CITY COUNCIL: Resolution Adopting Revisions to Planning and Building Fee Schedules

Meeting Date: 12 July 2011
Prepared by: Sean Conroy, Plng & Bldg Services Manager

City Council
Agenda Item Summary

Name: Consideration of a Resolution adopting revisions to the Planning and Building Fee Schedules.

Description: The proposed fee revisions are intended to more accurately cover the costs of providing the services associated with planning and building permit activities.

Overall Cost:
City Funds: N/A
Grant Funds: N/A

Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Resolution.

Important Considerations: At the June 14, 2011 Budget Workshop the Council requested that the Department of Community Planning and Building evaluate its fee schedules to determine if revisions should be made.

Decision Record: N/A

Reviewed by:

______________________________ _____________________
John Goss, Interim City Administrator Date

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY PLANNING AND BUILDING
STAFF REPORT
TO: MAYOR MCCLOUD AND CITY COUNCIL MEMEBERS
FROM: SEAN CONROY, PLNG & BLDG SERVICES MANAGER
THROUGH: JOHN GOSS, INTERIM CITY ADMINISTRATOR
DATE: JULY 12, 2011
SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF A RESOLUTION ADOPTING REVISIONS TO THE PLANNING AND BUILDING FEE SCHEDULES

BACKGROUND
At the June 14, 2011 Budget Workshop, the City Council requested that the Department of Community Planning and Building evaluate its fee schedule to determine if revisions should be made to more fully cover the costs of providing planning and building services.

On June 21, the Council directed staff to bring back the fees for further review at the July meeting. The proposed resolution would adopt revisions to some of the fees contained in the planning and building fee schedules.

EVALUATION
Fee Comparison: Table 1 (see attached) contains a brief fee comparison for planning related fees from neighboring jurisdictions. It should be noted that due to the differences in various factors including project sizes, design review processes, etc. that it is difficult to make a clear comparison by simply looking at the fees charged. For example, the
subdivision fees in neighboring jurisdictions are significantly higher than what the City of Carmel charges. However, most subdivision applications are vastly different in neighboring communities including large tracts of land and multiple new lots. Larger subdivisions require more review for planning and building, engineering and legal than
typically is required for subdivisions in Carmel. The lower fee charged by the City reflects those differences.

It should also be noted that the majority of planning applications that the City processes are design review related. The City’s fees related to design review are fairly consistent with what is charged by neighboring communities. The largest fee differences are for applications that the City rarely processes (variances, subdivisions, use permits etc.). For example, the City approved approximately 180 design review related projects in 2010. However, only 12 use permits, four variances and no subdivisions were approved in 2010.

Fee Revisions:
Planning: Planning fees are calculated based on the average time required to process the application including all of the various staff members and steps involved. Other overhead expenses are also included in these calculations. For example, a preliminary site assessment application fee includes the cost of receiving and processing the application, reviewing it at a staff meeting, an on-site evaluation performed by planning and forestry staff, the preparation of a written report and overhead expenses (copies, postage, etc.).

The proposed fee revisions more accurately reflect the costs involved with processing the various applications. The two application fees that were questioned by the Council at the June 21, 2011 Budget Workshop included the appeals fee and the Mills Act fee. Staff proposed an increase from $260 to $585 for the appeals fee and a new fee for Mills Act application of $595 to more fully cover the costs associated with these types of
applications.

Staff recognizes that having a high appeal fee may make it difficult for concerned citizens to appeal projects to the City Council. The current fee ($260) does not normally cover staff time and resources that processing an appeal requires. However, due to the limited number of appeals that are typically received during a given year, staff could support maintaining the existing $260 fee. Staff has removed the proposed appeal fee increase
from this resolution. If the Council determines that is appropriate to cover at least a portion of staff costs in receiving and processing an appeal, it is suggested that the fee be increased to $350. This would fit into the range charged in Monterey ($170-$370) and would be less than that charged in Pacific Grove ($387-$585).

Staff has also revised the Mills Act fee from $595 to $150. While this will not fully cover the costs of processing the application, a higher fee may discourage property owners from applying. The Mills Act promotes the restoration and rehabilitation of historic properties and Mills Act projects will likely have positive impacts on community character and property values that would justify a lower fee.

Another new fee proposed is a $200 fee for Track 1 Design Study applications that are referred to the Planning Commission by staff. Track 1 applications are typically approved at the staff level. However, when a project may conflict with a land use policy or guideline, staff often refers the application to the Planning Commission for review. This fee would cover staff time required to process the applications plus the added
expense of the Commission’s review when required.

The final new fee proposed is a $350 fee for preliminary concept reviews with the Planning Commission. This application allows an applicant to approach the Commission with a general project concept without fully developed plans to receive direction and feedback from the Commission prior to submitting a formal application.

These revised and new fees are designed to cover the expense of staff time required to process the specific land use applications. In all cases the fee either equals the staff time required for processing the application, or, as in most cases, only covers part of the full staff cost. In the case of fees for appeals and Mills Act requests, the fees are reduced due
to policy considerations.

Building fees: Most building fees are based on a formula established in the California Building Code and the construction value of the project. For minor construction permits, the City can establish its own fee structure. The proposed resolution includes increases to these types of fees (plumbing, mechanical, electrical, etc.).

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the attached Resolution.

Table 1 – Fee Comparison
Type Carmel Pacific Grove Monterey Monterey Co.
Minor Design
Review (Track 1)
$150 - $370 $501 $200-$620 $461
Commercial Track
2 Design Review
$760-$1650 $620 $1,990 $768
Preliminary Site
Assessment
$300 - - $302.40
Residential (Track
2) Design Review
$1425 $1,448 $840 $768
Appeals $260 $387-$585 $170-$370 $3731.50
Minor Use Permit $595 $791 $820
Major Use Permit $760 $1827 $2,990 $3,844
Variance $760 $1827 $820-$980 $3,075
Lot Line
Adjustment
$760 $972 $1,300 $2,767
Subdivision $1,425 $2,925 $3,250 $6,140
General Plan
Amendment
$,2800 $2,340 $2,600 $3,075
Zoning Amendment $2,800 $1,170 $1,300 $1,537
Demolition $200 - $90 $153
*It should be noted that many of the City’s applications also require deposit accounts to be
submitted by the applicant that could include a $1500 volume deposit (new construction), a
$1500 historic deposit (alterations to historic structures), a $500 deposit (subdivision review by
City Engineer), $1500 Mills Act deposit (review by historian).

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
CITY COUNCIL
RESOLUTION 2011-
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA ADOPTING REVISIONS TO THE PLANNING AND BUILDING FEE SCHEDULES
WHEREAS, the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea is a unique community the prides itself in the provision of quality public services; and

WHEREAS, the City has fee schedules to cover the costs of processing and administering planning and building related applications; and

WHEREAS, the proposed revisions to the Planning and Building fee schedules will more accurately recover the costs associated with planning and building related applications; and

WHEREAS, all fees not identified in this resolution will remain unchanged; and

WHEREAS, this resolution is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15061(b) (3) of the CEQA Guidelines.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA does hereby resolve to:

Adopt the attached revisions to the Planning and Building fee schedules.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA this 12th day of July 2011 by the following roll call vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

SIGNED,

________________________
SUE McCLOUD, MAYOR

ATTEST:

_________________________________
Heidi Burch, City Clerk

Proposed Planning Fee Changes
Application Existing Fee Proposed Fee
Preliminary Site Assessment $300 $325
Track 1 Design Review $370 $395
Residential Track 2 Design
Review
$1425 $1475
Demolition $200 $225
Mills Act Application - $150
Time Extension (Staff Approval) $40 $150
Time Extension (Planning
Commission)
$150 $370
Track 1 Referral to Planning
Commission
- $200
Preliminary Concept Review
(Planning Commission)
- $350
Preliminary Historic Review $45 $50
Volume Analysis $50 $75