Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout22 DISCRETNRY APP FEES 03-07-94NO. 22 3-7-94 OATE' MARCH 7, 1994 Inter-Com TO: WILLIAM A. HUSTON, CITY MANAGER FROM: COMMIINITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: REDUCED DISCRETIONARY APPLICATION FEES RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council review the attached fee analysis and provide direction to staff on the reduction of certain planning fees. BACKGROUND During tke past few months the City Manager and Community Development Department have been requested to provide reduced application fees for a number of minor development projects. The Mayor has also requested that Community Development Department take a close look at the feasibility of reducing application fees for certain projects. The type of projects where reduced fees would apply would be those projects that are typically routine where less staff time is required and where there are no real land use or compatibility issues. Our present fee structure recognizes such projects as "major" and "minor" conditional use permits, design reviews (new and remodels) and variances. The Director of Community Development has the authority to determine the appropriate fee category which should be applied to a particular project for purposes of establishing the appropriate applicaticn fees. Examples of the types of projects which would be included within each of the fee categories is shown as Attachment I. The Director also has the authority to determine the applicable fee category for projects not covered by the examples showh in Attachmenn I or as may be appropriate based upon the scope of a project. Our application fee schedule reflects reasonable.and equitable cost recovery for services provided. A primary consideration when establishing a fee is its relationship to the cost of providing the service. Within the various city departments different criteria is used to evaluate the level of cost to be recovered from fees and charges. For example, services that benefit the entire community such as street maintenance and police protection are for the public in general and are provided without any direct fees or charges. Services which benefit only the individual property owner or City Council Report Reduced Discretionary Application Fees March 7, 1994 Page 2 business are generally associated with land development projects and permits. These app2ications make up the major part of the Current Planning workloa~ and fees are set so as to recover the full cost of the service being provided. Reviewing the number of requests for fee reductions or fee waivers recently, it appears tha% the majority of these requests are for conditional use permits for uses which do not require an increase in floor area or a change in occupancy or primary use. In addition, our current fee schedule also does not provide a fee for amendments to CUP's, Design Reviews, Subdivisions and Variances. Presently whenever an applicant requests an amendment they must pay the full original application fee. In addition, an applicant requesting a time extension must also currently pay a full application fee. I . It is recommended tkat we amend our fee schedule to ±nclude a subcategory under Minor Conditional Use Permits (CUP's) titled: Minor CUP's (Existing Development). For an application to qualify under this new subcategory there would be no change of occupancy or primary use; there would be no expansion of floor area; and the request would not alter the original intent of the project or site. An example of 5he type of project that would fall into the Minor CUP (Existing Development) catego~; is the recent CUP application for 99¢'World where nhe store operator wished to add packaged food items for sale. In order to accommodate the food items the operator needed to add one additional display rack, probably accounting for less than 5% of the total merchandise area. It is recommended that the fees for these type of minor applications for existing development be set at $350 based on the processing steps and estimated staff time shown in Attachment III. . It is recommended that we include a subcategory under CUP, Design Review, Subdivision and Variance actions titled Amendment to Conditions of Approval. The types of cases that would apply under tkis subcategory would be requests for such things as changes to: exterior materials, colors, elevations, hours of operation or any request for an amendment to Conditions of Approval determined by the Community Development City Council Report Reduced Discretionary Application Fees March 7, 1994 Page 3 Director to be minor in nature and which does not alter the original intent of the project or site. Recent examples of an Amendment to Conditions of Approval included the following applications: a · Dr. Stanford's request to eliminate landscaping, block walls and parking lot curbing that were conditions of a previous CUP. b· California Pacific's request to eliminate the condition on a tentative tract approval reqUiring a signal override for the Fire Department on certain local traffic signals. It is recommended that the fee be set at $350 for Amendments to Conditions of Approval based on primary steps and estimated staff time. · It is recommended that we add a subcategory under CUPs, Variances, Sign Reviews and Subdivisions titled Time Extensions. Recommended fees for Time Extensions would be $250 based on the processing steps and estimated staff time shown in Attachment III. The proposed changes recommended above would not necessitate any code amendments since the zoning code does not reference exact fee amounts nor does it make distinctions between minor/major discretionary actions, or the process for amendments to conditions of approval or time extensions. Amendments to the criteria for defining Planning fees are also attached as Attachment II. On February 28, 1994, the Planning Commission reviewed a Draft Ordinance amending City Code Section 9299 related to the. Office of the Zoning Administrator. The Draft Ordinance establishes the types of Minor Adjustments, Conditional Use Permits and Specified Development applications that would be considered by the Zoning Administrator. As part of the analysis for the preparation of the Draft Ordinance, staff evaluated the time and fee savings that would result from using the Zoning Administrator powers for the recommended applications. The use of a Zoning Administrator could reduce the applicant's application fees between 47 and 85 percent City Council Report Keduced Discretionary Application Fees !<arch 7, 1994 Page 4 depending on the application type. Minor Adjustments which are currently categorized as Minor Variances outside of East Tustin and Pacific Center East would have fees reduced from $380 to $95 and Soil Remediation which currently requires a minor CUP with a $665 application fee would be reduced to $95. The cost savings would result due to time saved in staff report preparation and noticing. while amendments to the Zoning Code related to the Zoning Administrator's role will not come before the City Council for another 30-45 days, staff believes that amendments to the City's =ees could be made at this time. 2n order to arrive at the recommended reduced fees the Community Development Department examined the actual tasks and anticipated staff time required to process a discretionary application. Fees are based on the direct labor costs and overhead anticipated to be incurred during the review and processing stages of a project. The labor costs utilized for this analysis are $50 per hour and are based on the cost to provide services. As a second step in the analysis, staff estimated the actual average number of productive kours that would be spent on each specific task (Attachment III). As noted in Attachment. III, hours were then. multiplied by hourly rates and City overhead costs to determine the justified cost of review and proceSsing of each project type. ~3 with any property or business owners request to waiver or reduce fees, the City Manager's office would continue to retain the ability for unique circumstances to waive or reduce fees where he feels necessary. CONCLUSION ~f the City Council concurs with the reduction in fees as recommended, staff will prepare the appropriate noticing for a ~ublic hearing and-'a Council resolution to modify certain ~dentified Planning. Once the legal noticing is completed city staff will bring the matter back to the City Council for their action. Aita T. West/~ield ssistant Director 3ommunity Development Department ~hristine ~ Shingleton Assistant G-'lty Manager .:i~': kb~\redf ee. mem. ATTACHMENT I Criteria for Determining Existing Planning Fees ATTACHMENT I CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING EXISTING PLANNING FEES CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS MAJOR CUP: MINOR CUP: New uses in combinanion wiuh new construction or existing development in excess of 5,000 square feet of floor area, new auto services or repair related uses, and new apartment or condominium projects in excess of 3 dwelling units, condominium conversions. , New uses in combination wiuh new construction or existing development wi~h 5,000 square feet or less of floor area, new uses within existing structures, expanded or modified existing uses, signs, new apartment or condominium project with 3 dwelling units or less, second single family dwellings. DESIGN REVIEW MAJOR NEW: MINOR NEW: MAJOR REMODEL: MINOR REMODEL: New development in excess cf 5,000 square feet of floor area or building relocations. New development with less than 5,000 square feet of floor area. Modifications to existing structures or site which include an increase in existing floor area in excess of 50%, and'or existing facade or site modifications wkich constitute a change in 3 or more major design elements on a building elevation or site which result in a complete facade upgrade. Definition of an element include windows, doors, colors, materials, parking lot changes, etc. Modifications to existing structures which include an increase in existing floor area of 50% or less, and/or existlng facade or site modifications which const~-ute a change in 3 or less major design elements which do not result in a complete facaie upgrade, single family homes not part cf a subdivision, residential room additicns, and new or modified accessory structures associated with existing development. VARIANCES MAJOR VARIANCE: New development that deviates from a specific development standard, all existing development which deviates from a standard by more than 10%. MINOR VARIANCE: Existing development that deviates from a specific development standard by less than 10%, new single family homes not part of a subdivision, or projects where the site will contain less than 3 new apartments or new condcminiums. PLEASE NOTE: Where there is a question as to what category a project should be classified, the Director reserves the right to determine the applicable category a project should fall within. ATTACHMENT II Amendment to Criteria for Determining Planning Fees _ ATTACH~IENT II AMENDMENT TO CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING PLANNING FEES CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS MAJOR CUP: New uses in combination with new construction or existing developmen5 in excess of 5,000 square feet of floor area, new auto services or repair related uses, and new apartment or condominium projects in excess of 3 dwelling units, condominium conversions. MINOR CUP: New uses in combination with new construction or existing development with 5,000 square feet or less of floor area, new uses within existing structures, expanded or modified existing uses, signs, new apartment or condominium project with 3 dwelling units or less, second single family dwellings. DESIGN REVIEW MAJOR NEW: New development in excess of 5,000 square feet of floor area or building relocations. MINOR NEW: New development with less than 5,000 square feet of floor area. MAJOR REMODEL: Modifications to existing structures or site which include an increase in existing floor area in excess of 50%, and/or existing facade or site modifications which constitute a change in 3 or more majcr design elements on a building elevation or site which result in a complete facade upgrade. Definition of an element include windows, doors, colors, materials, parking lot changes, etc. MINOR REMODEL: Modifications to existing structures which include an increase in existing floor area of 50% or less, and/or existing facade or site modifications which constitute a change in 3 or less major design elements which do not result in a complete facade upgrade, single family homes not part of a subdivision, residential room additions, and new or modified accessory structures associated with existing development. VARIANCES MAJOR VARIANCE: New development that devianes from a specific development standard, all existing development which deviates from a standard by more than 10%. MINOR VARIANCE: Existing development that deviates from a specific development standard by less than 10%, new single family homes not part of a subdivision, or projects where the site will contain less than 3 new apartments or new condominiums. SUBDIVISION PLEASE NOTE: Where there is a question as to what category a project should be classified, the Director reserves the right to determine the applicable category a project should fall within. ATTACHMENT III Review Fee Analysis ATTACHMENT II I Review Fee Analysis The following matrices have been developed based upon an analysis of the identified specific tasks required during the review, evaluation and approval process for certain minor types of discretionary projects: Minor Conditional Use Permits (Existinq Development) Task Man Hours Tasks Preliminary Review Accepting Application Creating Project File Review for Completeness Interdepartmental Reviewing/Routing Meetings/Phone calls with applicant Report Preparation Typing Noticing Hearing Post Hearing Inspection .75 .25 .25 .25 .25 .5 3.0 1.0 .25 .25 .25 .25 Cost per Man-hour* Total Man-Hours $50.00 7.25 Total Estimate of Direct Labor Costs Recommended Minor CUP (Existing Development) Fee $362.50 $350.00 T~me Extensions (Conditional Use Permits & Variances) Task Man Hours Tasks Accept Application/Review for Completeness Meetings/Phone calls with applicant Report Preparation Typing Noticing Hearing Post Hearing 1.0 .5 2.0 .75 .25 .25 .25 Cost per Man-hour* Total Man Hours $50.00 5.0 Total Estimate of Direct Labor Costs Recommended Time Extension (CUP & Variance) Fee $250.00 $250.00 Amendment to Conditions of Approval Task Man Hours Tasks Preliminary Review Accepting Application Creating Project File Review for Completeness Interdepartmental Reviewing/Routing Meetings/Phone calls with applicant Report Preparation T?~ing Noticing Hearing Pcst Hearing .75. .25 .25 .25 .25 .5 3.0 1.0 .25 .25 .25 Ccst per Man-hour~ Tctal Man-Hours $50.00 7.0 Tctal Estimate of Direct Labor Costs Recommended Amendment to Conditions of Approval Fee $350.00 $350.00 Hourly rate of $50.00 is based on cost to provide service and include Professional and Clerical salaries, benefits, supplies and administrative overhead divided by total staff hours per year. ATTACHMENT IV Service Charges and Planning Fees COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARrl MENT SERVICE CHARGES & PLANNING FEES EFFECTIVE ., 1994 RESOLUTION NO. 94- As Amended by Resolution 94-29, Exhibit A on ,1994' TYPE OF CHARGE FEE OR SERVICE CHARGE(l) Appeals 1/2 Original Fee CC&R Review (1 check and 1 recheck)- Subsequent Reviews-City Attorney Planning Staff $190 $150/hr $50/hr Certificate of Compliance $95 Code Amendment $950 Conditional Use Permits and Amendments ABC License $255 Major $1,270 Minor ~!ii~fl.'~~:. ~i $665 Design Reviews and Amendments Major New $985 Major Remodel $635 Minor New $510 Minor Remodel $350 Sign $65 Development Agreements $2,ooo (2) Extraordinary Research (minimum 2 hours) $50/hr Environmental EIR Major EIR Minor Initial Study Negative Declaration Notice of Completion Notice of Determination Notice of Exemption $4,000 (2) $2,500 (2) $95 $125 $50 $25 $25 General Plan Amendments Land Use Map Major Text Am~dment Minor Text Arm~ndment $985 $2,000 (2) $750 Lot Line Adjustment $255 Lot Merger $190 Miscellaneous Documents (3) $190 Temporary Use Permit iTUP) Time extension on TUP's $95 $5O Subdivisions and Amen&ments Reversion to Acreage Tentative Tract Map (ET Project) Tentative Tract Map (ET Sector) Tentative Tract Map Tentative Parcel Map Final Tract Map Final Parcel Map. Vesting Map Map Fee + $65 $2,73O $5,715 $1,205 $1,205 $1,335 $1,110 Base Map+ $65 Use Interpretations $125 Variances and Amendments Major $665 Minor $380 Zone Change $95O Zoning Administrator Action Administrative Adjustment/ ~':i~~ii $95 Written Zoning confirmation or non-conforming stams letter $50 Footnotes (1) (2) (3) (4) Includes cursory review of applications by building staff. Minimum deposit for city staff and city attorney's office review. Review by city staff to be reimbursed at a rate of $5Ohour and review by city attorney's office at a rate of $150/hour. Examples: Parking Agreements, Access Agreements, Deed, Restrictions. An additional $25 filing fee is required by the County Clerk when the City files the Notice of Determination. The applicant will be required to provide the City with a cashiers check for $'25, payable (4) (5) (a) (7) An additional $25 fil ~e is required by the County Clerk ~ the City files the Notice of Determination. The applicant will be required to provide the City with a cashiers check for $25, payable to the ORANGE COUNTY CLERK within 48 hours fo project approval. Substantial additional fees may be required by the County Clerk when the City files the Notice of Determination, in accordance with AB 3158 as established by the Department of Fish and Game. If additional fees are required, the applicant will be required to provide the City with a cashiers check for the additional fees, payable to the ORANGE COUNTY CLERK within 48 hours of project approval. See fee for Minor CUP (existing development) See fee for Time Extensions (CUP, Design Review and Subdivision) See fees for Design Reviews see shaded areas for amendments I RESOLUTION NO. 94-29 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUSTIN, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING CERTAIN PLANNING FEES. The City Council of the City of Tustin does hereby resolve as follows: The City Council finds and determines as follows: A. Certain discretionary planning projects are typically routine and represent no land use or compatibility conflicts. Bo C. A new category of fees is necessary to more adequately reflect certain planning applications. Costs of providing service shall be borne by the individual receiving benefit from the service. II. The following fees are hereby established and supercede certain existing planning fees and shall be applied uniformly except where, in the discretion of the City Manager, reduced fees are justified by special circumstances. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Tustin at a regular meeting held on the - 22nd day of February, 1994. JIM POTTS Mayor MARY E. WYNN City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CITY OF TUSTIN CERTIFICATION FOR RESOLUTION NO. 94-29 MARY E. WYNN, City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Tustin, California, does hereby certify that the whole number of the members of the City Council of the City of Tustin is 5; that the above and foregoing Resolution No. 94-29 was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted at a regular meeting of the Tustin City Council, held on the 22nd day of February, 1994. COUNCII, MEMBER AYES: COUNC~MEMBER NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAINED: COUNCILMEMBER:ABSENT: MARY E. WYNN City Clerk