My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
pf_01862
Roseville
>
Planning Files
>
Old Numbering System (pre-2007)
>
PF1000 - PF1999
>
1800-1899
>
pf_01862
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/16/2024 9:43:50 AM
Creation date
2/16/2024 9:43:41 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Planning Files
Planning Files - Planning File #
1566
Planning Files - Type
Zoning Text Amendment
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
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
M E M O R A N D U M <br />DATE: March 29, 1988 <br />TO: Craig A. Waldron <br />FROM: Rick Jopke Q <br />SUBJECT: Zoning Fee Analysis <br />The following tables provide a quick analysis of zoning related <br />fees. Table 1 is an attempt to analyze the results of a planning <br />fee survey conducted by the city of Coon Rapids in February of <br />1988. 38 communities responded to the survey. <br />It is difficult to draw conclusions about fees because <br />communities structure their fees differently. I have taken an <br />extremely conservative view in Table 1 to attempt to compute <br />average fees. In most cases, actual fees collected would be <br />higher. Even with this conservative approach, Roseville's fees <br />are below average. <br />Table 2 shows two alternative fee schedules and what revenue <br />would be generated assuming that the number and type of <br />applications would be similar to those in 1987 (except as noted). <br />Finally, there are fees which we don't have which we could start <br />charging which could generate additional revenue (i.e. comp plan <br />amendment, shoreline, and PUD) Table 2 also shows what revenue <br />might be generated if we added these fees. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.