Site Plan and
Draft Plan). The process milestone tracker should identify
trigger points for scheduling inspections and subsequently
releasing securities.
Ensures transparency and clarity of the securities release process,
improving relationships with the development community and
reducing staff effort in tailoring securities release on a case-by-
case basis.
5.0 Recommended Future State Pickering DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 34
No. Strategic/Tactical Current State Finding/Observation Recommendation Expected Benefit
PI 16 Tactical Inconsistent requirement for zoning review within the site plan
process.
Require a zoning review for all site plan applications to
ensure that zoning of site plan control applications is
consistent with regulations. This zoning review should be a
standardized document for all zoning examiners to use to
remain consistent between applications and reviewers.
Provides consistency and ensures zoning compliance for all site
plan applications, regardless of whether they are tied with a
rezoning application or not.
PI 17 Tactical
Applications which include a high level of detail are typically
only prepared by consultants or applicants familiar with
Pickering standards. Applications coming from consultants or
applicants who do not regularly do work in Pickering are often
not of the same quality.
Publicize application requirement standards more clearly on
the City's website and application form process, and
recommend that the applicant participate in Pre-
consultation (i.e., City of Mississauga, City of Burlington, City
of Hamilton, City of Vaughan, City of Markham, City of
Toronto).
Improves public knowledge of submission standards and
contributes to a high quality of application materials, reducing
rework and improving downstream process flow.
PI 18 Tactical
Multiple levels of file handoff and senior review increases the
time it takes for an application to get reviewed and for a
decision/recommendation to be made.
Formalize process maps and internal standard operating
procedures to define major and minor application types,
which each require different levels of senior management
review. Adopt technology workflow solutions for accepting
and assigning review to staff/senior management and for
coordinating with other internal departments. A revision of
the 2021 fee review may be required to complete this
recommendation based on the proposed changes.
Minimizes redundancy of senior management review, reduces
workload of all Development Engineering staff, and improves
application turnaround time.
PI 19 Tactical
Comments are received in piece-meal by the file planner from
technical reviewers, meaning that file planners have to format
responses into a consolidated location and comments can be
lost. Lack of consistent or centralized technical review
comment response template.
As part of the City-wide adoption of AMANDA, require all
City technical reviewers and key external reviewers to input
technical comments directly into AMANDA. Configure
AMANDA to automatically compile a matrix-style comment
response template for the assigned planner to provide to
the applicant. In the meantime, develop a standardized
SharePoint document consisting of a pre-formatted table
for Pre-consultation and technical review comments that
can be accessed by both the City of Pickering and external
reviewers. The link to this document can be located in each
SharePoint folder and circulated along with the application
material.
Centralizes technical review comments and automatically
produces a formatted table of comments; alleviates coordination
effort of file planner.
PI 20 Tactical Notices of complete applications are mailed to applicants.
Eliminate mail-out application completeness notifications
and build in automated digital notifications in AMANDA.
Limit mail outs to public notice notifications.
Reduces redundant resource use (i.e. postage and stationary
costs & staff effort) and integrates digital notification processes
into AMANDA milestones.
PI 21 Tactical
Many of the checklists and other configurations in AMANDA
are overly complex and can be streamlined to create a "one-
click" end-user experience for staff. Staff often ignore most of
the info fields due to confusion or feeling overwhelmed by the
large amount of data they need to input. This leads to
inaccuracies, incomplete information, and sometimes errors
when the system requires specific data to proceed to the next
step.
Conduct a review of the current AMANDA folders to identify
each info field and its purpose—whether it is for fee
calculation, statistical reporting, or providing information
about the file. Remove any info fields that do not support
the main goal or are not essential for specific statistics or
calculations.
This will reduce unnecessary data input and make the system
more user-friendly and efficient.
5.0 Recommended Future State Pickering DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 35
No. Strategic/Tactical Current State Finding/Observation Recommendation Expected Benefit
PI 22 Strategic
Regular meetings have been arranged with specific
representatives for the Seaton community, which has been a
successful model. A planning lead was identified for this
development area as well.
Implement a pilot project to evaluate the risk/reward of a
geography specific DARP team for a priority development
area (e.g., Seaton). The pilot should implement a
streamlined/customized DARP model and develop
specialized staff expertise across disciplines for applications
within the catchment area. Use the results/insights of the
pilot project to consider whether a geography specific DARP
model can work City-wide.
A geography-based DARP processing model can foster greater
teamwork, bolster staff knowledge of area-specific issues to be
resolved and may lead to faster day-to-day decision-making by
drawing upon this depth of expertise. The pilot project will help
determine the broader applicability of a geography based DARP
processing model moving forward.
PI 23 Strategic
Applications are currently assigned based on the capacity and
skill set of the planning team. A formalized approach for
triaging priority applications (e.g., concierge service) has not
been established, but may be done on an ad hoc basis.
Develop a formalized Standardized Operating Procedure
that identifies priority projects that warrant a streamlined
approach, as well as specific targets to accompany that
streamlined approach.
Removes the debate and potential for lengthy dialogue to
determine whether a given application should be triaged
differently/prioritized. Once this new system has been tested
(e.g. 6 months - 1 y), it can be formalized or abandoned
depending on results.
PI 24 Strategic Lack of delegation for the approval of minor application types.
Adopt a By-law to delegate Minor Zoning By-law
Amendment and Holding Removal decision authority to the
Director of the City Development Department.
Increases the overall efficiency of application turnaround time by
freeing City Council from deciding on minor applications and
builds upon the delegated authority intent of Bill 13.
5.5 Resource Capacity
High-performing DARP models are characterized by three interdependent performance drivers:
1. Full-cost DARP fees that provide adequate financial support for Pickering to ensure consistent timeframe performance. DARP fees provide the opportunity to secure necessary levels of DARP processing muscle.
2. Deploying the necessary DARP processing muscle to meet expected workload demands by utilizing a mix of qualified City staff and readily available roster of external consulting expertise.
3. Executing standardized, consistent DARP processes (mapped and integrated with workflow technology) to achieve targeted application processing throughput times.
Assembling an evidence-supported business case to justify DARP resourcing investments is essential to secure Council and development community support. Securing and updating the DARP fee structure’s resourcing basis to
fund investments is also required. In fact, a DARP fee update will generate the processing effort data to justify the required resourcing investments business case.
Even prior to business case finalization it is clear that potential Development Engineering processing capacity chokepoints represent a serious DARP performance risk if pending post-Draft Plan engineering phases proceed in a
compressed timeframe. Rostered external resources for engineering review as well as other DARP potential chokepoints should proceed in advance of a finalized DARP fee review and the associated multi-year resourcing plan.
Decisions regarding resourcing and staffing must be made by Pickering to enact meaningful improvements to the DARP model. Pickering should consider creating new technical staff positions to support the current and future
DARP workflow demands and maintain rosters of external support to facilitate backstopping of resources to maintain service delivery throughput. Resources will also be required to enact organizational changes, improve
processes, train staff, and adopt a corporate-wide technology tool to support a high-functioning DARP model.
5.0 Recommended Future State Pickering DARP Model
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 36
Table 6: Resource Capacity Recommendations
No. Strategic/Tactical Current State Finding/Observation Recommendation Expected Benefit
RC 1 Strategic
Full-cost recovery of DARP (mitigating property tax
subsidization) is a necessity for Pickering but requires a DARP
fees update to reflect “As Should Be” processes and recent
Provincial regulatory changes.
Conduct a DARP Full-Cost Fees Review to reflect new “As Should Be”
process improvements and the evolving regulatory regime.
Updated DARP fees will deliver cost recovery fairness
between existing development and new
development. Mitigation of inappropriate property
tax subsidization of DARP will improve the fiscal
health of the City moving forward.
RC 2 Strategic
Existing DARP processing capacity may not be adequate to
ensure timely processing of existing and/or future workload
demands. Housing Pledge target achievement may be at risk if
existing difficult-to-predict Post-Draft Plan workload and future
application volumes peak at the same time. Furthermore, the
Development Engineering team does not have sufficient
staffing to support the development application workload
demand and documents a significant amount of annual
overtime hours.
Implement a multi-year DARP resourcing strategy informed by the
analysis/commentary set out in this review. Ensure initial emphasis on
closing the high-risk Development Engineering capacity gap that could
erode Pickering's ability to process the Post-Draft Plan infrastructure
design phase that delivers registered lots; consider a combination of
fully cost-recovered additional staff and/or consultant resources.
Proactive risk mitigation will improve the probability
of meeting Council-endorsed DARP processing
timeframe targets as well as securing Housing Pledge
commitments to process 13,000 units.
RC 3 Strategic
The Development Engineering department does not have
sufficient staffing to support the workload demand and logs
significant overtime hours.
Increase staffing levels in the Development Engineering department
or manage a roster of independent third-party reviewers.
Increases application turnaround time and alleviates
workload of staff.
RC 4 Strategic
Based on workload, resource capacity and shifting
responsibilities in a two-tier system, the City sometimes
experiences delays in receiving technical input and/or legal
expertise during the agreement phase.
Establish and retain a pre-approved roster for capacity as required for
timely/rapid deployment; encompassing Planning, Environmental, and
Legal services.
Protects DARP capacity erosion in an OLT appeal and
allows the City to mobilize quickly with external
resources consisting of consultants who are familiar
with the Pickering landscape.
RC 5 Tactical
The file planner often coordinates the intake of securities and
the securities bond, which takes away from technical input in
the approval process.
Update process maps and standard operating procedures to fully
utilize the Finance business unit in DARP specifically related to post-
condition clearance securities release (see revised process maps).
Alleviates administrative effort from the file planner
and allows the file planner to focus primarily on
technical input throughout the approval process as
opposed to a heavy coordination workload.
RC 6 Tactical
Inconsistent file delegation in the legal department where
senior staff process a large workflow while associate solicitors
rarely assist.
Delegate files where appropriate to leverage the associate solicitor
position and hire a junior solicitor if staff processing capacity is an
issue.
Reduces workload on a limited number of individuals
and ensures additional staffing support in the legal
department to process requests.
RC 7 Strategic
Current underutilization of administrative assistants and lack
of resourcing to support the growth of the administrative
assistant DARP function.
Expand resources to support the expanded responsibility of the
Administrative Assistant in the DARP model and create new
Administrative Assistant roles.
Supports the available resources related to the
expanded role of the Administrative Assistant in the
DARP model.
6.0 Roadmap to Recommended Implementation
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 37
6.0 Roadmap to
Recommended
Implementation
6.1 Implementation Roadmap
The Dillon/Performance Concepts team recognizes the cost required to enact the recommended
process improvements and understands that Pickering has finalized the municipal budgets for 2025. To
address this, most low-effort and low-cost recommendations included as part of this report are
suggested to be implemented in the short term. Alternatively, the recommendations which require a
higher degree of effort and come with a higher cost are suggested to be implemented in 2026 and
beyond to provide the City with an opportunity to review budgets and weigh the full cost of
accommodating certain recommendations.
While acknowledging the monetary and temporal cost related to improving the current DARP model, it
is recommended that Pickering make these investments to create a more efficient and effective DARP.
The full transition from current state processes to those of an ideal future state model will require a
series of successive changes and will take time for Pickering to work out the nuances of change.
Investment into the DARP process in the short-term will result in long-term benefits and help ensure
that Pickering is properly suited to accommodate the anticipated population and development growth
in the near future.
6.0 Roadmap to Recommended Implementation
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 38
Pickering’s DARP transformation needs to be implemented through leadership, assigning resources and
setting achievable timeframes for implementing the recommendations. It is expected that the Planning
Department will lead implementation in close coordination with the Building Services and Engineering
divisions, respectively. If significant resources are needed, implementation will follow after approval of
funding.
The provided implementation roadmap identifies timeframes for the implementation of the various
recommendations according to the following categories:
• Do now, which refers to activities that can and should be undertaken immediately;
• Do soon, which refers to activities that may have longer lead times due to associated pre-work or
other dependencies, but which should still be undertaken sooner than later (i.e., within
approximately one to two years);
• Do later, which refers to activities that will require lengthier implementation periods or which
should follow others due to pre-work or other dependencies; such activities should be fully
executed within approximately two to three years.
The proposed implementation timeframes have been based on the relative priority and assumed level
of effort needed to successfully implement each recommendation. The roadmap is presented in
Appendix C.
6.1.1 Ongoing Monitoring and Evaluation
The successful implementation of any plan necessitates meaningful monitoring and evaluation along
the way to ensure that things get done, or to modify the plan if needed. As it proceeds through
implementation, Pickering should prepare end-of-year internal progress reporting on an annual basis.
The progress reports should function as a brief summary of what has been achieved in the preceding
year, the activities that are actively underway, and the roadmap for remaining implementation
activities yet to be undertaken.
6.2 Further Advice on Tools and Tactics to Implement High-
Performing DARP
6.2.1 LEAN Thinking
LEAN thinking can be applied to DARP to secure continual improvements in service delivery
(see Figure 12: below). This involves a constant effort to streamline processes, aligning KPI-derived
targets, implementing workflow technology solutions, and ensuring accountability in results reporting.
LEAN concepts such as value stream mapping, creating flow and establishing push are directly
applicable to DARP.
6.0 Roadmap to Recommended Implementation
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 39
Figure 12: LEAN Principles
6.2.2 Pickering DARP Requiring KPI Driven Performance Targets:
Throughputs and Controllable Timeframes
Pickering's DARP model features core service delivery channels: front-end Planning Act decisions, mid-
way Development Engineering reviews, and back-end Building Code approvals. For applicants, the
DARP process is a single, time-sensitive regulatory necessity that incurs costs. Therefore, KPIs applied
to DARP must capture the end-to-end performance requirements of both collaboration and timeline
expectations of the City and applicant.
Figure 13: Core DARP Service Channels for KPIs
6.0 Roadmap to Recommended Implementation
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 40
DARP application processing throughputs are central to the designing of KPIs and are driven by the
following factors:
• Number of City Technical Review Cycle days for any given file. More review cycles lead to a longer
duration to secure DARP approval outputs.
• Number of Controllable File Processing days, when a DARP file is in the custody of the City.
• Number of Controllable File Processing days, when a DARP file is in the custody of the applicant.
This highlights the key DARP effort driver, technical review cycles and the necessity of back-and-forth
file control transfer between Pickering and the applicant.
Figure 14: Countdown Clock Functionality below sets out a detailed illustration of required DARP
workflow tool configuration features (i.e., AMANDA). Countdown clock throughput targets between
application milestones have been established (i.e., 20 business days) and actual throughput times
between processing milestones are tracked and compared against the targets. Controllable file
processing days are assigned to the City or the applicant according to file custody and are tracked
based on which party is in control of the file.
Figure 14: Countdown Clock Functionality
KPIs should help report on throughput times associated with core outputs that are countable and
measurable, such as throughput times for technical review cycles or final application approval
decisions.
6.0 Roadmap to Recommended Implementation
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 41
Figure 15: Core DARP Processing Outputs
Table 7: KPI Design Concepts below outlines appropriate approaches to KPI design for Pickering DARP.
Technical review cycles are the major component contributing to DARP application throughput times.
The percentile approach to timeframe measurement, used by Fire and Ambulance services, can be
applied to DARP technical review cycles. Additionally, measuring the required number of technical
review cycles to secure application approval against the target number of technical review cycles is a
powerful KPI for assessing process throughput timeliness.
Table 7: KPI Design Concepts
KPI Design Concepts
Technical Review Timeframes Technical Review Cycle Counts
• Percentile approach (e.g., 8 out of 10 site
plan circulations executed in 30 controllable
file days or less)
• Average (actual) timeframes versus average
(target) timeframes
• Percentile approach (e.g., 6 out of 10
applications are executed in less than 2
review cycles)
• Average (actual) number of review cycles
versus average (target) number of review
cycles
6.2.2.1 Potential KPIs for Pickering’s Consideration
Table 8: Potential KPIs for Consideration and Figure 16: Potential Post-Draft Plan Related KPIs to
Consider below identify potential DARP KPIs that Pickering can apply to the DARP model. These KPIs
are consistent with the design concepts mentioned earlier and apply to Zoning By-law Amendment,
Official Plan Amendment, Site Plan Control, Draft Plan of Subdivision and Post Draft Plan components
of DARP. These KPIs focus on application decision throughput times and technical review cycle metrics.
A properly configured AMANDA workflow solution will track the required throughput timeframes
across processing milestones for Zoning By-law Amendment, Official Plan Amendment, Site Plan
Control, Draft Plans of Subdivision and Post-Draft Plan engineering review phases. These milestones
can be documented in "As Should Be" process maps and configured within AMANDA. A robust report
writing assistant, such as Microsoft BI, can be connected to AMANDA to facilitate easy access to
throughput timeframe reports, including actual versus target analyses.
Core DARP Processing Outputs
Pre-consults navigated forward to
official application submissions
Application submissions navigated
forward to “deemed complete” status
Complete applications/engineering
review phases that move through
Technical Review Cycles enroute to a
municipal approval decision
All 3 of these core DARP outputs
are countable and measurable!
# DARP Pre-consults
# Submitted/Processed DARP
Applications/Phases
# DARP Technical Review Cycles
6.0 Roadmap to Recommended Implementation
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 42
Timely and accurate data entry in AMANDA is critical for KPIs to add value to DARP. AMANDA must be
seen as a DARP tool with shared accountability and ownership across all DARP-participant business
units in Pickering, not just as a Planning tool. Ultimately, cultivating a results-driven culture around
AMANDA data population is essential for all DARP staff teams.
Table 8: Potential KPIs for Consideration
DARP Service
Channel Key Performance Indicator
Official Plan
Amendment and
Zoning By-law
Amendment
• Average number of City controlled processing days to application approval
decision by Council
• Average number of Applicant controlled processing days to application
approval decision by Council
• Average number of Technical Review Cycles to secure Council application
approval decision
• Average number of City controlled processing days from end of final
Technical Review Cycle to application approval decision by Council
Site Plan Approval
• Average number of City controlled processing days to application approval
decision
• Average number of Applicant controlled processing days to application
approval decision
• Percent of SPC applications approved after two Technical Review Cycles
• Average number of Technical Review Cycles to secure delegated approval
decision
Draft Plan of
Subdivision
Approval
• Average number of City controlled processing days to delegated staff
approval decision
• Average number of Applicant controlled processing days to delegated staff
approval decision
• Average number of Technical Review Cycles to secure delegated staff
approval decision
• Number of processing days per application relative to the “No Municipal
Decision” OLT appeal trigger deadline
6.0 Roadmap to Recommended Implementation
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 43
Figure 16: Potential Post-Draft Plan Related KPIs to Consider
6.2.2.2 DARP Technology Solution Supporting KPIs
A workflow technology solution such as AMANDA can serve as the central system to coordinate DARP
execution. Pickering’s DARP workflow solution should be composed of Sandbox World (internal to the
City) and Portal World (entry point for external stakeholders). Figure 17: Sandbox World Functionality
below illustrates essential functionality requirements for the workflow tool in Sandbox World. External
stakeholders should have input access to Sandbox World data and receive reports on application
processing status.
Figure 17: Sandbox World Functionality
Proposed Post-Draft Plan Approval KPIs
Stormwater
Infrastructure
Parks/Open Space
Infrastructure
Roads/Transportation
Infrastructure
Water & Wastewater
Infrastructure
Potential KPIs
# Technical Review Cycles to
secure City approvals
Average # City controlled processing days to secure
approvals
Average # Applicant
controlled processing days to secure City approvals
# Technical Review Cycles to
secure approvals
Average # controlled
processing days to secure approvals
Average # Applicant
controlled processing days to secure approvals
Pickering
Durham
Infrastructure/Asset Categories
Firewall
Portal World (External)Sandbox World (Internal)
“As Should Be” DARP Workflow/Process
Milestones to document/track progress (#
business days file under City control)
KPI Dashboard –Targets versus Actuals
Processing discipline strengthened via
milestone “drawbridges” triggered by
business rules & countdown clocks
•Applicants
•Public
•Other Agencies
DARP public reporting
re. actual timelines versus
One always-current set of technical
submission data/drawings/comments
6.0 Roadmap to Recommended Implementation
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 44
6.2.3 Embracing a Modernized DARP Workflow Tool
The technology best practices case submitted to Pickering is highly relevant as the City evolves towards
a high-performance DARP model. The evolution of DARP workflow technology solutions over the past
20-years has followed a recognizable pattern across Ontario municipalities, particularly those adopting
an AMANDA workflow solution.
Workflow tools like AMANDA were widely implemented after the 2006 changes to the Building Code
Act, which mandated building permit decision timeframes for complete applications. Chief Building
Officials oversaw these changes in their service delivery model, emphasizing zero tolerance for
incomplete submissions and deploying tools like AMANDA to manage workflows and report results
accurately. This led to a measurement-oriented culture within Building departments across Ontario,
with AMANDA becoming central to managing applications, inspections and performance targets.
In contrast, Planning and Engineering DARP teams were slower to adopt workflow technology tools
such as AMANDA due to the lack of mandatory application timeframes. These teams prioritized
collaboration and negotiation over LEAN process execution over technology solutions. Tools like
AMANDA were subsequently often underutilized or seen as a specific tool of the Planning department
rather than a critical enterprise system, which resulted in an inconsistent commitment to technology
solutions.
Recent changes, such as compressed Ontario Land Tribunal appeal timeframes, Bill 109 targets and
Housing Pledge accountability pressures, have transformed the landscape for Planning DARP. These
teams now face the same timeframe-driven pressures that Building DARP experienced in 2006. The
need for rigorous workflow management and performance tracking is now universally recognized by
Planning Departments across Ontario. Lessons learned by Building departments still apply, which
include but are not limited to, timely data population, AMANDA literacy, current workflows reflecting
streamlined processes and insightful timeframe reporting.
Pickering directly reflects this historic evolution and inconsistency around technology tools such as
AMANDA. Pickering must ensure its Planning and Engineering DARP teams catch up to the Building
department's diligent use of AMANDA. This includes training, modernized workflows, timely reporting
and promoting a measured results-driven culture built around LEAN principles.
A modernized DARP technology platform typically consists of a portal, a document management
solution, a drawings mark-up application and a workflow software tool. The various component pieces
typically work in a hub and spoke configuration with the DARP workflow software tool playing the
central role in driving LEAN performance improvement and service delivery transformation.
AMANDA can deliver what Pickering needs to evolve into a high-performing DARP model. Table 9:
Functionality Checklist for a High-Performing DARP Workflow Tool below outlines the essential
functionalities for a high-performing DARP model. With proper configuration and staff commitment,
AMANDA can meet these needs. Additional components like document management, drawing mark-
up software, a PRISM portal expansion and report writer tools can further enhance the Planning and
Engineering DARP workflow solution. Table 9: Functionality Checklist for a High-Performing DARP
6.0 Roadmap to Recommended Implementation
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 45
Workflow Tool below details the value-added configuration that Pickering should aim for as AMANDA
takes center stage in improving DARP.
Table 9: Functionality Checklist for a High-Performing DARP Workflow Tool
No. Functionality Explanation
1 User Configurability Municipal IT support must be able to easily change process
milestones, timeframe metrics and staff approval authorities.
2 User Permission Setting
Municipal IT support must be able to create user accounts for
internal staff and external agencies, with customizable permission
settings.
3
Integration with Land
Parcel Information
Systems (GIS)
DARP Workflow Tool must link all Planning, Engineering and
Building applications back to the originating land parcel or
applicant.
4 Application Milestone
Tracking
Track the progress of each DARP file against standardized
milestones linked together in a mapped process (DARP is linear).
5 Application Milestone
Measuring
Count "controllable business days" for each file based on custody of
the file (municipality and applicant).
6 System Wide
Measurement (KPIs)
Ability to count "system-wide" units of work (e.g., number of pre-
consults, number of complete applications, number technical
review cycles, number of approved applications, other KPIs etc.).
7 Timeframe Actuals
Setting
DARP Workflow Tool must have the ability to set countdown clock
performance timeframes for each file category.
8 Timeframe Actuals
Reporting
DARP Workflow Tool must be able to report actual timeframes
versus targets for each application and system-wide by application
category.
9 File Ageing and Triaging DARP Workflow Tool must be able to provide "real-time" progress
status on files approaching timeframe target deadlines.
10 Staff Prompting
DARP Workflow Tool must be able to prompt staff regarding file
status and file triage based on red, amber, green status or similar
notification schemes.
11 Usable by all Business
Units
DARP Workflow Tool must be accessible by all DARP participating
staff in the municipality.
12 Intuitive and Friendly
User Interface
DARP Workflow Tool must be easy to understand, user-friendly and
intuitive for both full-time users and occasional part-time users
from external agencies.
13 Document Version
Manager
Ability to access a constant working version of all submission
documents while providing access to previous versions. Documents
stapled to specific milestones. Creates file audit capacity.
14 Fee Calculation and
Processing
Workflow Tool functionality should include calculation and
payment confirmation of DARP fees and Development Charges (at
the point of application or later).
15 Training Vendor capacity to provide training relevant to applicants,
consultants, external agencies and municipal staff.
6.0 Roadmap to Recommended Implementation
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 46
No. Functionality Explanation
16 Cloud-based Service
Delivery
Will minimize internal support workload and support cost and
deliver baseline workflow tracking.
17 Ease of Implementation
and Deployment Implementation in two months or less.
18 Ease of Integration with
Portal Simple user interface for external users using a web-based portal.
6.2.3.1 DARP Technology Transformation Do’s and Don’ts
Change initiatives can succeed due to a variety of reasons, but can also fail due to:
• Lacking a Change Vision
• Under-communicating a Change Vision
• Not Creating a Powerful Enough Guiding Coalition
• Not Establishing a Great Enough Sense of Urgency
• Not Systematically Planning for, and Creating Short-Term Wins
• Not Anchoring Changes in the Corporation’s Culture
A DARP workflow tool is not intended for accounting, document management or organizational
workflow tracking tools. Instead, it is a LEAN transformation tool that facilitates performance by
aligning workflow information with targets and establishing an enterprise-wide results-based culture.
The following lists reflect the Dillon/Performance Concepts team’s DARP technology learnings around
performance improvement:
• Technology Do’s
o Commit to a surge approach with appropriate resources and realistic-yet-ambitious timeframes
to create focus and avoid losing momentum over time.
o Ensure DARP fundamental business needs to drive the functionality of workflow tools and not
vice versa.
o Avoid automating current workflows and focus automation on future state workflows.
o Use the workflow tool to set performance targets and measure results to promote a culture of
accountability in the DARP team.
o Strongly consider cloud-based versus on-premises solutions that already deliver strong
reporting and configuration.
• Technology Don’ts
o Underestimate the importance of a measurement-friendly and results oriented culture. The
workflow tool should be a central aspect of the DARP model.
o Accept anything other than the timely, daily, and consistent population of the workflow tool.
o Settle for an in-between solution to existing issues or intended outcomes.
o Place too much importance on cost-saving measures because an effective DARP approach is
essential for the City and local economy. Investments made into the DARP model will result in
long-term benefits and can be recovered from non-tax fees or reserve funds.
6.0 Roadmap to Recommended Implementation
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 47
6.2.4 Pickering’s Housing Pledge Tracker
Pickering’s Housing Pledge target of 13,000 new housing units was established by Council in
February 2023. The Pledge is rooted in the City’s Housing Strategy and Action Plan. An excerpt from a
2023 Pickering staff report emphasizes the need for reporting that reflects the City’s DARP
interdependence with the development community:
The City had undertaken a Housing Study between 2019 and 2021. As a result of that
Study, Council adopted the “Pickering Housing Strategy & Action Plan 2021-2031”,
dated December 22, 2021, on January 24, 2022.
Based on this information, and in consideration of forecasted growth within Seaton
and the City Centre Neighbourhood, staff believe the 13,000 new homes target is
achievable by 2031. However, there are many factors that determine when
development occurs. One of the largest factors is the market conditions that
influence the housing market in a particular area. The City will undertake a variety of
initiatives to facilitate this housing target. However, staff strongly encourage MMAH
to obtain similar housing pledge commitments from the building community.
To date, senior government narratives around municipal Housing Pledge progress have not reflected
the interdependent realities of DARP. The Province’s published online Housing Pledge scoreboard is an
example of this. The following excerpt from Ontario’s online Housing Pledge tracker illustrates this
interdependency measurement problem and the risks associated with poor measurement framework
design.
Table 10: Durham Housing Pledge Tracker
Municipality
10-year
Housing
Target
Total Housing
Progress Since
2022
2024 Target
Total 2024
Housing Progress
to Date
2024
Progress %
Ajax 17,000 1,764 1,417 450 31.8%
Clarington 13,000 1,709 1,083 514 47.5%
Oshawa 23,000 3,870 1,917 756 39.4%
Pickering 13,000 4,631 1,083 1,579 145.8%
Whitby 18,000 2,798 1,500 340 22.7%
Municipalities do not entirely control the timing of housing construction. Municipalities only partially
control the timing of housing approvals while developers play a significant role by initiating approval
requests based on a variety of business and economic considerations. Municipalities only control the
throughput times of DARP applications once they are advanced by development industry applicants;
furthermore, municipalities only control the timeline to provide comments or a decision, and do not
control how long it takes a developer to consider comments then organize resubmissions.
6.0 Roadmap to Recommended Implementation
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 48
Any meaningful progress tracking metrics for the City’s Housing Pledge will need to incorporate
development industry housing approval requests and City DARP approval decision throughputs. The
result will be shared targets and shared accountability between the City and its development industry
partners as they strive to meet their common goal of 13,000 housing units by 2031. This approach
offers an effective response to the risks associated with simplistic Housing Pledge progress tracking.
7.0 Conclusion
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 49
7.0 Conclusion
Receipt of this report marks only the commencement of DARP improvement in Pickering. This report
has delivered a robust series of strategic and tactical recommendations to improve overall DARP
performance that can be gradually implemented over the next three years. The Dillon/Performance
Concepts team has provided a draft implementation timeline of each recommendation to critically
navigate the scheduling of change management efforts that can be conducted to improve the current
model of DARP services.
Through the process of understanding the current model of DARP service in the City, it is evident that
the staff and culture surrounding development approvals is based in strong customer service, and a
desire to achieve good planning. This has been noted by staff and echoed by external agencies and
members of the development community. However, it has also been observed that there are
significant process, workflow, and technological limitations to existing staff that hinder their ability to
achieve an expedited turnaround timeframe for development applications.
The suite of recommendations proposed seeks to build upon the strengths of the existing DARP culture
in Pickering and provide recommendations as a path forward to achieving an optimized DARP model.
Modernizing the existing model through increased resourcing, staff expansions, and technological
improvements to assist staff will improve the experiences of Pickering staff and applicants across the
diverse local development industry.
Overall, the City is well positioned to advance the proposed DARP Performance Improvement
Implementation Roadmap with determination of existing staff members and both available and
planned resources. Further resourcing will support DARP performance through an efficient
implementation of required processes, organization design and technology solutions. Effort spent on
7.0 Conclusion
City of Pickering | Streamlining the Development Applications Review Process | December 20, 2024 50
executing the implementation plan is expected to produce a significant return on investment for
Pickering by providing long-term DARP efficiencies and quicker development approvals. It is difficult to
estimate the dollar value of efficiency gains from all the recommendations in the absence of detailed
time-tracking and workflow analysis; however, in a report by the Association of Municipalities of
Ontario6, the digital solutions for DARP streamlining “experienced time savings of 65%... printing cost
savings of up to 72% and reduction of hardcopy storage by up to 54%” which represents only some of
the recommendations in this study.
By relentlessly focusing on implementing the recommendations generated during this DARP exercise,
Pickering will be well positioned to create a high performing DARP model, and secure successful
development outcomes for years to come.
6 See: https://www.amo.on.ca/sites/default/files/assets/DOCUMENTS/Reports/2020/
StreamliningtheMunicipalDevelopmentReviewProcess20200123.pdf
Appendix A: Case Studies
Memo
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 1 of 2
To: City of Pickering
From: Dillon Consulting Limited & Performance Concepts Limited
Date: October 2024
Subject: Pickering DARP Best Practice Scan – Case Study #1 (Resourcing Levels)
Our File: File #237206
This memo has been prepared to summarize Case Study #1 (Resourcing Levels) of the Development
Approvals Review Process (DARP) Best Practices Scan that was undertaken by Dillon Consulting Limited
and Performance Concepts (Project Team).
Through our working sessions, we have identified the following key issues/priorities related to
resourcing levels within the City of Pickering:
• A need to conduct a formal staffing resources review (including cost recovery methods) and
workload forecast to consider additional hires.
• A need to complement any increase in staffing effort with additional training (on the use and
implementation of technologies such as AMANDA and BlueBeam).
• A need to investigate and target specific staffing needs for departments that complement the
development review process (i.e., a strong need for development specific lawyers at the City to
deal with appeals, a need for more Building, Fire and Corporate staff).
• A need to shift administrative responsibilities away from planners. However, more admin
staff/support is needed.
As a result of these issues/priorities identified and Best Practice Scan, the Town of Ajax’s Core Services
Review for the Planning & Development Department (2022) was identified as a strong candidate case
study to examine further.
1.0 Case Study: Town of Ajax’s Core Services Review for the Planning &
Development Department (2022)
Like Pickering, Ajax is one of the fastest growing towns in the eastern Greater Toronto Area. As the
population of the Town continues to grow, the demands placed on the Department have increased. Ajax
identified resourcing and employee retention in the Planning and Development Department (which
consists of planning, engineering, transportation, building and economic development) as a common
theme to be addressed through their 2022 improvement exercise. According to the Final Report
prepared by Grant Thornton (2022) as part of their Core Services Review, 15 out of 41 staff members
quit in the 2 years between 2020 and 2022. That accounts for 36.5% of the Planning and Development
staff (supervisor and below positions), and 28.3% of total staff count in the Town of Ajax. This, coupled
with an increased workload due to ongoing development pressures and a difficulty in hiring, has created
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 2 of 2
a knock-on effect with existing staff feeling overworked. In addition, the long and complex hiring process
is a contributing factor to long resourcing gaps and the inability to attract the right talent.
In order to alleviate the impacts of the resourcing gap, the following items were recommended in the
Core Service Review for the Planning and Development Department to prioritize:
1. Consider additional work perks, which will both entice existing staff to stay and attract new staff
(e.g., working from home, extra vacation/personal days, referral bonus, employee of the month
awards, etc.);
2. Review the hiring process and, where possible, eliminate the number of review and approval
cycles to be more efficient;
3. Use benchmark findings from current department review as an indicator of where the
departments’ pay scale falls, when compared to other municipalities; and,
4. Create a customized onboarding process, which includes a robust training program for all
department hires (i.e., a development plan, success metrics, and result tracking).
RACI Matrix
The RACI Matrix was recommended as a
tool the Town could use to adapt to new
service constraints while dealing with
resourcing gaps and task allocation.
The RACI Matrix is an organizational
design tool used to map the roles and
responsibilities of team members. Its goal
is to better serve residents by putting the
right people in front of tasks. The matrix helps assign tasks to team members. It also identifies the tasks
that supervisors, or those accountable, need to be consulted on or informed of. Having clearly defined
tasks and processes also ensures that staff do not take on additional tasks and helps reduce employee
stress and overwork.
The RACI Matrix gives transparency on workloads, distribution of work, redundant work processes, skills
risks, etc. It creates objective conversations about organizational improvement. The City can consider
holding RACI workshops to help resolve task allocation issues by clarifying project workflow. This will
help pay dividends by ensuring accountability, clarifying delegation issues, identifying expertise, and
establishing boundaries. This will, in turn, help alleviate overworked staff by provide an opportunity to
clarify and shift responsibilities where appropriate.
Memo
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 1 of 7
To: City of Pickering
From: Dillon Consulting Limited & Performance Concepts Limited
Date: October 2024
Subject: Pickering DARP Best Practice Scan – Case Study #2 (Organizational Design)
Our File: File #237206
This memo has been prepared to summarize Case Study #2 (Organizational Design) of the Development
Approvals Review Process (DARP) Best Practices Scan that was undertaken by Dillon Consulting Limited
and Performance Concepts (Project Team).
Through our working sessions, we have identified the following key issues/priorities relating to
organizational design within the City of Pickering:
• Opportunity to better centralize the development review team (i.e., creating a cross
departmental development review team that functions as a unit).
• A need to reduce unnecessary circulation and screening efforts in the circulation period (i.e.,
who to circulate to on what type of application/circumstance).
• Pre Consultation Application meetings are currently scheduled on an ad-hoc basis and need to
be better structured/formalized under a standard process.
• A need to formalize the differences between a phone/email inquiry, a Zoning Compliance
Report, and a Pre Consultation meeting.
As a result of these issues/priorities identified and Best Practice Scan, the City of Toronto’s Concept 2
Keys (2023) program was identified as a strong candidate case study to examine further.
1.0 Case Study: City of Toronto’s Concept 2 Keys (2023) Program
Like Pickering, the City of Toronto was looking for ways to better optimize their development review
process through a centralized approach where staff know their roles, responsibilities, and areas of focus.
In 2019, the City of Toronto adopted an End-to-End (E2E) Review of the Development Review Process.
E2E serves as a blueprint for the transformation of the City's development review service, which is
underway through the Concept 2 Keys program, implemented in 2020, and ongoing divisional program
reviews. The implementation of the E2E review, became further imperative as a result of the legislative
timeline provisions introduced through Bill 109.
The new operating model consists of three key components - organizational structures, process
improvements and new technology - all aimed at improving the outcomes of the development review
process.
To improve the City’s development review organizational structure, the City implemented a team-based
structure across its development review service to streamline the processing of all development
applications. The new team-based structure comprises a core development review team of staff from
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 2 of 7
Community Planning, Urban Design, Transportation Planning, Engineering and Construction Services,
Transportation Services and Parks, Forestry & Recreation, and as-needed input from other divisional
subject matter experts.
The team-based structure and standardized weekly team meeting schedule establishes clear
interdivisional roles, internal review team timelines, and defined accountability for all aspects of review.
The team-based structure enables the various divisions and partners engaged in development review to
collaborate, coordinate and communicate regularly.
Furthermore, the C2K program established an operational pilot program incorporating several key
changes to the development review process:
1. New Triage Program: A new triage program will determine if an application is complete before
assigning it to an application review team. This will provide a predictable standard and
consistent experience to applicants.
2. Priority Application Stream: Works to ensure Council directed priorities, such as affordable
housing, are given precedence over other applications. This can include designated specific
priority review teams.
3. Milestone Meetings with Review Teams and Applications: Setting internal milestone team
meetings ensures the City identifies issues early on, thereby more quickly resolving internal
conflicts and achieving consensus on the position of each application.
4. Interdivisional Application Review Teams: Introduces standing review teams is a core element of
the transformation.
5. New Roles and Positions: Pilot new roles such as Application Manager, Application Coordinators
and Manager of Strategy and Business Improvement to lead the implementation and
standardization of process and organizational changes.
6. Escalation Protocols: The application manager will escalate issues to an interdivisional
governance structure for resolution by senior staff involved in development review. Further, C2K
will identify common sources of conflict and standardize solutions so that quicker resolution is
possible in the future.
7. Customer Centric Digital Solutions: utilizing technology to simplify, enable collaboration, and
improve transparency within the process both internally and externally.
8. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs): KPIs will be understandable and measurable, and will be
integrated into the City’s technology to allow for more efficient and accurate reporting and data
analysis.
The City of Pickering can look to these key changes for inspiration on how to support improved internal
organizational design.
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 3 of 7
2.0 Form Follows Function Organization Design
Municipal governments across Ontario frequently opt for organization design solutions when they
encounter service delivery performance challenges. DARP is no exception. While organization design
can improve DARP performance - when aligned with other DARP improvement tools and tactics - it
should not be considered a DARP performance “game changer” when implemented in
isolation. Organization design is best understood as one ingredient in the DARP improvement recipe.
2.1 Understanding DARP from a “Form Follows Function” Perspective
DARP is a core municipal regulatory service. DARP requires complex/timely process execution involving
a range of development industry consultants and municipal subject matter experts (covering various
disciplines). DARP service delivery is best understood using horizontal systems thinking. Labour and
other inputs are organized into activities/processes that produce regulatory decision outputs or
“products”. The horizontal complexities of DARP simultaneously processing numerous application files –
with each file composed of detail-oriented internal milestones – is daunting from an execution
standpoint.
In contrast, municipal DARP staff are traditionally organized vertically into distinct organizational silos
based on their respective DARP disciplines. Vertical silos based on disciplines (e.g. Planners versus
Engineers) may not be optimal for DAP execution. Accountability for overall DARP results may be
unclear in a widely distributed, multi-business unit organizational model. Some business units have
DARP execution as their sole mission while others have non-DARP missions that pull focus and resources
in other directions. Multiple DARP-participating business units located across different City departments
– featuring differing levels of mission/resource commitment to DARP – may not deliver the required
focus for LEAN DARP execution.
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 4 of 7
2.1.1 Form Follows Function Org Design - Diagnosing DARP Org Design Performance Issues
A “form follows function” approach to DARP organization design is all about creating focus through
consolidation – minimizing vertical organization silos. The key is to align org design, resources, processes
and priorities across the City’s staff team in order to deliver LEAN service delivery performance and
consistently meet measurable DARP performance targets. Organization design is evaluated in terms of
how it can be optimized to achieve the overriding DARP mission to deliver LEAN results.
2.1.2 Capability Maturity Model (CMM)
This highly regarded diagnostic tool can provide valuable insights about the evolving performance
capabilities of a municipal DARP delivery model. A municipality that has not yet achieved Maturity
Levels 4-5 may well benefit from adopting mix of continuous improvement tools. Organization re-design
around a One Stop Shop concept may provide enhanced focus around DARP execution and achieving
quantitatively managed results targets.
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 5 of 7
2.2 Common DARP Org Design Pain Points to Resolve
Across numerous assignments, our team has encountered a recurring set of decision points when
designing a consolidated “form follows function” DARP organization structure.
2.2.1 Absence of Overall DARP “Decider” on Senior Management Team
There are demonstrable benefits in terms focus and accountability when a single member of a municipal
Senior Management Team is the recognized DARP “decider”. Avoiding organizational tug-of-war across
silo-based business units when it comes to DARP resourcing and priority setting can secure LEAN DARP
delivery. With clear authority and accountability comes decision-making efficiency and
focus. Empowered leadership of horizontal DARP by a single vertical “decider” will improve overall
results – in marked contrast to the time-consuming consensus-building approach necessary in a
distributed org design model that artificially separates DARP’s core technical disciplines.
2.2.2 A Conflicted Development Engineering Function
Development Engineering subject matter experts are often at the heart of the debate when it comes to
DARP org design. These subject matter experts experience competing linkages and relationships within
and beyond DARP. They must coordinate their work seamlessly with Planners to generate LEAN
processing of applications – achieving timely file processing throughputs. They must also ensure the
municipal interest of public works operating efficiency and maintenance costs are considered/respected
when they review applications. The resulting tug-of-war between DARP priorities and other non-DARP
priorities can be counter-productive – especially when the same Engineering staff are doing DARP and
non-DARP work. A One Stop Shop approach to DARP org design re-positions Development Engineering
staff into cross-functional teams with Development Planners as their colleagues. Non-DARP engineering
work is located and resources outside the One Stop Shop team. The team has a direct reporting
relationship upwards to the designated Senior Management Team DARP “decider”. The One Stop Shop
solution may well require the dissolution of an existing Engineering business unit that handles DARP and
non-DARP workload. The overriding benefit of the cross-disciplinary One Stop Shop is a relentless focus
and specialization around DARP execution – with no competing workload distractions.
2.2.3 Unclear Priorities Around Zoning Examination Function
Zoning technical reviews are embedded in Planning DARP processes as well as Building DARP
processes. Zoning Examiner positions can be located within a Development Planning business unit or
within the Building Department. DARP performance can be compromised by the competing workload
demands placed on the Zoning Examiners – especially when priorities are ambiguous between Planning
versus Building workloads. The key is to establish measurable service level standards, ensure robust
resourcing, and avoid tug-of-war inefficiencies across Planning and Building zoning review tasks. Ideally
a One Stop Shop DARP org design places Planning and Building under the leadership of a single DARP
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 6 of 7
leader/decider in order to broker priorities and ensure Zoning Examiners can meet the dual priorities of
Planning versus Building DARP.
2.2.4 Gaining Dependable Performance of Business Units Outside the One Stop Shop
Business units located outside the DARP One Stop Shop will continue to deliver subject matter
expertise/commentary via application Technical Review Cycles. The primary focus of these business
units will continue to be non-DARP work, but their adherence to DARP timeframe targets will be non-
negotiable. Accountability reporting of actual timeframes versus targets will be critically important to
ensure the overall DARP system functions optimally. Comments that are delivered late will simply be
disregarded by core DARP business units as files move forward. Competing workload priorities outside
DARP cannot be permitted to compromise DARP execution.
2.3 Aligning Org Design with DARP Process Execution and “Who Does
What” Role Clarity
One Stop Shop organization design will not deliver DARP improvement unless it is aligned with “As
Should Be” process mapping and a clear delineation of “who does what” within those mapped
processes. LEAN DARP will feature processes with fewer/no low-value activities and the elimination of
duplicated effort by business units within any given mapped process. Org design, mapped processes,
and role clarity are all sides of the same LEAN DARP Rubik’s cube.
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 7 of 7
2.4 Transitioning DARP Org Design Changes – Be Deliberate
The migration to a DARP One Stop Shop can be phased as per the sequence set out in the figure
below. DARP “As Should Be” process mapping and “Who Does What” role clarity should be established
before the required changes to the organization structure.
Memo
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 1 of 2
To: City of Pickering
From: Dillon Consulting Limited & Performance Concepts Limited
Date: October 2024
Subject: Pickering DARP Best Practice Scan – Case Study #3 (Streamlining #1– Overall Process
Overhaul)
Our File: File #237206
This memo has been prepared to summarize Case Study #3 (Streamlining #1 – Overall Process Overhaul)
of the Development Approvals Review Process (DARP) Best Practices Scan that was undertaken by Dillon
Consulting Limited and Performance Concepts (Project Team).
Through our working sessions, we have identified the following key issues/priorities related to
streamlining the overall DARP process through an overall process overhaul within the City of Pickering:
• A need for a more consistent submission process for Applicants (i.e., creating an application
submission portal, updated SOPs and TOR/user guides for Applicants, having standard naming
conventions for application submission material, updating application forms to ensure they are
text fillable, requiring a comment response matrix to Pre Consultation comments at the time of
formal application submission).
• A need to revise the application intake and circulation process, including how applications are
deemed complete and with what level of review.
• Other internal process efficiencies needed (i.e., process guides for internal staff on how to draft
an OPA, etc.).
As a result of these issues/priorities identified and Best Practice Scan, the City of Brantford’s DARP
Process (2021) was identified as a strong candidate case study to examine further.
1.0 Case Study: City of Brantford DAP Process
Like Pickering, the City of Brantford is continually challenged by major growth in the forms of infill
growth in the existing built-up area, greenfield growth within the City’s traditional urban boundary, and
new greenfield growth across boundary lands. Over the coming three decades, an estimated 29,000+
housing units will need to be approved across Planning/Engineering/Building DARP. This, coupled with
the Province’s increased pressures on municipalities to accelerate their DAP processing velocity,
required the City to consider overhauling their approval processes to deal with this continued growth
surge and create a high-performance service delivery model.
Through the DARP review, three “big picture” performance lenses were identified. The first was the
DARP cost recovery/revenue stream lens. DARP fee design innovations and aggressive “growth pays for
growth” fees pricing are critical ingredients to provide the fuel for robust/necessary DAP staffing
investments.
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 2 of 2
The second “big picture” performance lens is the DARP staffing/org design lens. A robust staffing model
that delivers the right amount/right cross-disciplinary mix of staff processing hours is essential to high
performing DARP. Councils are more likely to approve robust staffing investments when the DAP fees
fuel or minimize/eliminate property tax subsidization. An optimal org design is the final ingredient. One-
stop-shop integrated Planning/Development Engineering models can be effective and so can integrated
development engineering/public works models.
The third performance lens is the creation of “As Should Be” streamlined/coordinated DARP processes
supported by modernized IT workflow tool solution. This would recognize that process innovations that
improve up-front submission quality pay downstream dividends during effort intensive Technical Review
Cycles. Delegated Council approvals to staff also pay significant processing time dividends.
Further, to increase the quality of submissions being received at the City, a two-step review of
applications was recommended to be established prior to deeming them complete. First, staff would do
the traditional “piece count” to ensure everything requested was submitted; and second, they would
undertake a “shallow dive” into the submission pieces to ensure they were adequate to commence a
technical circulation.
The City’s DARP business units/assigned staff would access the application submission package in
AMANDA, and then target the content adequacy through a “shallow dive” review of the specific
submission pieces to ensure they are accounted for. An interdisciplinary staff meeting would then be
held to certify the application is adequate/complete or to deem it inadequate/incomplete. This
adequacy/completeness decision would be made within 30 days, as per Planning Act requirements. If
deemed complete, the file would proceed for Technical Review Cycle “deeper dive” review. High quality
submissions by applicants are thus rewarded with an expeditious pivot to the Technical Review Cycle
section of the DARP conveyor belt. The City of Pickering can consider implementing a similar overhaul of
their development review process or consider specific lenses to focus on.
Memo
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 1 of 2
To: City of Pickering
From: Dillon Consulting Limited & Performance Concepts Limited
Date: October 2024
Subject: Pickering DARP Best Practice Scan – Case Study #4 (Streamlining #2– Focus on Higher
Density Development)
Our File: File #237206
This memo has been prepared to summarize Case Study #4 (Streamlining #2 – Focus on Higher Density
Development) of the Development Approvals Review Process (DARP) Best Practices Scan that was
undertaken by Dillon Consulting Limited and Performance Concepts (Project Team).
Through our working sessions, we have identified the following key issues/priorities related to
streamlining the process for higher density development within the City of Vaughan:
• A need to have specific Terms of Reference and standards for different types of development,
given the increase in medium to high-rise development applications in Pickering.
• A need for review guideline examples from municipalities west of Pickering (or those who have
already taken the leap towards substantial high-rise development) as opposed to relying on
more strict guidelines from municipalities east of Pickering (who predominantly see low rise
development).
• Potential to establish and solidify a review team with a specific focus on certain types of
development applications (i.e., Draft Plan of Condominium and Site Plan Control for high-rise
development) in high density areas of the municipality.
As a result of these issues/priorities identified and Best Practice Scan, the City of Vaughan’s
Comprehensive Review of Development Review and Formulation Process (2021) was identified as a
strong candidate case study to examine further.
1.0 Case Study: City of Vaughan’s Comprehensive Review of Development
Review and Formulation Process (2021)
Like Pickering, the City of Vaughan is a fast-growing municipality that is seeing its skyline continue to
grow with substantial high-rise development concentration. The Vaughan Metropolitan Centre (VMC) is
a downtown area poised for continued large-scale growth. To anticipate and accommodate this, the City
of Vaughan established an interdisciplinary team-based approach to development review for
applications submitted within the VMC. Not only does the City mobilize specific staff resources to this
area of the City, they also created templates, meeting structures and other commenting practices with a
specific focus on the VMC.
The VMC uses a team-based model for development review that integrates core commenting partners
(urban planners, urban designers, development engineers and transportation engineers) within a single
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 2 of 2
organizational structure for increased collaboration. The team-based model is used by other comparable
municipalities. Internal and external stakeholders consistently indicated that the VMC model has been
highly successful. The benefits of a team-based approach include:
• Improved coordination, collaboration and communication, which reduces interdepartmental
conflict, accelerates application reviews timelines and improves service delivery levels;
• Enhanced accountability for development applications; and,
• Professional development opportunities for staff through consistent exposure to the expertise
and experience of other team members.
It was recommended that this team-based model be expanded to other high-growth areas in the City,
which would allow the City of Vaughan to leverage the tools, templates and structures developed form
the VMC in high-growth areas such as Yonge-Steeles with relative ease.
A Terms of Reference was also recommended to be developed for this team-based approach, to identify
membership, and establish the mandate, processes, and accountability structures. This would allow for
clear and accurate governance.
This team-based model can also be used for high-growth areas in the City of Pickering as a mechanism
for dealing with complex high-rise projects. Recognizing the unique development opportunities, the City
of Pickering can create a tailored service delivery model for the geographic area.
Memo
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 1 of 8
To: City of Pickering
From: Dillon Consulting Limited & Performance Concepts Limited
Date: October 2024
Subject: Pickering DARP Best Practice Scan – Case Study #5 (Cost Recovery – Growth Pays for
Growth)
Our File: File #237206
This memo has been prepared to summarize Case Study #5 (Cost Recovery – Growth Pays for Growth) of
the Development Approvals Review Process (DARP) Best Practices Scan that was undertaken by Dillon
Consulting Limited and Performance Concepts (Project Team).
“Growth should pay for growth” has been the cost recovery mantra across Ontario’s municipal sector
for decades. There is an enduring consensus that beneficiary pay principles should be applied to DARP
fee design as well as Development Charge calculations to fund growth related capital and infrastructure
investments.
By adopting a growth pays for growth fiscal framework, Ontario municipalities have tried to avoid
inappropriate property tax subsidization of new development by existing development. The growth
pays for growth fiscal consensus has recently come under increased scrutiny as Canadian governments
at all levels come to grips with the national housing supply/affordability crisis. Critics claim that
municipal DARP fees and/or Development Charges are passed through to homebuyers and
unnecessarily drive-up housing prices.
SITUATION ANALYSIS: ONTARIO MUNICIPALITIES ARE TRAPPED IN A FISCAL VICE
Ontario municipalities are caught in a tightening fiscal vice. The vice is structural and can be traced back
to the constitutional subservience of municipal governments as creatures of the provinces in Canada’s
federal system.
The municipal sector fiscal vice in Ontario has the following characteristics described below.
1.1 Development Charge Cost Recovery Leakage
The non-partisan Institute on Municipal Finance and Governance (IMFG) has conducted a thorough
analysis of the current state of Development Charges in Ontario. The IMFG has documented a number of
statutory flaws that seriously compromise municipal recovery of growth related infrastructure and other
capital investments (see figure below). IMFG have concluded that at least 25% of municipal growth
related infrastructure/capital costs are being transferred to existing development. Property taxes and
water/sewer rates are inappropriately cross-subsidizing new development. The 25% fiscal impact of
Development Charge leakage is often deferred via increased debt levels in capital budgets/forecasts.
Debt is simply a deferred utility rate or property tax increase.
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 2 of 8
The IMFG also refutes the claim that Development Charges inflate housing prices. The 25%
Development Charge leakage creates highly problematic utility rate and property tax pressures. In order
to slow down the trajectory of rate/tax increases, IMFG economists forecast municipalities would defer
or halt development. The unanticipated impacts of retreating from Development Charge cost recovery
would be less housing and higher prices due to increased supply-demand imbalances (see figure below).
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 3 of 8
1.2 Infrastructure Funding Backlog
The Province requires Ontario municipalities to develop detailed asset management plans that feature
asset inventories, condition ratings, defined levels of service, and lifecycle based financial forecasts.
Provincial Regulation 588-17 sets out the specific requirements. After a multi-year runway of
preparations, municipalities are fast approaching the final implementation deadline in mid-2025.
The Provincial rationale for mandating asset management cross the municipal sector is entirely justified
– there is a pressing need for financially sustainable governance preserving the cost-effectiveness of
taxpayer funded infrastructure. Traditional municipal decision-making has typically deferred
difficult/expensive decisions around asset renewal versus asset replacement versus asset divestment.
With Regulation 588-17 these important decisions about publicly funded infrastructure, facilities,
equipment and fleets will no longer be postponed for political reasons. Municipalities will need to
address asset lifecycle unfunded liabilities.
The Financial Accountability Office of Ontario (FAO) has undertaken important analytical work to
quantify the municipal sector infrastructure backlog (see figures below). The FAO has established a 2020
$45B to $59B range quantifying the municipal infrastructure backlog – which they highlight using a $52B
midpoint estimate. The backlog is defined as the capital spending required to bring existing assets up to
a State of Good Repair. The backlog $ estimate is almost certainly too low since $47B worth of
municipal assets had undocumented condition ratings
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 4 of 8
In the figure below the FAO concludes that 45% of municipal assets (worth $197B) are not in a State of
Good Repair. The cost of repair requires $24.3B in renewal and $27.9 in rehabilitation – totalling
$52.1B.
The multi-year utility rate/property tax impacts of bringing assets back to a State of Good Repair were
not quantified, but they are sure to be very significant - even with senior government funding support.
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 5 of 8
1.3 Property Tax System Design Challenges
Non-partisan academic evaluations have concluded that municipalities face a structural mismatch
between service delivery responsibilities (drivers of spending) and revenue sources. The municipal
reliance on property taxation is central to these evaluations.
While property taxation is seen a stable/predictable revenue source, it has significant structural
deficiencies.
• Property taxes are regressive. Property values do not correlate well with personal income. They
do not accurately reflect owner’s ability to pay. Homeowners with relatively modest incomes
may reside in relatively valuable properties – a.k.a. high Current Value Assessments – that
generate relatively higher property tax burdens.
• The property taxation regime in Ontario permits municipalities to artificially redistribute tax
burdens across property classes in ways that do not reflect their relative assessed $ values.
Rental apartments are taxed more heavily than single family residences with the same assessed
value. The relative degree of tax burden redistribution favouring single family residential
taxpayers varies across Ontario municipalities.
• Ontario’s base year for Current Value taxable assessment is 2016. The Province has so far been
unwilling to update the assessment base; presumably due to the significant property tax burden
shifts that would occur within and between property classes. Tax fairness becomes more
difficult to achieve as the base year of Current Value Assessment ages over time. Every other
province in Canada has updated the base year for property tax assessments while Ontario
remains dependent on outdated 2016 values.
1.4 Implications of the Fiscal Vice and the DARP Fee Design & Cost
Recovery Best Practice
The Province has ratcheted-up regulatory pressures on municipalities to accelerate DAP processing
velocity across their conveyor belt of applications. Bill 108 compressed “No Municipal Decision”
timeframe triggers for an OLT appeal to almost-impossible-to-achieve levels (see table below). The “No
Municipal Decision” timeframe triggers are measured in calendar days, as opposed to business days
which can be defined as controllable file processing days.
While now newly repealed, Bill 109 created unprecedented financial uncertainty across the Ontario
municipal sector by mandating DARP fee refunds when municipalities failed to meet legislated decision
timeframes. Municipalities now face the prospect of unwinding DARP process changes and fee design
they recently put in place to deal with Bill 109 refunds. The shifting regulatory regime in Ontario
continues to create uncertainty and destabilize DARP performance - hindering efforts across the
municipal sector to generate streamlined housing approvals.
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 6 of 8
Legislated compression of Planning Act processing timeframes have exacerbated already-problematic
DARP resourcing chokepoints across numerous Ontario municipalities. Development approvals teams
across Ontario suffer from chronic under-resourcing. Development Engineering teams (including
designated subject matter experts) are especially prone to staffing chokepoints. Development
Engineering staffing levels typically do not reflect the fact that Draft Plan of Subdivision applications
generate multiple Detailed Engineering Review phases per approved Draft Plan. The result is a volume
multiplier workload challenge when executing multiple Engineering DAP phases - with each phase
requiring approval of infrastructure design packages, production of an Early Servicing Agreement,
production of a Subdivision Agreement, and its own standalone lot Registration process.
Modernized full-cost Planning/Engineering DAP revenue streams are required to fuel the necessary
DARP staffing muscle and IT workflow tool investments that offer a fighting chance to secure
reasonable/predictable processing timeframes.
•Site Plan Section 41 “no
municipal decision” trigger for
OLT/LPAT is 30 calendar Days
Pre-Bill 139 Bill 139 Bill 108
Official Plan
Amendment or
OPA/Re-Zoning
Combo Pack
180 Days 210 Days 120 Days
Re-Zoning 120 Days 150 Days 90 Days
Subdivision Draft
Plan
180 Days 180 Days 120 Days
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 7 of 8
Full-cost DARP fee reviews can provide the technical justification necessary for growth pays for growth
cost recovery that eliminate property tax subsidization burdens traditionally imposed on existing
development.
The figure below illustrates a “best practices” Activity-Based Costing approach to DARP fee calculations.
Activity-Based Costing generates DARP fees based on granular estimates of processing effort expended
by cross-disciplinary municipal staff teams across various Planning/Engineering/Building DAP delivery
channels. DARP costs mirror these effort estimation pathways.
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 8 of 8
Innovation in the design of Planning DAP fees is critically important for growth
municipalities. Transitioning away from flat/fixed base fees for Subdivisions and Site Plans is necessary
for optimal cost recovery. The alternative of a base fee ($) plus a per-unit/lot/hectare escalator ($) is an
emerging best practice. Planning fees featuring a base + an escalator account for the added complexity
of some applications versus others within a given DAP approvals category. Per unit escalators can be
capped to recognize that the complexity/processing effort for larger files eventually plateaus. OLT fee
appeals have latched onto open-ended per unit fee escalators as problematic and indefensible.
1.4.1 Go-forward DARP Cost Recovery Best Practice
In the past, numerous Ontario growth municipalities have opted to discount their modeled 100% cost-
recovery DARP fees to a lower 75% recovery level in order to share the burdens of DARP between
applicants (new development) and property taxpayers (existing development). Historically, there was a
public policy rationale for doing so, since DARP often addresses/considers the interests of existing
development. However, the increasingly problematic fiscal impacts of the Province’s Fiscal Vice cannot
be ignored. Property tax burdens cannot continue to support a DARP cost recovery discount to
developers while simultaneously absorbing Development Charge cost recovery leakage plus the reversal
of the $52B municipal sector infrastructure backlog via asset management Regulation 588-17. New
housing development will need to absorb 100% of DARP processing effort through modernized base +
capped escalator fee structures.
The figure below – extracted from a recent DARP full-cost fees review conducted by Dillon/Performance
Concepts - confirms that the quantum of DARP processing costs are relatively minor in terms of overall
housing prices – typically hovering around/below the 1% range of market-driven housing purchase
prices.
Memo
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 1 of 8
To: City of Pickering
From: Dillon Consulting Limited & Performance Concepts Limited
Date: October 2024
Subject: Pickering DARP Best Practice Scan – Case Study #5 (Technology & LEAN Transformation)
Our File: File #237206
This memo has been prepared to summarize Case Study #5 (Technology & LEAN Transformation) of the
Development Approvals Review Process (DARP) Best Practices Scan that was undertaken by Dillon
Consulting Limited and Performance Concepts (Project Team).
A modernized DARP technology platform typically consists of a portal, a documents management
solution, a drawings mark-up application, and a workflow software tool. The various component pieces
typically work in a hub and spoke configuration with the DARP workflow software tool playing the
central role in driving LEAN performance improvement and service delivery transformation.
DARP workflow tool functionality, configuration, and performance reporting capabilities will play an
important role in Pickering meeting its Housing Pledge target of 13,000 new homes by 2031.
1.1 Applying Systems Thinking + Results Based Management to DARP
DARP is a core municipal regulatory service. DARP requires complex/timely process execution involving
a range of development industry participants and public sector actors working within and beyond the
City. DARP service delivery is best understood via a systems approach. Labour and other inputs are
organized into activities/processes that produced regulatory decision “products”. The horizontal
complexities of DARP simultaneously processing numerous application files – with each file composed of
detail oriented internal milestones – is daunting from an execution standpoint. The execution challenge
is heightened by legislated timeframe pressures and the urgency of the current housing supply crisis.
DAPR workflow software can play an important role in managing service delivery complexities and
driving LEAN performance.
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 2 of 8
Results Based Management (RBM) is a cyclical approach/model for achieving efficient and accountable
municipal service delivery. The RBM cycle consists of Plan-Do-Check-Act components (see figure above).
DARP performance targets and a properly resourced service delivery model define the “Plan”
component. Consistent and dependable execution of mapped/measured DARP end-to-end processes
define the “Do” component. The “Check” component involves the comparison of actual DARP results
(i.e. application throughput timeframes) against performance targets. Based on the “Check”
information and conclusions the “Act” component involves performance target refinements, resourcing
adjustments and/or process execution changes. The RBM cycle is all about continuous improvement and
LEAN performance.
A modernized municipal DARP model should feature an RBM cycle supported by KPI-derived
performance targets.
1.2 Towards a DARP LEAN Assembly Line
In order to meet Plan-Do-Check-Act continuous improvement objectives, DARP must be configured
using LEAN thinking. The figure below is instructive in the sense that DARP can be easily understood
using Toyota-style assembly line concepts. A DARP workflow tool must be configured to manage and
measure the Velocity of the various Planning, Development Engineering, and Building assembly lines. A
DARP workflow tool can be configured to support/add rigour to service delivery processes specifically
designed to drive LEAN assembly line Quality.
By properly/accurately tracking Velocity and Quality within the workflow tool, and generating timely
diagnostic reporting, assembly line consistency can be optimized. LEAN performance can be realized
DARP Workflow Tool Drives Results Based Management
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 3 of 8
when results based culture, “as Should Be” process execution, and workflow technology tools are in
alignment.
1.3 DARP Workflow Functionality Test
Whether Pickering uses the AMANDA workflow tool or any other commercially available solution, a
series of functionality requirements must be secured. The basic architecture of a properly functioning
DARP workflow solution is described in the figure below.
Sandbox World is internal to City staff executing DARP. The DARP technology solution should include a
bolt-on documents management solution to supply always-current data/drawings/comments. The
central DARP workflow tool (e.g. AMANDA) should be configured to mirror/track “As Should Be”
workflows/process milestones. Chess clock functionality can/should track the relative shares of
controllable processing days the file is under the control of the City versus the applicant. Configuring
processing drawbridges in the workflow tool (between completed versus pending file milestones) adds
measurement rigor and discipline. Unless completed process execution milestone X is closed in the
AMANDA workflow, process milestone Y cannot be completed.
Building a DARP “LEAN” Assembly Line
1.Velocity of the DARP assembly
line (timelines for generating
DARP outputs)
2.DARP assembly line Quality
(completeness/quality of
applicant submissions & City
technical review)
3.Consistency of the DARP
assembly line
(Maintaining/Tracking Velocity +
Quality across multiple DARP files
at any given point in time)
DAP File“Black
Boxes”
DAP Assembly Line –LEAN Thinking in Action
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 4 of 8
Portal World is the external viewfinder into the execution of DARP. External actors/stakeholders can
gain useful insight into DARP application processing status/progression. Public accountability reporting
versus targets can be viewed transparently.
Portal World and Sandbox World align and are coordinated on both sides of a security/privacy firewall.
Inside Sandbox world the DARP workflow tool can populate a series of diagnostic reports that can drive
LEAN execution or populate an external publicly facing Scoreboard. Throughput timeframes should be
the central focus of DARP measurement and reporting. Controllable file processing days – NOT calendar
days – should serve as the standardized unit of throughput measurement. File processing days should
be organized/reported according to a “chess clock” configuration based on file custody hand-offs
between the City and the applicant.
Firewall
Portal World (External)
Sandbox World
(Internal to staff)
“As Should Be” DARP Workflow/Process
Milestones to document/track progress (#
business days file under municipal control)
KPI Dashboard –Actuals versus Targets
Process discipline strengthened via
milestone drawbridges triggered by
business rules & countdown clocks
•Applicants (View File Progress)
•Public
•Other Agencies (Sandbox Inputs
from across Portal)
DARP public reporting
re. actual timelines versus
targets
One always-current set of technical
submission data/drawings/comments
AMANDA Must Meet DARP Workflow Tool Functionality Test
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 5 of 8
The figure below sets out a detailed illustration of a DARP workflow tool configuration. Countdown
clock throughput targets have been put in place. Actual throughput times between processing
milestones are counted and then tracked against the targets. Controllable file processing days are
assigned to the City or the applicant according to custody hand-offs. Chess clocks turn On/Off based on
which party is in control of the file.
1.4 Performance Measurement & Target Setting
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) should measure categories of DARP processing outputs, as well as the
throughput times associated with those output categories. Pre-consults, Application Submissions, and
Required
Functionality
to Generate
DARP
Performance
Metrics
Requirements:
1.DAP file tracking & reporting of Actual versus
Targeted Timeframes
2.Countdown clocks based on Municipal
Controllable File Processing Days
3.Reporting on Applicant File Processing Days
DARP File“Black Boxes”
Milestone Tracking +
Chess Clock On/Off
Functionality
▪Workflow tool sets Countdown time based on a targeted
timeframe to move from DARP processing milestone X to
milestone Y
▪Workflow tool time stamps actual time to move from
DARP processing milestone X to milestone Y
▪Clocks turn On/Off based on file custody “chess clock”
with applicants
Milestone A Milestone B Milestone C
Day 1
Day 20Day 1
Day
20
Controllable
Processing Days
Controllable
Processing Days
File custody
Chess Clock
switch
Clock
On/Off
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 6 of 8
Technical Review Cycles are all appropriate workload outputs to track across all DARP Planning
application categories.
When measuring throughput times for a core workload driver like Technical Review Cycles, the KPI
design concepts outlined below are relevant. Percentile based reporting is about batting averages.
What share of Site Plan Review Cycles take 30 days or less? Average based reporting focuses more on
typical throughput speed. The number of required Review Cycles per application is another powerful
metric focused on managing DARP throughput timeframes to a final application decision.
1.5 DARP Workflow Technology Evaluation/Diagnostic Criteria
When evaluating functionality of an existing or new DARP workflow tool it is useful to have diagnostic
criteria to inform the exercise. Our team has developed a checklist of 18 diagnostic criteria to support
an evaluation of an existing DARP workflow tool configuration or a DARP workflow tool that is
unconfigured or only partially configured. A DARP workflow tool that cannot check most/all of these
functionality criteria will not deliver/support LEAN performance.
Core Planning/Eng. DAP Processing Outputs
1.Pre-consults navigated forward to
application submissions
2.Application submissions
navigated forward to complete
applications
3.Complete applications that move
through Technical Review Cycles
enroute to a municipal approval
decision
All 3 of these DAP outputs are
countable & measurable!
# Pre-consult Understandings generated
# Submitted applications navigated
forward to Deemed Complete
# Technical Review Cycles executed
KPI Design Concepts
Technical Review Timeframes
✔Percentile approach (8 out of 10
Site Plan circulations in 30
controllable file days or less)
✔Average (Actual) Timeframes
versus Average (Target) Timeframe
Technical Review Cycle Counts
✔Percentile approach (6 out of 10
Site Plans in executed in < 3
circulations
✔Average Actual # circulations
versus Average Target # of
circulations
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 7 of 8
AMANDA or Alternative
Functionality Evaluation Tool
#Functionality:Explanation:Priority:AMANDA Y/N
1 User Configurability Municipality IT support must be able to easily change process milestones,
timeframe metrics and staff approval authorities internally Required
2 User Permission Setting Local municiplaity IT support must be able to create user accounts for internal
staff and external agencies, with customizable permission settings Required
3 Integration with Land Parcel Information
Systems (GIS)
DAP Workflow Tool must link all Planning/Engineering and Building
applications back to the orginating land parcel/property owner/applicant Required
4 Application Milestone Tracking / Current
Status
Track the progress / current status of each/every DARP file against/across
standardized milestones linked together in a mapped process (DARP is
horizontal/linear).
Required
5 Application Milestone Measuring Have the ability to count "controllable business days" for each file based on the
"chess clock" custody of the file (municipal custody + applicant custody)Required
6 System Wide Measurement
(KPIs)
Ability to count "system-wide" units of work (e.g. number of pre-consults,
number of complete applications, number technical review cycles, number of
approved applications, other KPIs etc)
Required
7 Timeframe Target Setting DARP Workflow Tool must have the ability to set countdown clock
performance timeframes for each milestone/application category Required
8 Timeframe Actuals Reporting DARP Workflow Tool must be able to report actual timeframes vs targets for
each individual application and system-wide by application category Required
9 File Aging/Triaging DARP Workflow Tool must be able to provide "real time" progress status on
files approaching timeframe target deadlines Optional
10 Staff Prompting DARP Workflow Tool must be able to prompt staff regarding file status, aging
and file triage based on red, amber, green status or similar notifiation scheme Optional
11 Usable by all Business Units DARP Workflow Tool must be accessible by all DARP participating staff in the
municipality Required
12 Intuitive/Friendly User Interface
DARP Workflow Tool must be easy to understand, user-friendly and intuitive
for both full time users and occasional part-time users from external
agencies/actors
Required
13 Document Version Manager
Ability to access a constant "working" version of all Submission
documents/attachments/staff comments while providing access to previous
versions. Documents stapled to specific milestones. Creates file audit
capacity.
Required
14 Fee Calculation/Processing
Workflow Tool functionality should include calculation and payment
confirmation of DAP fees and Development Charges (at point of application or
later)
Optional
15 Training Vendor capacity to provide training relevant to applicants, consultants,
external agencies and municipal staff Required
16 Cloud-based Service Delivery Will minimize internal support workload and support costs…also delivers
baseline workflow tracking Required
17 Ease of Implementation/Deployment "Out of the Box" in two months or less Optional
18 Ease of Integration with Portal Simple user interface for external users using web-based portal Required
DILLON CONSULTING LIMITED
www.dillon.ca
Page 8 of 8
1.6 DARP Technology Transformation Do’s & Don’ts
Change initiatives succeed or fail for a variety of reasons. Among the classic causes of change project
failure are the following:
• Lacking a Change Vision
• Under-communicating a Change Vision
• Not Creating a Powerful Enough Guiding Coalition
• Not Establishing a Great Enough Sense of Urgency
• Not Systematically Planning for, and Creating, Short-Term Wins
• Not Anchoring Changes in the Corporation’s Culture
A DARP workflow tool is not an accounting or documents management tool. Its not a just an
organizational tool to keep track of complexities. It is a LEAN transformation tool that drives
performance forward by aligning information with targets and a results-based culture that is focused on
keeping score and winning.
The following Do’s and Don’ts reflect our teams DARP technology learnings around performance
improvement.
DARP Technology Do’s & Don’ts
Do….
ü Commit to a Surge approach with abundant resources &
realistic-but-ambitious timeframes…create focus and avoid
losing momentum with overly long timeframes for project
success
ü Ensure DARP “must have” business needsdrive workflow
tool functionality and not vice versa…this may require a
better workflow solution if it cannot deliver
ü Avoid automating“AsIs” workflows…Insiston automating
LEAN “As ShouldBe” workflows
ü Use the workflow tool to set performance targets &
measure results…drive an accountability culture across the
DARP team
ü Strongly consider Cloud vs On-Prem solutions that already
deliver strong out of the box configurations & reporting
Don’t…
§Underestimate theimportance ofa measurement friendly
and results oriented culture…the workflow tool has tobe
portrayed as a mission-critical information management
backbone for DARP. Insist on tracking rigor despite
predictable “…but I’m so busy” excuses
§Accept anything other than timely/consistent population of
the workflow tool every day…without accurate milestone
documentation tracking though-puts (time stamping)
nobody will trust your back-end performance measurement
reporting
§Settle for a half-way solution…everybody in DARP-world
must be trained, must populate the tool, must have
relatively wide access to see the end-to-end journey of files,
and must have access to report card type performance
reporting. Teams that keep score play harder
§Pinch pennies. DARP is mission critical to the City & the
economy. Spend what is required and recover it from non-
tax fees or reserve funds
Appendix B: Process Map Recommendations
Table of Contents
Symbol Meaning
Mandatory flow of process
Optional/additional flow of process
Application intake and closure
Internal meeting
Action/AMANDA Action
Reference to alternate process map
Meeting
Ap
p
l
i
c
a
n
t
Ad
m
i
n
i
s
t
r
a
t
i
v
e
A
s
s
i
s
t
a
n
t
Pl
a
n
n
e
r
Te
c
h
n
i
c
a
l
R
e
v
i
e
w
e
r
s
Di
v
i
s
i
o
n
H
e
a
d
(1) Submit
Pre-
consultation
Request
Resolve missing
information, if
applicable
(3) Input into
AMANDA
(6) Conduct
preliminary
review, prepare
technical
comments,
resolve
interpretation
issues. Provide
comments to
planner.
(5) Conduct
preliminary
review, prepare
technical
comments,
resolve
interpretation
issues
(7a)
Internal
Vetting
Meeting
(if
required)
(9) Consolidate
comments from
external meeting
and comments
received from
technical
reviewers using
template.
Compete
technical report
checklist and
update AMANDA
(10) Finalize
meeting minutes
and technical
report checklist
(12) Issue final Pre-
consultation
Letter/Checklist to
applicant and
technical reviewers.
Provide two weeks
to applicant and
technical reviewers
to review prior to
closing file. (Update
AMANDA).
(13) File
closed
Pr
e
-co
n
s
u
l
t
a
t
i
o
n
Day 1 - 10 Day 10 - 30 Day 30 - 60 Day 61
Application Intake and Circulation Concept Review and Pre-consultation Meeting Consolidate Comments
Preparation of Notes/Checklist, Division Head Review, and Issue Letter/Checklist
Close
Pre-consultation
(8)Pre-
con
Meeting
(4) Update AMANDA, upload
material
Confirm Complete application.
Complete a Geomatics Request
Form for Location Maps. Arrange
meeting date with Applicant and
internal reviewers (based on
staff/key internal reviewers
schedule). Send meeting invite (held
virtually on Microsoft Teams).
Complete City Development
Voucher and provide to Finance.
(11) Review Final
Meeting Minutes
and Checklist,
Finalize
document in
AMANDA
(2) Confirm
request
(7) Consolidate
comments and
issue
preliminary
comments to
applicant
(7a)
Internal
Vetting
Meeting
(if
required)
(7a)
Internal
Vetting
Meeting
(if
required)
(8)Pre-
con
Meeting
(8)Pre-
con
Meeting
(8)Pre-
con
Meeting
(3) Assign the
application to a
Planner in
AMANDA
Planner and Engineering review the application
submission for completeness and a preliminary
quality check
Planner makes completeness decision in AMANDA,
which automatically produces an acknowledgement
letter and request for fee payment
Planner notifies GIS Technologist to create a location
map
Planner distributes the circulation letters for
departments and agencies and prepare notice of
complete application
Existing process New process
Application Intake & Adequacy Check
Administrative Assistant to update the City’s
website with application information
Planner and technical reviews begin their technical
review of the submission materials
Planner to coordinate with Division Head, Ward
Councillors, and Applicant as applicable
Administrative Assistant to coordinate a date for an
open house, book facilities for open house,
prepare notice of open house, prepare notice sign
Existing process New process
Intake and Technical Review Cycles
Administrative Assistant to issue notice sign to applicant;
update website to include notice; request geomatics to
make poster boards; and prepare materials for open
house
Administrative Assistant to mail out public notices to a
radius of 150 m or greater, as requested by Ward
Councilor
Mandatory Open House
Planner to consolidate comments received by the public,
Council, and City departments; and draft status letter
Existing process New process
Voluntary Open House
Planner to upload status letter into AMANDA, which
automatically notifies applicant. Applicant resubmits
documents, if necessary
Planner and Engineer to review revised application and
discuss with Division Head, if necessary
If application is complete, Planner to automatically notify
applicant and circulate to technical reviewers in
AMANDA. If incomplete, Planner to notify applicant for
additional materials automatically in AMANDA
Technical reviewers to conduct/continue technical review
of submission materials
Existing process New process
Resubmission
Planner to issue review reminder to technical reviewers
automatically through AMANDA and consolidate
comments as they are received
Administrative Assistant to prepare public notice sign,
notice of statutory public meeting, memorandum to
Clerk’s Department, and Agency List for the Clerk’s
Department
Administrative Assistant to email notice sign to applicant
for posting, provide outstanding information to the
Clerk’s Department, and update the City’s website
Planner to draft the recommendation report, draft
OPA/ZBA by-law, and coordinate with GIS Technician to
create maps and exhibits
Existing process New process
Preparation for Planning and Development Committee
Clerk’s Office to confirm that no appeals
have been filed, or if an appeal has been
processed, if applicable
Administrative Assistant to prepare
memorandum to Council notifying receipt
of appeal process
Chief Planner and Division Head to review
memorandum to Council and provide
approval to Administrative Assistant
Administrative Assistant to finalize the
memorandum and issue to Clerk’s
Department
Existing process New process
Appeal Process
General Process Recommendations
Applicable to all DARP Files
•All intakes and file document to be conducted in AMANDA.
•Leverage Administrative Assistant where possible.
•Automate in AMANDA or other technology solutions where possible.
•Reduce manual inputs where possible by using automated templates
in AMANDA.
Appendix C: Implementation Timeline
Appendix D: Engagement Feedback
Summary
Internal City of Pickering Engagement Sessions
Internal Engagement Session 1
Lack of standardized Pre-consultaƟon meeƟng schedule.
Two different Pre-consultaƟon processes for development applicaƟons and land division.
The overall quality of applicaƟons received by the City are generally high.
Lack of formalized disƟncƟon of when to conduct a property inquiry/development due
diligence, zoning cerƟficate, or formal Pre-consultaƟon.
Inefficient method of tracking applicaƟons or inquiries for a property in the Planning
Department, although this is parƟally developed for the Building Department.
MulƟple memos sent to reviewers for noƟficaƟon.
Lack of standardizaƟon for file naming, formaƫng, storage.
No consistent applicaƟon submission portal.
Planning takes on a lot of administraƟve roles which slows down applicaƟon review.
Lack of staffing resources in the Legal Department to process appeals.
Lack of an internal legal specialist devoted to development and planning.
Standard OperaƟng Procedures and process guides are rudimentary and are not consistently
stored, used, or referenced.
Internal Engagement Session 2
The formal Pre-consultaƟon process typically marks the beginning of a planning applicaƟon,
although informal discussions with Planning staff prior to Pre-consultaƟon is common.
Standardized comments are someƟmes provided, although it depends on the type and/or
complexity of the applicaƟon.
Design standards currently exist and are regularly updated.
The overall quality of applicaƟons received by the City varies and relies heavily on the
consultant and their familiarity with the Pickering standards.
Many people in the department are involved in receiving, preparing, reviewing, and
providing technical comments.
Issues with meeƟng agreed upon turnaround Ɵmelines and subopƟmal communicaƟon
between departments.
Staffing resourcing limitaƟons coupled with the underuƟlizaƟon of third-party review or
maintaining a roster of consultants with pre-approved work plans.
Lack of city-wide training and access to AMANDA.
Internal Engagement Session 3
The level of involvement in Pre-consultaƟon for departments outside of Planning depends
on the complexity of the applicaƟon.
Some standard Pre-consultaƟon comments are issued to the applicant.
File transfer is someƟmes done by compressed ZIP Files and local file downloads.
MulƟple technology tools used across City departments for file management and
communicaƟon (BlueBeam, Prism, MS Teams, email, etc.)
No condiƟonal site plan approval or condiƟonal servicing agreements.
Lack of standardized fee collecƟon model (Moneris, EFT, cheques, and e-transfers are all
used).
The annual City-wide budgeƟng exercise only considers corporate wide budgets and is not
detailed on a department basis, which can make the findings difficult to understand from a
cost recovery perspecƟve.
General staffing issue with limited staff members acƟng in backup or secondary roles.
Lack of staffing to support technological roll out (development, implementaƟon, training,
etc.).
Internal Engagement Session 4
SAP system was recently introduced, full EFT rollout has been put on hold to prioriƟze
implementaƟon of SAP.
Lack of consistency for charging the correct fees for planning applicaƟons.
MulƟple payment types accepted and used which can lead to confusion and administraƟve
inconsistencies (in-person check, mail-in check, in-person credit card, EFT, eStore, AMANDA,
Core, etc.)
EFTs do not indicate the applicable project/applicaƟon number, leading to wasted effort in
connecƟng a payment to an applicaƟon.
Many departments are not trained on the use of AMANDA, reflecƟng a technological
discrepancy between departments.
Internal Engagement Session 5
Regularly scheduled meeƟngs with between internal departments to discuss workflow and
Ɵmelines were previously held but were stopped due to an increased workflow of internal
departments, resulƟng in weakened intra-departmental communicaƟon.
Lack of formal design standards.
ExpectaƟons are not always clearly communicated during technical review.
Internal Engagement Session 6
InformaƟon sharing is not standardized between departments due to differing technology
tools, varying workflow prioriƟes, and busy staff.
The exisƟng templates used for draŌing legal agreements are useful and are based on
precedent cases managed by the City.
Lack of formal communicaƟon with regards to deadlines, assignment of work, and project
status.
Overworked staff members with limited delegaƟon of tasks.
Lack of formal project tracking/status tracking.
Informal document management and version control.
Internal Engagement Session 6
Strong exisƟng network of communicaƟon and strong sense of knowing who to speak to for
various components, although lack of status tracking can present challenges to understand
file leads.
There is a sense of trust between departments to inform the other of potenƟal applicaƟons,
issues in applicaƟons, etc.
Strong connecƟon to the development community.
Digital file sharing is currently done through email and SharePoint. Comments are provided
through an email response (no memo) or verbal response.
The departments who are not technical reviewers but sƟll involved within planning and
development operaƟons could benefit from more frequent updates on ongoing applicaƟons
or to have the ability to quickly check applicaƟon statuses.
Internal Engagement Session 7
AMANDA was primarily introduced as temporary in 2002 but has never been fully adopted.
The lack of historical cultural shiŌ to use AMANDA and conƟnuaƟon of using various tools in
different departments has had lasƟng results.
Only 10%-15% of a planner’s work is done in AMANDA.
AMANDA could be configured to track effort on applicaƟons and turnaround Ɵmelines, but
it has not been configured this way.
Building, Engineering, and Planning applicaƟons do not overlap in the same workflow tool,
even if it’s related to the same property.
Lack of required staffing resources available to adequately process development
applicaƟons and funcƟon comfortably.
Internal Engagement Session 8
The City is generally supporƟve of development, efficiency, building homes faster, and being
customer focused.
Efficiency and streamlining the process while remaining customer focused should be the
main outcome of any transformed DARP model.
Main City issues are parking, greenspace, transit supporƟve communiƟes, greenfield
growth, and intensificaƟon of the City centre.
External agencies tend to not work together which results in communicaƟon and review
challenges.
The Mayor typically meets with staff at the beginning of the process and again at the end to
advance the back-end process.
Internal Engagement Session 9
Consistent challenges with waiƟng on comments from external agencies.
The City deals with the applicants very well, there is a collaboraƟve process in place.
ApplicaƟons are oŌen waiƟng on comments from the same City departments that have
staffing and workflow issues.
City has implemented a digital automaƟon strategy and completed an IT Capability Study to
assess the possibiliƟes and capabiliƟes of technological soluƟons.
Internal Engagement Session 10
Concern that the role of council and the ability to incorporate interest into the planning
process is decreasing with the streamlined approval process.
The planning checklists/requirements don’t always reflect the large-scale goals of the City.
Internal Engagement Session 11
Lack of awareness of the City’s public development applicaƟon informaƟon reflects the need
for beƩer communicaƟon and awareness to reduce effort on low value updates from staff.
On occasion,there may be conflicƟng comments between internal City technical reviewers.
BeƩer collaboraƟon could be beneficial.
Desire for increased public awareness of the development approvals process, including
several significant recent changes. A simple quick win could be developing plain language
noƟces to make the process more accessible to the public.
External Agencies ConsultaƟon
External Engagement Session 1
Strong working relaƟonship with Pickering staff and saƟsfied with the level of engagement in
planning review.
DARP tracking systems are not aligned with those of other nearby municipaliƟes within the
region.
Generally appropriate use of strong mayor powers in Pickering.
The three-week turnaround for Pre-consultaƟon is typically enough Ɵme for external
reviewers.
External Engagement Session 2
External reviewers are typically circulated on all applicaƟons, even if applicaƟons are not
fully included in the area of experƟse. This approach is preferred, albeit less efficient.
External reviewers do parƟcipate virtually in Pre-consultaƟon meeƟngs for complex or
notable applicaƟons, although involvement in Pre-consultaƟon is not regular.
Pickering staff are accessible and there are strong lines of communicaƟon.
External reviewers have different technological soluƟons compared to Pickering.
External reviewers could benefit from being able to see comments from other
reviewers/agencies.
External Engagement Session 3
DARP is typically a slow process, with the back end of development applicaƟons taking a
significant amount of Ɵme.
While communicaƟon with the City is generally good and staff are cooperaƟve, there is a
lack of effecƟve meeƟng scheduling.
Submission expectaƟons are clear and planning staff provide updates. However, the process
is inefficient due to extended Ɵmelines.
The City struggles to keep up with the high volume of applicaƟons which affects the
efficiency of the overall process.
The City uses a template for Pre-consultaƟon checklists without much discreƟon which adds
Ɵme to the process, especially in areas like Seaton where old guidelines are grandfathered
in.
External agencies are oŌen difficult to deal with and not bound by municipal approval
Ɵmeframes, causing addiƟonal delays.
The City Clerk handles approvals and condiƟons efficiently, but there are oŌen
administraƟve hold-ups in issuing comments due to a significant amount of sign-off needed.
Staff are overwhelmed, leading to slow approval, inspecƟons, and securiƟes release. A peer
review system is suggested to alleviate staff workload.
External Engagement Session 4
Strong communicaƟon with Pickering staff but there is no ability to track progress of
applicaƟon (potenƟal for GIS Mapping or online applicaƟon tracking).
External agencies can cause delays in technical review, not necessarily Pickering.
While the City does their best to manage, there can exist conflicƟng technical review
comments between departments/reviewers.
Lack of standardized and regularly enforced guidelines for engineering/transportaƟon.
The early public meeƟng process flushes out certain details and allows applicants to respond
to the public comments, later minimizing public concerns at the formal meeƟng.
External Engagement Session 5
There is a suggesƟon to consider condiƟonal building permits to expedite the building
process.
Bi-weekly meeƟngs with the principal planner and a building department representaƟve are
held to ensure the applicaƟon process is smooth and complete.
RecommendaƟon for having a dedicated person in Pickering to manage growth and support
economic development.
The primary focus is on obtaining approval rather than fee refunds.
Challenges with external agencies include general poor responsiveness.
ParƟcipaƟon in Economic Development meeƟngs fosters relaƟonships with the city and
support a well-facilitated development community.
Recommends a gradual implementaƟon of technology as opposed to a rollout of new all
new soŌware or processes.
External Engagement Session 6
Challenges exist in awaiƟng comments or approval from some departments who are
generally understaffed and deal with limited workflow processing capabiliƟes.
CoordinaƟon between internal departments and external agencies needs improvement, as
conflicƟng comments from different agencies are common.
It is recommended that planners screen for conflicts before issuing comments.
There is a need for more clarity from the City regarding the Ɵmeline and noƟficaƟon of
trigger points for the release of securiƟes.
Overall, the City can benefit from beƩer communicaƟon, coordinaƟon, and structured
processes to address delays and inefficiencies in the development applicaƟon process.