My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CCP 10-12-1993
ArdenHills
>
Administration
>
City Council
>
City Council Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1993
>
CCP 10-12-1993
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/8/2007 1:09:34 PM
Creation date
11/6/2006 3:05:09 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General (2)
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br /> . <br /> . -' <br /> . Page Two <br /> Additional Fees Memo <br /> As you can see, the City currently charges only $100 <br /> for a variance application. The remainder of these <br /> expenses would fall under the General Fund. In looking <br /> at the greater Metropolitan area, an increase in this <br /> fee would be warranted; to $125. It is clear that most <br /> communities do not re-coup their land application <br /> costs. Overall, our fees are not out of line of other <br /> communities and in looking at the option below, you can <br /> see the minimal increases that would be justified to <br /> bring us in line with other Metropolitan cities. <br /> Optional <br /> Land Development Current Increase <br /> site Plan Review $ 200 + $ 225 <br /> Rezoning/ $ 250 + $ 300 <br /> Comp Plan Amend. $ 250 + $ 500 <br /> Special Use Permit $ 200 + $ 225 <br /> Variance $ 100 + $ 125 <br /> PUD $ 250 + $ 500 <br /> Zoning Ordinance Amend. $ 200 + $ 250 <br /> Sign Permit $ 50 $ 50 <br /> . Preliminary Plat $ 250 + $ 250 + <br /> $ 20/lot $ 20/lot <br /> Final Plat Consultant $ 125 <br /> Fee <br /> Lot Split $ 150 + $ 175 <br /> Vacation of Easement $ 100 + $ 150 <br /> TIF $2500 $2500 <br /> One other option that the city may want to consider is <br /> actually reducing its initial fees and charging for <br /> staff time. This would be somewhat similar to what the <br /> city does now with the consultant fee. <br /> With this approach I would again be concerned about our <br /> residents being charged after-the-fact for an unknown <br /> fee. If the City were to consider this option, I would <br /> suggest that a maximum fee be established. with the <br /> history we have had of non-payment of these after the <br /> fact fees, the City may also consider collecting the <br /> maximum up front and then reimbursing the unused <br /> portion upon completion of the case. This would <br /> eliminate our non-payments, save money for the <br /> applicant on a simple request and allow the City to re- <br /> coup as much of its costs as possible on more time- <br /> . consuming cases. <br /> --~- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.