CC - 2010-45 - Updating Community Development / Planning Fees and Charges for Services for FY 2010-11ATTACHMENT A
RESOLUTION 2010-45
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD,
CALIFORNIA, UPDATING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENTIPLANNING FEES
AND CHARGES FOR SERVICES FOR FY 2010-11
WHEREAS, the Municipal Code of the City of Rosemead provides that
certain filing fees, permit fees, inspection fees, deposits, and conditions of
service may from time to time be established by the City Council, and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Rosemead has determined that
the cost of providing certain services is not of general benefit but of benefit to the
individual and, therefore, certain filing fees, permit fees, inspection fees and
deposits should be required to pay for materials and special services performed
by the City staff, and
WHEREAS, after the passage of Propositions 4 and 218, local
governments were made to charge for the costs of services to those who
benefited, and
WHEREAS, for certain services performed, the cost of providing said
services greatly varies and is contingent upon the specifics of each project or
application. The City Council finds it more appropriate to require an initial deposit
to guarantee the applicant will reimburse the City for costs associated. If the
costs exceed the deposit, the applicant shall be responsible for additional
deposits or reimbursement necessary to offset cost. If cost of service performed
is less than deposit, then the difference shall be refunded to applicant, and
WHEREAS, based upon fee justification reports on file with the City Clerk
and the City Finance Director, the City Council finds that the fees included in this
Resolution represent a portion of the actual costs of the services provided or
facilities funded and, therefore, there is a rational relationship between the fees
charged and the services and facilities funded, and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that since the fees represent a portion
of the actual costs of the service or facilities provided, there is a reasonable
relationship between the amount of the fee charged and the costs of the services
provided to the person paying the fee, and
Page 1 of 7
ATTACHMENT A
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to adjust fees for certain services
from time to time and to incorporate all adjusted and/or new fees for services
provided into one comprehensive resolution, and
WHEREAS, the City Council finds it necessary to adjust fees for services,
and to maintain a comprehensive document which incorporates most or all fees
for services provided by the City into one Resolution, however, the City Manager
shall have the authority to establish staff billing rates and equipment charges by
Administrative Policy on an as needed basis, and
WHEREAS, after notifying those parties interested in fee revisions the City
Council proposed adoption of the Resolution on May 25, 2010.
NOW,, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Rosemead as follows:
SECTION 1. That the general regulations and project deposit guidelines
are established as follows:
A. TIME AND MATERIALS DEPOSITS - Certain types of applications have
been determined by the City Council to benefit the applicant. Therefore, these
deposit projects will be billed on a time and materials basis including applicable
administrative overhead.
Project costs include City Attorney, City Staff, City Engineer, City Landscape
Consultant and other fees including overhead costs for staff and contract
personnel. All deposited fees shall be due and payable immediately upon
presentation of a billing statement by the City. All deposited fees not used to
process and manage the application shall be returned after receipt and payment
of final project-related bills. Staff billing rates and equipment charges are
established periodically by Administrative Policy of the City Manager.
B. BILLING - Failure to pay all charges invoiced within thirty (30) days of the
date of invoice shall be considered a sufficient cause to stop processing until full
payment is made. The City will accept only cash, cashiers checks, bank checks
or credit/debit cards; payment by credit/debit card may not exceed $5,000 (five
thousand). Work on a deposit project will not commence until payments have
cleared the bank and funds have been transferred to the City. Projects shall not
be deemed approved until all City fees have been paid in full.
C. LATE PAYMENT CHARGE - Outstanding balances that are not paid in
Page 2 of 7
ATTACHMENT A
full within twenty-five (25) days after the statement is rendered shall accrue a late
payment fee of one percent (1 per month.
D. REVISIONS - Fees set forth for plan check and development review shall
be for the initial application. See attached fee listing for additional costs for
revisions.
E. RECORDS - Records of deposit projects are available by contacting the
City. Project deposit updates or closing out of projects shall be accompanied by
project summary sheets, detailing costs of staff time, City Attorney, City
Engineer, City Landscape Consultant, and other consultation charges.
F. HARDSHIPS - Fees shall be paid in full for all development projects. The
City recognizes that in unique and special circumstances financial hardship may
preclude the full payment of fee prior to application for permits. In such cases,
the applicant shall apply for a payment deferral agreement with the City
Manager.
In no case shall the fees be waived or partially paid when the project is
completed. The applicant shall state in writing the reasons for deferral. The City
Manager shall inform the Community Development Director and Finance Director
in writing of the fee deferral and reasons for the deferral. In no case shall the City
Manager permit less than half of the fee to be initially paid.
G. OTHER FEES AND CHARGES FOR SERVICE - Applicants should be
aware that they may be subject to other fees and charges for service established
periodically by Administrative Policy of the City Manager or by Ordinance.
H. EXEMPTION OF FEES - Where it is verified by the City Manager or
appropriate department head that the City is the applicant or party to be charged,
fees will be waived. Additionally where a contractor has been hired on behalf of
the City, fees may be waived at the discretion of the City Manager.
Page 3 of 7
ATTACH M ENT A
SECTION 2. That the general regulations and project deposit guidelines
are established as follows:
A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING
Planning Fees
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:
Current Proposed
General Plan Amendment
5;500 $2.00
0
Conditional Use Permit
$x-000 $1.20
0
Tentative Parcel Map
$1,385+
$100/lot +
Engineering
$270
Tentative Tract Map
$1,385+
$100/lot +
Engineering
$270
zene Va o oc Single Family Residential Variance $975_ 975
0
Other Variances (New fee) $1,25
0
Zone Change $x;059 $1.70
0
Municipal Code Amendment $925 $2.50
Design Revie $890
Design Review /Single Family Home (New fee)
800
Design Review/Sign Design Review (New fee)
800
Design Review/Master Sign Program (New fee)
800
Design Review/New Commercial Structures (New fee)
0
$1.40
Commercial Design Review/Remodel with Additions (New fee)
900
Commercial Design Review/Facade or Site Plan Only (New fee)
800
Multi-family Design Review13 or More Units (New fee)
0
$1.00
Modification of Conditional Use Permit
$750 890
Page 4 of 7
ATTACH M ENT A
Current Proposed
0
Planned Development Review $633 $1.20
Relief from Ordinance (moratorium) $300
Relocation Impact Report (mobile home parks) $1,500
Other Public Hearing Requests (modifications) $300
Other (LA County Clerk Recording Fee, subject to LA Count Fee schedule) $75
Wildlife Exemption Fee No charge
COPIES:
Land Use Database $35/each
General Plan
$25/each
General Plan Map
$5/each
Zoning at a Glance Chart
No charge
Zoning Map
$5/each
Zoning Requirements
No charge
Zoning Ordinance
$35/each
APPEALS:
Filing Fee
$398 450
Public Hearing Fee
$38
OTHER PLANNING ITEMS
Conditional Use Permit Extensions $300
Lot Line Adjustment/Certificate of Compliance $290
Map Extensions $400
Occupancy Permit $225
Rite. Pl;;n Ravipv $22-5
Site Plan Review/Single Family/Duplex Residential 225
Comm/Res Tenant /mprovemenUNo New Sq. Ft (New feel X70
Page 5 of 7
ATTACHMENT A
Current Proposed
Commercial Site Plan Review (New fee) 500
Sign Plan Review $225
Oak Tree Permit $800
Negative Declaration Fee (City fee only) (New fee) 300
Mitigated Negative Declaration (City fee only) (New fee) Cost + 10%
Gn•;' eptal knn^n' A° nn' (initial Study) $300
CategoricalExemption Fee/Non Residential (New fee) $90
EIR Plus Outside Consultant-(Not incl. County charges) Cost + 10%
Geologic/Geotechnical Review
Initial Traffic Assessment
Traffic Impact Analysis Review
Zoning Verification Letter (New feel
Conenent (City fee only) (New feel
Second Unit Covenent (City fee only)
Banner Permit (New fee)
Cost + 10%
$330
Cost + 10%
$55
Cost + 10%
No Charge
PASSED, AND ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Rosemead, County
of Los Angeles of the State of California on June 22, 2010.
Gary Taylor, Mayor
Page 6 of 7
ATTACHMENT A
ATTEST:
Gloria Molleda, City Clerk
APPROVE AS TO FORM:
Joseph M. Montes, City Attorney
Page 7 of 7
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS.
CITY OF ROSEMEAD )
I, Gloria Molleda, City Clerk of the City of Rosemead, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. 2010-45 being:
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD, CALIFORNIA,
UPDATING COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING FEES AND CHARGES FOR
SERVICES FOR FY 2010.11
was duly and regularly approved and adopted by the Rosemead City Council on the 22nd of June,
2010, by the following vote to wit:
Yes: Armenta, Clark, Low, Ly, Taylor
No: None
Abstain: None
Absent: None
~b&-a\jo
Gloria Molleda
City Clerk
ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: JEFF ALLRED, CITY MANAGER
DATE: JUNE 22, 2010
SUBJECT: ANNUAL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/PLANNING FEE SCHEDULE
FOR FY2010-11
SUMMARY
The City provides various individualized services (i.e. inspections, permits, variances,
etc.) that are not of general benefit. Historically, many of these services have been
provided at a cost greater than the price being charged for them thus resulting in
subsidies of the remaining costs of service from the general taxpayers. As a matter of
routine fee maintenance and to keep pace with increasing costs of individualized
services, the fees charged to users need to be reviewed on a regular basis, preferably
each year.
In the interest of being responsive to the service needs of Rosemead residents and
businesses; not all fees need to be increased and some are controlled by statute.
Consequently, not every Rosemead fee is being recommended for an adjustment this
year. Furthermore, for ease of identifying proposed fee adjustments, new and
increased fees will be underlined, bolded and highlighted in yellow and the current fee
will be sticken out when a new fee is proposed in Section 2, subheading A "Community
Development/Planning" portion of the proposed Annual Comprehensive Fee Schedule,
Resolution 2010-45 (Attachment A).
Staff Recommendation
It is recommended that City Council members approve the Section 2, subheading A
"Community Development/Planning" portion of the Annual Comprehensive Fee
Schedule for FY 2010-11, Resolution No. 2010-45 adopting the updated fees.
ANA[ YSIS
Requested fee adjustments or new fees in the attached resolution are for selected
planning services and adjustments to fees for filming. All of the fee increases will cover
some, but not all of the costs to provide the related services and will reduce the amount
currently subsidized by the general taxpayers. Keeping pace with cost increases
APPROVED FOR CITY COUNCIL AGENDA: ITEM NUMBER: qC
City Council Meeting
June 22, 2010
Page 2 of 2
through annual fee adjustments avoids the need for much larger "catch up" fee
increases when adjustments are made less frequently.
The following is a discussion of the justification of the fee increases:
Certain current Planning fee categories that are general in definition are being
replaced with categories that more specifically define the service being charged for.
For example, Design Review (general) is being replaced with fees such as Design
Review/Single Family Residential and Design Review/Signs (specific). The objective
of all fee adjustments is to attempt to recover costs of providing services (primarily to
developers) without exceeding the average fees charged by neighboring cities for
similar services.
Attachment B is included with this report to illustrate a comparison (where possible) of
proposed Rosemead fees to those of neighboring cities. Because not all services and
associated fee structures are identical to Rosemead's neighbor's fees, a direct
comparison (apples to apples) is not always achievable. Therefore, fee comparisons
are presented where possible.
PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS
This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process.
Submitted by:
Steven Brisco
Finance Director
Attachments: A - Resolution No. 2010-45
B - Selected Fee Comparisons