HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1980/05/27 Item 16
"'
.
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 16
Meeting Date 5/27/80
ITEM TITLE: Resolution /011'1. - Providing for a fee for General Plan Amendments and a
reduced fee for General Plan Amendments and rezoning filed concur.rent~~"
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning ~
A. BACKGROUND ~
(4/5ths Vote: Yes
No~)
1. Council adopted the Master Fee Schedule on June 29, 1978 increasing various city
fees in an effort to cover the cost of handling various types of applications. At that
time the fee for a General Plan Amendment was not included in the schedule, so it remained
at the rate established in March, 1974 of $200 plus $2.00 for each acre over 5 acres
involved in the application.
2. On February 26, 1980 Council directed staff to look into setting up a special
fee for those people who present both a General Plan change and a rezoning at the same
time and bring back to Council a recommendation to change the fee schedule.
B. RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt a resolution establishing the fee for General Plan Amendment applications at
$1100, plus $2.00 for each acre over 5 acres, and establishing a combined fee for con-
currently filed General Plan Amendment and rezoning applications at the sum of the two
separate fees minus 10%.
C. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
Not applicable.
D. DISCUSSION
1. The application fee for a rezoning was established at $630 on June 29, 1978.
Frequently a rezoning application is relatively "simple to evaluate as it is measured
against the General Plan designation for a particular area. General Plan Amendment
applications, on the other hand, must be evaluated on the basis of fundamental planning
principles, and if the area is large, on such factors as street and sewer capacities.
The analysis can thus be quHe complex. As in the case of rezoning applications, the
analysis may contain some judgmental factors, the rationale for which should be set
forth. In looking back at a number of General Plan Amendment applications which have
been completed in recent years, the median cost of salaries of Planning Department
personnel per application was $565. Calculations performed by the City Manager's office
in June of 1978 indicated that the cost of overhead, supplies, time spent by other
departments on applications and the proportional cost of service departments allocated
to the Planning Department approximates the cost of salaries of the Planning Department.
Accordingly, full recovery costs would approximate $1100.
2. The recommended $1100 base fee for a General Plan Amendment, plus the $630 for
a rezoning application, produces a combined fee of $1,730. If both applications are ~.
filed concurrently, there wou19 be some savings in the required le9al advertising and
some savings in report preparation""and reproduction. The amount of this savings could
vary widely. If the staff recommendation on the General' Plan Amendment were for denial,
the recommendation on the rezoning would be very simple so that a large cost savings
would be realized. If the staff recommendation on the General Plan Amendment were for
approval of a very'straighiforward General Plan designation, such as "Visitor Commercial,"
Form A-1l3 (Rev. 11/79)
1611Y
Continued
EXHIBITS
Agreement_____ Resolution~ Ordinance~ Plat_____ Notification List
Other
ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: Attached
Submitted on
I
'1
..J:..
" .'-
.
.,
,
Page 2, Item
16
Meeting Date
a similarly large savings on a rezoning probably would be realized. On the other hand,
if the General Plan designation recommendation'were for "Residential, 4-12 DU/acre." the
amount of savings would be smaller as the rezoning report would then have to determine
a zoning category ranging from R-l to R-3-P-12. Obviously, the staff recommendation can-
not be determined 'in advance of the filing of an application, so a savings cannot be
determined at the'time the filing fees are paid. These factors make it difficult to
arrive at a basis for reducing the fees for applications which are filed concurrently.
If Council wishes to consider a reduction, however, a reduction of 10% would
recognize the savings in legal advertisement and some savings in report preparation.
A typical advertisement in the "Public Notice" section of the newspaper costs approxi-
mately $45 and a 10% reduction in the combined fees would amount to approximately $173.
If Council wishes to encourage the concurrent filing of"applications, a reduction larger
than 10% probably would be necessary. In such event, a reduction of 50% of the cost of
the rezoning fee 'might strike a balance between those combined applications on which a
considerable cost savings may occur and 'those on which, little savings would be realized.
Such a combined fee would 'be '$1,415 vs. $1,730.
E. CONCLUSION
All things considered, the 10% reduction seems appropriate for the following
reasons:
1.
The amount of
dependent upon
predicted.
savings resulting from concurrently filed applications is
the nature of the, application and this cannot be accurately
,
2. There has been no expression of interest by applicants in filing applications
concurrently.
DJP: hm
~et.~ ~
by ,he City C0'1 ;~;! of
Chula Vistn, C:::liiornia
Dated
..>~ ;< ;?- rd
I Oll~