HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - May 15, 1991 (61){ OR
Q CITY OF LODI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing Regarding Engineering Fee Update
MEETING DATE: May 15, 1991
PREPARED BY: Public Works Director
RECOMMENDED ACTION: That after conducting a public hearing, the City Council adopt
a resolution updating the City's engineering fees.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On July 21, 1976, the City Council passed Resolution
No. 4236 which established an engineering fee on new
subdivisions and developments. That fee amounted to 3% of
the off-site improvement cost estimate used to determine
the project's improvement security. The purpose of this engineering fee was to
cover the City's cost of processing and checking improvement plans and maps, and
construction inspection. It did not include clerical or management costs such as
the Public Works Director, City Attorney, etc.
Until four years ago, there was a fairly close balance between revenue collected
from the engineering fee and expenses charged to the subdivision engineering
account. In total, since 1976, expenses,have exceeded revenues by $312,000.
However, since 1986/87, the revenue from the engineering fee only covered one half
of the expenses for subdivision engineering. Annual expenses and revenue are shown
in Exhibit A. Both have fluctuated with development activity.
A major reason for the growing difference between revenue and expenditures is two
different types of development in the City. The first is "in -fill" projects in
which most off-site improvements are already existing. These typically require
minor off-site modifications. The work involved in field reviewing and designing
new work to match existing improvements is disproportionately higher than just new
work. The fee collected is lower because it is based solely on a percentage of the
cost for installing publicly -maintained facilities. There should be fewer of these
projects in the future.
The second type of project includes those with private streets and utilities. These
types of projects typically have a homeowners' association to maintain the streets,
sanitary sewer, and storm drain systems. The on-site water systems through these
developments are publicly owned and maintained and are reviewed by the Public Works
Department. Again, these projects require nearly as much effort as a standard
subdivision. An engineering fee is paid for the review of the public water system
and for any other publicly -maintained street improvements. Because the interior
streets, storm drain, and sanitary sewer systems are privately maintained, their
improvement costs are not included in the calculation of the engineering fee. This
type of project will continue to be developed under the new General Plan.
APPROVED:` --
THOMAS A. PETERSON
City Manager
CEVGFEE2/TY.T'W.02M (CO.CQN)
April 29, 1991
cc•t
Engineering Fee Update
May 15, 1991
Page 2
There are also some projects which include subdivision or parcel maps. No map
processing or review fee is presently charged. San Joaquin County provides
technical review of final maps. The City checks parcel maps and does easement and
other checking on all maps.
A new method of collecting the plan check fee would also alleviate another existing
problem. No fees are collected until the improvement plans and maps have been
reviewed and the developer is ready to start construction. Staff has spent
considerable time reviewing some projects that are never constructed or are
redesigned before construction and therefore no fees were collected.
Other reasons for increased expenses include the following. The only administrative
time charged to the subdivision engineering account is a portion of the Assistant
City Engineer's time. At the inception of the fee, this portion was 30%; however, a
few years ago it was increased to 40% based on an updated time analysis. Also, the
Senior Civil Engineer (who charges time by time card) now supervises the inspectors;
thus, some engineering time is now charged as part of inspection that was not done
earlier.
Comparison With Other Cities
San Joaquin County and the cities of Stockton, Tracy, Galt, and Manteca were
contacted to see how their engineering fees were collected. The rates vary,
although a sliding scale is common, as well as separate fees for maps.
Exhibits B and C recap these fees and show a comparison for two recent developments.
Fee Increase
If the City,is to attempt to cover most of its costs in processing new developments,
an increase in the fee is needed. Exhibits 0 and E present recent historical data
and estimates of future expenses. Based on estimates of future expenses, a 41%
increase is needed, assuming fees already cover costs. However, this is not the
case. Based on three recent years, a 117% increase would have been necessary to
break even.
Since much of new development will not have the same characteristics as recent
development and the updated design standards will place some of the City's past work
onto development, staff has developed the recommended fee schedule to provide an
average increase of 80%. The exact revenue increase will depend on the size mix of
developments due to the sliding scale, An analysis based on three recent years is
shown in Exhibit E. This recommended fee represents a 10% reduction from that
presented at the shirtsleeve meeting on April 9. A subsequent public meeting with
local engineers and developers was scheduled for 2:00 p.m., April 26, at the
Carnegie Forum. Notices were sent to 11 local design professionals and developers.
No one attended the meeting.
CENGFEE2/TXTW.02M (CO.COM) April 30, 1991
Engineering Fee Update
May 15, 1991
Page 3
Recommendations
Based on the above discussion and that from the shirtsleeve meeting of April 9, the
following revisions are recommended for collecting a Public Works engineering fee.
1. Charge a sliding scale fee for reviewing and processing improvement plans. The
fee would be 4.5% of the engineer's estimate for the first $50,000 worth of
off-site improvements, 2.5% of the engineer's estimate for the next $200,000
worth of off-site improvements, and 1.51 of the engineer's estimate for the cost
of all off-site improvements above $250,000.
2. Collect a "deposit" on the improvement plan check fee with the first submittal
of a set of improvement plans. This non-refundable, initial plan check fee
would'be $750 per sheet, or the engineer may submit a preliminary cost estimate
with a submittal fee based on that estimate and the above fee schedule. The
plan check submittal deposit would be credited toward the engineering fee
collected prior to signing the improvement plans provided this takes place
within one year of submittal or there are no substantial revisions to the
pians. Plans submitted 12 months after the initial plan submittal would pay
another initial plan check fee.
3. Charge a $200 fee for processing subdivision final maps. This non-refundable
fee would be due upon map submittal.
4. Charge a fee of $250 plus $10 per lot for checking and processing parcel maps.
This non-refundable fee would be due upon map submittal.
5. Collect an inspection fee of 2.5% of the engineer's estimate for off-site
improvements.
6. Rescind Resolution No. 4236 and adopt a new fee resolution implementing the
above items. (Reference Lodi Municipal Code §§12.04.150, 15.44.090 and
16.20.020.)
FUNDING: None needed.
erv,�
ensko
ks Director
Prepared by Richard C. Prima Jr., Assistant City Engineer
JLR/RCP/mt
Attachments
cc: Senior Civil Engineer
Assistant Civil Engineer
Interested Parties
CENGFEE2/TXTW.02M (CO.COM)
April 23, 1991
City of Lodi
Engineering Fee Study
COMPARISON OF ENGINEERING FEES
April 1991
Nan Joaquin Countv
Improvement plans
Final & Parcel Maps
Inspection
City of Stockton
Improvement plans
Final Maps
Parcel Maps
Inspection
City of Tracv
Impr. Pians & Final Maps
i Parcel Maps
Inspection (Final Maps)
Inspection (Parcel Maps)
mill
Improvement Plans
Final Maps
Parcel Maps
Inspection
City of Manteca
Improvement Plans,
Maps. & Inspection
City of Lodi - Existing
Plans & Inspection
Final & Parcel Maps
Plan Submittal Deposit
Improvement plans
Final Maps
Parcel Maps
Inspection
Plan Submittal Deposit
(Fees current as of April 3, 199 1)
5.5% to $25,000
3.0% next $225,000
1.75% above $250,000
$300 + $20/tot
4% to $200,000
3%$201,000 to $500.000
2.5% $501,000 to $1,000,000
2% over $1.000,000
5.5% to $25,000
3.0% next $225,000
2.0% above $250,000
$400 + $10/lot
$300 + $10/lot
3.5% of Engineer's Estimate
Exhibit B
Note: All percentTges of $
amounts refer to the cost of
public improvements.
3.25% of Engineer's Estimate, ($200 Minimum)
$250
2.5% above $100,000
3.5% below $100,000
2.0% above $100,000
3.5%below $100,000, ($2000minimum)
5.0%up to $100,000.,
1.5%of amount above
$433 + $5/lot 1-26 lots, $3/lot 26.501ots, $2/lot 51-75 lots
$1/lot 76+ lots
$216 + $5/lot
3.0% of Engineer's Estimate
Note: Staff is presently
2.0%cfEngineer's Estimate evaluating an increase.
3.0% of Engineer's Estimate
none
none
AMR
gQylAed
5.5% to $25,000
4.5% to $50,000
3.0% next $225.000
2.5% next $200,000
2.0% above $250.000
1.5% above $250.000
$200
same
$250 + $10/lot
same
2.5% of Engineer's Estimate
same
per estimate or $750/sheet
same
ENGINEERING FEE COMPARISON OF TYPICAL SUBDIVISIONS
r�.
O'
c1.
SUSMEALS n
San Joaquin
Stockton
Tracy
Galt
Manteca
Lodi
Lodi
County
(Existing)
(Proposed)
Mokelumne Village East
Engineer's Estimate: $290,000
38 Lots
Improvement Plans
$8,825
$8,925
$9,425
$7,850
$5,800
$8,700
$7,850
Final Map
$700
$600
Included
$533
Included
Included
$200
Inspection
$10,700
$10,150
$7,250
$8,700
Included
Included
$7.250 -.
TOTAL
$20,225
$19,675
$16,675
$17,083
$5,800
$8,700
51x,300
previous proposal:
$16,375
Sunwest No. 9
Engineer's Estimate: $137,000
15 lots
Improvement Plans
$4,735
$4,735
$4,453
$5,555
$2,740
$4,110
$3,925
Final Map
$600
$550
Included
$508
Included
Included
$200
Inspection
$5,480
$4,795
$3,425
$4,110
Included
Included
$3,425
TOTAL
$10,815
$10,080
$7,878
$10,173
$2,740
$4,110
07,550
previous proposal:
$8,360
Note: The above fees are current as of 413191.
r�.
O'
c1.
SUSMEALS n
$Id0,00o
$120,000
$100,000
$80,000
$60,000
$10,000
$20,000
$0
Subdivision Engineering Account
Plan Check Cow -4. Admin. Traffic Ent;. As-hu+lts, AdminWralion supp+ki &
F-9. & Insp. Survey & Tc lin ,
D1ap.
[IM3"YrAnnu.Od Average (7/88. 6/90) O Estinwted Future Annual Expert,
- - -M I - i
Tulul
a
uuu�:xtsxt,c b
Exhibit E]
Engineering Fees
Annual Expenses 87/90: $99,379 (average of previous 3 fiscal years)
Estimated Future Annual Expenses: $140,000 41%
(anticipated increase
in expenses)
Actual Revenue: $137,438 (total of previous 3 fiscal years)
Actual Expenses: $298,138 117%
(increase in revenue
required based on
historical expenses)
Analysis of projects for 3 previous fiscal years:
Project Size
Number
Present Fee
Proposed Fee
% Increase
Incomplete (dropped):
3
$0
$4,220
NIA
Less than $50,000:
10
$7,070
$19,047
169%
$50,000 to $250,000:
10
$31,770
$64,890
104%
Over $250,000:
8
$103,620
$167,870
62%
Total/Average: 31 $142,460 $256,027 80%
Proposed Engineering Fees
Improvement plan Check
Final Maps
Parcel Maps
Inspection
Plan Submittal Deposit
4.5% to $50,000
2.5% of next $200,000
1.5% of amount above $250,000
$200
$250 + $10/lot
2.5% of Engineer's Estimate
per estimate or $750/sheet
(non refundable)
RESOLUTION NO. 91-91
A RESOLUTION OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING THE CITY'S ENGINEERING FEES AND RELATED PROCEDURES,
AND RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 4236 PERTAINING THERETO
WHEREAS, the Lodi City Council in 1976 adopted Resolution No.
4236 - Establishing A Subdivision and Development Engineering Fee - and
which fee, excluding administrative costs, was established as 3% of the
cost of installing public improvements; and
WHEREAS, the City is now experiencing different types of
development within the City than was existent when Resolution No. 4236
was adopted; and
WHEREAS, the cost of providing said engineering, inspection and
testing services, including administrative costs far exceeds the 30
adopted in Resolution No. 4236; and
WHEREAS, it is deemed prudent and in the City's best interest to
establish a new method of collecting plan check fees;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Lodi City Council that
the following engineering fee charges and amended procedures shall
apply on new subdivisions and developments:
1. A sliding scale fee shall be charged for reviewing and processing
improvement plans. The fee shall be 4.5% of the engineer's
estimate for the first $50,000 of off-site improvements, 2.5% .of
the engineer's estimate for the next $200,000 of off-site
improvements, and 1.5% of the engineer's estimate for the cost of
all off-site improvements above 5250,000.
2. An improvement plan check fee shall be collected with the first
submittal of a set of improvement plans. This non-refundable,
initial plan check fee shall be $750 per sheet, or the engineer
may submit a preliminary cost estimate with a submittal fee based
on that estimate and the above fee schedule. The plan check
submittal deposit shall be credited toward the engineering fee
collected prior to signing the improvement plans, provided this
takes place within one year of submittal, or provided there are
no substantial revisions to the plans. Plans submitted 12 months
after the initial plan submittal shall be required to pay another
initial plan check fee.
3. A $200 fee shall be charged for processing subdivision final
maps. This non-refundable fee would be due upon map submittal.
RE59191/TXTA.02J
'—.
Resolution No. 91-91
May 15, 1991
4. A fee of $250 plus $10 per lot shall ,be charged for checking and
processing parcel maps. This non-refundable fee shall be due
upon map submittal.
5. An inspection fee of 2.50 of the engineer's estimate for off-site
improvements shall be collected.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, in the adoption of *hese -new
engineering fees and amended procedures, reference is hereby rude to
Lodi Municipal Code Sections 12.04.150 - Encroachment Permit, Fees,
15.44.090 - Off -Site Improvements and Dedications, Fees, and 16.20.020 -
Map Fees - Final and parcel maps; and
FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Resolution shall be in force and take
effect 60 days from and after its final adoption.
Resolution No. 4236 is rescinded upon the adoption of this
Resolution.
Dated: May 15, 1991
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 91-91 was passed and
adopted by the Lodi City Council in a regular meeting held May 15,
1991 by the following vote:
Ayes: Council Members - Pennino, Pinkerton, Sieglock, Snider
and Hinchman (Mayor)
Noes: Council Members - None
Absent: Council Members - None
nnifer/M. Perrin
Deputy City Clerk
for Alice M. Reimche
City Clerk
91-91
RES9191/TXTA.02J
DECLARATION OF MAILING
On May 2, 1991 in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, I
deposited in the United States mail, envelopes with first-class postage
prepaid thereon, containing a copy of the Notice attached hereto, marked
Exhibit "A"; said envelopes were addressed as is more particularly shown
on Exhibit "B" attached hereto.
There is a regular daily communication by mail between the City of Lodi,
California, and the places to which said envelopes were addressed.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on May 2, 1991, at Lodi, California.
Alice M. Reimche
City Clerk
t ni er arrin
puty Ci y Clerk
DEC/O1
TXTA.FRM
CITY OF LODI
CARNEGIE FORUM
305 Nest Pine Street, Lodi
FN� CE OF PUBLIC HEARING
15, 1991
0 p.m.
EFo,,ination regarding this Public Hearing
ntact:
Alice M. Reimche
City Clerk
Telephone: 333.6702
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
May 15, 1991
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, at the hour of 7:30 p.m., or as
soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council will conduct a
public hearing to consider the following matter:
a) Amending engineering fees for passing and checking public
improvement plans prepared by private developers.
All interested persons are invited to present their views and comments on this
matter. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any time prior
to the hearing scheduled herein, and oral statements may be made at said
hearing.
If you challenge the subject matter in court, you may be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised at the Public Hearing described in
this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 West
Pine Street, at or prior to the Public Hearing.
By Order Of the Lodi City Council:
��-(��
Malice M. Reimche
`City Clerk
Dated: May 1, 1991-
Approved
991
Approved as to form:
(,i
Bobby W. McNatt
City Attorney
TIE GIANNONI ORGANIZATION i ,408 MORRIS
1420 S MILLS AVE /E 22 W LOCKEFORD ST #9
LODI, CA 95242 LODI, CA 95240
FRED BAKER
317 W LODI AVE
LODI. CA 95240
DARYL GEWEKE
PO BOX 1210
LODI, CA 95241
DILLON ENGINEERING
PO BOX 2180
LODI, CA 95241
RON THOMAS
PO BOX 1505
LODI, CA 95240
JEFF KIRST
120 N PLEASANT
LODI, CA 95240
WENELL MATTHEIS BOWE
222 W LOCKEFORD ST #9
LODI, CA 95240
ENGINEERING FEE UPDATE MAILING LIST, 4/19/91
DQ5) j,,—s 4c
/36TNTLAND-SNIDER
S HAM LN MA
x -ODI, CA 95242
GOODEN CONSTRUCTION
114A N CHURCH ST
LODI, CA 95240
BAUMBACH-PIAZZA
323 W ELM ST
LODI. CA 95240