AgdaPkt 2005-04-25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

//1- / REPORT To the Honorable Mayor and City Council From the City Manager April 25, 2005 Subject Development Fee Study Recommendation Review and comment on the attached Development Fee Study completed by the Coro Fellows in Public Affairs. Background The Community Development Services Department together with Parks, Recreation and Community Services Oepartment, and the Public Works Oepartment retained the services of three Coro Fellows in Public Affairs for four weeks to conduct a comparative study of development fees. The Fellows are part of a nine-month graduate level leadership-training program for individuals who are interested in government, politics, and public service. Staff undertook the fee study for several reasons. First, there is an interest in assessing any impacts of new fees and charges such as recycled water fees, park dedication fees, - General Plan fees, and increases in plan review fees. Staff wanted to do a fee comparison to determine if such new impact fees and fee increases would be reasonable in comparison to other cities. Secondly, staff wanted to get a sense from developers as to how such fees might affect development decisions. The study compiles information on the varied development fees Redwood City assesses between the time a project is first proposed and when a building permit is issued. These fees are generally for checking conformity of plans with zoning and safety codes, as well as impact fees, to pay for the incremental impact on traffic, schools, water supply, etc.1 These fees were then compared with fees of six comparable cities for seven hypothetical development projects. This study also involved interviews with seven developers to understand how fees fit into their decisions. Please refer to the attached report for further information. Findings The study demonstrates that, in general, Redwood City assesses fewer and lower fees than the other cities in the study. The most substantial difference found was in the impact fees assessed in each city, such as park fees and water capital facilities fees. The variation in these fees and others can be explained by some underlying differences: the level of service provided, the extent that cost recovery is used as a model for setting fees, and the 1 Certain required improvements, such as water main upgrades and sidewalks. were not examined in this study since they vary greatly depending on the jurisdiction and project location. ,,' -'."'-'.' -'-'-".'---.-"'--'-T--'.'" -...'-'."'."