R06-176
II
I RESOLUTION NO. 06- n b
2 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE
3 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING
4 FEES FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT RELATED
5 ACTIVITIES IN THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, AND
6 PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE
7
8 WHEREAS, The City Commission for the City of Boynton Beach last adopted a Fee
9 Schedule for Land Development Activities on April 18, 1995 pursuant to the adoption of
10 Resolution No. R95-45; and
II WHEREAS, the City Commission, pursuant to Part III, "Land Development
12 Regulations", Chapter I, "General Provisions", Article 6, "Land Development Fees", has the
13 authority to establish fees for Land Development Activities pursuant to Resolution; and
14 WHEREAS, the City Commission for the City of Boynton Beach finds that the
15 adoption of this revised fee schedule is necessary and is in the best interest of the health,
16 safety and welfare of the citizens or residents of Boynton Beach.
17 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF
18 THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA THAT:
19
Section 1.
The above referenced whereas clauses are incorporated herein by
20 reference.
21
Section 2.
The fees for Land Development related activities attached hereto as
22 Exhibit "A", incorporated herein by reference, is hereby adopted as the fee schedule for those
23 related activities as indicated on the fee schedule. A copy of the fee schedule shall be
24 maintained in the City Clerk's office as well as the Planning and Zoning Department.
25
Section 3.
This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage
26 and adoption.
I,
11
I
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 3
day of October, 2006.
2
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 ATTEST:
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
m.~
FEES FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT RELATED ACTIVITIES
ACTIVITY Pronose Existina
Abandonments (easement or right-of-way) $750 $500 .
----- ---------_._._~ - -~- ----
r ^'lnexations $500 $750/$1,000 I
-
)peals
Administrative $750 $200
Community Design Plan
First appeal (per code section) $500 $400
Each additional appeal $100 $100
Landscape Code
First appeal (per code section) $500 $200
Each additional appeal $100 $100
Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Map)
Up to 10 acres $ 750 $750
10 acres or more $1,000 $1,750
Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Text) $1,000 $250
Comprehensive Plan Amendment Transmittal (to be paid prior to 2"" Reading) $500 $250
Conditional Use Approval'
Concurrent with site plan review (in addition to site plan review fee) $1,000 $1,500/$1,000
Use Only with no site/building modifications (in lieu of site plan review fee) $750 New
Development of Regional Impact (DRI) Review L
Notice Of Proposed Change (NOPC) $1,500 Hourly rate
New DRI or Substantial Deviation $5,000 New
Review of Annual Reports $400 New
Height Exception $250 $250
Legal review of documents (Le. cross-access agreements and leased $500 $400
parkino aoreements)
Master Plan Review (within a conventional zoning district)
Less than 10 acres $1,000 $1,000
10 acres or more $1,500 $1,500
Master Plan Modification Ireaardless of zonina) $750 $500
Minor Site Plan Modification
Arch.lelevation changes only (Le. only requiring review by P &Z division) $150
Multiple changes to a single structure and/or site and/or requires review by
more than one division or department. $500 $100
Multiple modifications to multiple buildings and requires review by more
Than one division or department-ILe. M-U or PDD). $750
New Site Plan or Major Site Plan Modification Review (total project sq. ft.)
Up to 2,999 sq. ft. $750
, 3,000 - 9,999 sq. ft. $1,000
10,000 - 29,999 sq ft $1,500 $750/$1,500
30,000 - 99,999 sq $2,000
100,000 - 499,999 sq ft $2,500
~ 500,000 + sa ft $3,000
District Use Approval $750 $250
, PID District Code Waivers
First waiver (per code section) $100 New
Each additional waiver $50 New
Plannino & ZoninQ Permit Reviews will be based on hourly salary plus 35% for
d
\~
l
r''''' b~,'"', '"' will" ,,"""to' '" ,"" of permit review and paid when Hourly New
permi~issued ~ ____ _ _______ Rate
. --- ------- -~--
Platting
Pre-application process (credited toward plat fee) $1,000
Plat review $3,?00
Postponement
Without re-advertisement and re-notification to property owners $25 $25
Re-advertisement reauired (in addition to leaal ad/notification costs) $50 New
Pre-application meetings (charge for 3'" meeting held within a three month
period, and involving 2 or more disciplines. Fee will cover the hourly salary of
employees involved in the meeting, plus 35% for fringe benefits. Can include Hourly New
Public Works, Engineering, Utilities, Building, Fire, Police, and Parks.) Rate
Due UDon aDDlication submittal
Rezoning
Conventional district
Up to 10 acres $750 $750
More than 10 acres $1,000 $1,000
Planned District Rezoning (i.e. IPUD, PUD, PCD, PID, MU, SMU)
Up to 10 acres $1,000 $1,000
More than 10 acres $2,000 $1,500
When site plan is filed in lieu of Master Plan3 $750 New
Site Plan Time Extensions $500 $400
Telecommunications (preliminary review in accordance with Chapter 10)
Co-locations / Tower Siting / Tower Replacements $200 New
New Lease / Lease Revisions $1,500 New
~. ~;ances
First variance (per code section) $500 $400
, Each additional variance $100 $100
I
Waivers
Sidewalk $100 $100
Administrative $200 $200
Zonina Code/LDR Amendment (after CitY Commission review)" $1,000 $250
Zonina-Verification letter (or other reauests for written responses to inquires) $35 $25
General Notes:
Fees are not refundable after staff review has begun unless noted otherwise herein.
Applications will be automatically cancelled if a check is returned; to re-apply an applicant must pay the published fee plus
the fee for returned checks established by resolution. .
Activities requiring noticing in the local newspaper (PB Post) shall remit the current advertising fee to cover said costs.
Footnotes:
1 Fee covers two reviews. Additional reviews will be billed to the applicant based on the hourly salary of employees
involved in the review, plus 35% for fringe benefits.
.
2 A deposit of $1,500 for an NOPC application, and $5,000 for a new DRI or Substantial Deviation, will be required at time
of application filing. Cost of advertising, and Staff time will be billed to applicant based on hourly salaries plus 35% for
fringe benefits. Costs for current legal ad/public notices will also be paid at time of filing.
3 When a site plan application is filed in lieu of a Master Plan for a mixed-use district, the corresponding site plan fee will
Ipply.
'If the commission denies request at preliminary review, $750 will be reimbursed.
S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\SPECPROJ\Application Fees\Proposed Amendment to Fee Schedule_doc
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING
Memorandum PZ 06-164
FROM:
Quintus Greene
Director of Dev!,o~~t .
Michael Rumpf 1-:Vl ~
Planning & Zoning Director
August 15, 2006
Fee schedule for the Planning & Zoning Division -
Proposed amendments and updates
TO:
DATE:
RE:
Please find attached hereto proposed revisions to the fee schedule for the Planning & Zoning
Division. According to city records, these fees were last amended in April of 1995. Except for
the meeting minutes, which indicated that the schedule was amended to also include ad fees,
no data was found on these preceding revisions or on any original fees. Therefore, the
analysis and revised fees, if acceptable to the City Commission, will be a valuable benchmark
for future studies and updates. Furthermore, solely based on the new fees proposed, and the
proposed significant adjustments to fees for the review of larger projects, it is estimated that
these adjustments could generate additional annual revenues in excess of $20,000.
p-')
j
The proposed revisions are based on 1) the results of a simple timelfee study conducted by
staff, and 2) include additions or modifications to reflect reviews of larger projects
accommodated by zoning changes, 3) new or changed processes, 4) the extraction of legal
fees, 5) the addition of previously overlooked processes, and 6) minor changes to improve
accuracy of, and clarity and consistency within the fee schedule.
1) The short timelfee study was conducted over the past several months. The analysis was
therefore based on current wages, review hours, all staff members involved in the processes
studied, and new or revised processes administered by the Division. For the sake of simplicity
and time, only selected, principal processes were analyzed. The objective was to collect a
cross-section of data sufficient to determine the range of hours spent on like processes, the
magnitude of increased review time for large projects processed under new mixed-use zoning
districts, and the review time and cost for multiple, concurrent application reviews (i.e.
annexation, land use amendment, and rezoning). To determine estimated review times and
fees for processes (application types) not studied, such processes were matched with the
processes of the study which had similar review characteristics (Le. P&Z reviewer, involvement
by other departments, complexity of review, and whether it is a principal or accessory
application). For example, the Community Design Plan Appeal process was not studied, due to
the lack of such applications during the study period, but was matched with the Variance
process given similarities in the reviewers involved and complexity. Where voids still remained,
staff applied the best estimate, or adjustments from known data to account for the respective
differences. An example of this would be the confirmation of the Height Exception process fee.
This process is similar to the Variance or Appeal processes; however, it differs by its
accessory status to a principal application, New Site Plan review. The estimated fee was
therefore arrived at by an estimated reduction from known fees to account for the lesser time
I
devoted to the review of this accessory application. Lastly, the time/fee study revealed the
significant range in review times/costs for processing Minor Site Plan Modifications, from the
simplest being around $100 (our current fee) to the more staff-intensive reviews exceeding
$600. Therefore, due to the significant deviation from an average, it is recommended that fees
be based on multiple ranges to cover the broad type of possible requests. Again, the increases
in complexity and review time are attributed to the larger planned/mixed-use developments.
2) In addition to changes in fees for minor modifications, the proposed fees reflect the greater
time required to review new, large projects accommodated by the SMU and other mixed-use
districts. Such projects represent an increase in both size and complexity compared to
historical reviews. Since these new zoning districts increase the potential margin of review
hours, from the smallest building/site to the largest project, it is again proposed that the review
fees be based on multiple ranges in project sizes. Since the sample data did not include a
project to match each size range, the voids were filled with estimates from data collected on
the other size ranges. These same size and fee ranges were applied similarly to the New Site
Plan, and Major Site Plan Modification categories.
3) With the implementation of the new mixed use districts, which require the submittal of either
a master plan or a site plan, the fee schedule should be adjusted to clarify this scenario and to
prevent undercharging or overcharging of applicants. A second change that should be
reflected in the fee schedule, with the objectives of accuracy and applicant-friendliness, is the
new step in code reviews that includes a preliminary review by the Commission. As recently
expe~ienced, if the Commission denies such a request at preliminary review, the review is
discontinued at about one-quarter (1/4) through the normal process. This addition allows a
reimbursement of 75% of the application fee if denied early on, and facilitates the accurate
representation of staff time and cost.
4) legal ad costs are recommended to be removed from the fees and paid separately by the
applicant. This will prevent the specific ad fees from being adopted with the application fees,
and thereby easily adjusted when increased by the Palm Beach Post. This format will also
prevent confusion during subsequent reviews and adjustments in the fee schedule. Although
some fees for major processes are to be reduced or maintained as currently approved, despite
the increased review cost (i.e. increasing project size, staff wages, complexity), please note
that the legal ad fees would be separate from the application fees. Overall, there would be a
net increase in the fees for these aforementioned application categories. For informational
purposes, current advertisement fees range between approximately $300 (variance or
abandonment - 2 publications at $150/ad) to $1,800 (Ig. scale land use/rezoning - 3
publications at $600/ad).
5) Certain processes have either been overlooked or possibly underestimated when fees and
activities were previously evaluated. This includes Review of Annual Reports for a DRI, Minor
Landscape Permits, Planning & Zoning Permit Reviews, and the review of New Lease/Lease
Revisions for telecommunication towers as well as the review of Colocations/Tower
SitingfTower Replacements. Some of these reviews are more costly as several processes
involve the review by senior staff including the City Attorney and Assistant City Manager.
Lastly, and perhaps also attributed to project size and complexity, applicants are more
frequently requiring multiple pre-applications prior to submittal. Staff has boasted of offering
unlimited pre-application meetings at no cost to the customer. However, given the involvement
by multiple disciplines (Departments/Divisions), and project size and complexity, costs of this
activity should be limited and at a certain point covered by the pending applicant. Therefore, to
balance quality customer service with stewardship, staff recommends that only two pre-
application meetings be offered without charge, when involving more than one discipline,within
a specified time period.
6) The clarity and consistency within the fee schedule would be improved through a few minor
changes, namely the use of a consistent acreage threshold for those relevant application
categories. It is recommended where an acreage value determines the application and fee
category, the value be uniform at 10 acres. This involves the Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(Map), Master Plan Review, and Rezoning processes, all of which could affect a single project.
Since "Use" and 'Waiver" reviews only involve the Planned Industrial Development (PID)
District, the corresponding titles have been separated from other unrelated processes, and
titles clarified accordingly. Since no reviews should be initiated without collecting some
application fee, it is proposed that a deposit be collected for NOPC requests ($1,500) and DRI
applications or substantial deviations ($5,000), in lieu of the current process whereby the
applicant is billed following the review, based on staff hours and wages. Lastly, the reference
and fee applicable to site plans proposed in the Central Business District (CBD) has been
removed, as the CBD has been essentially replaced with the Mixed-use High zoning district,
and the review costs are more proportional to project size than zoning district.
Other amendments would include a flat rate for the Annexations and Conditional Use Approval
processes, which more accurately reflects the respective staff reviews of these accessory
applications. Staff proposes to add a fee for Postponements that require publication of new
legal ads, to cover processing/administrative costs (legal ad costs are also owed in addition to
this processing fee). Lastly, staff proposes to add a conditional use review category for
requests which exclude site modifications. Although historically infrequent, with the use
provisions within the SMU and mixed-use districts, there may be an increase in applications for
conditional uses for properties that are built-out. This reduced fee is more applicant-friendly, ~ )
intended to correspond with future changes to the LDRs to accommodate this simpler
application process, and more accurately reflects staff review time and cost.
With respect to how our proposed fees compare to other jurisdictions, although not detailed
herein, fee schedules have been obtained for comparison purposes from Jupiter, Palm Beach
Gardens, West Palm Beach, Delray Beach and Boca Raton. The proposed fees remain
comparable to, slightly more, or significantly less than those of other cities, based on the
assumption of comparability.
Please note that the fee schedule still reflects activities/fees for processes administered by the
Engineering Division (Le. sidewalk and administrative Waivers, and Platting). These fees may
ultimately be amended or removed give the outcome of their independent review.
MR
S:\P1anning\SHARED\WP\SPECPROJ\Application Fees\Cover memo for study and amendments.doc
)