1h. Fee schedule for PUD Applications CITYOF /_,P,
i CHANHASSEN
1
690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
(612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
Action by City Mm,-1 iri
Eninrsed ✓ 1:N4 A'
II MEMORANDUM M,awa _____ -
Rejxta.+
. TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager ��yNt! k _/
IIFROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Director
Dote 3 - " -TT _i.aj•_
DATE: August 22, 1991 ?-7.-la-q)( _
1 SUBJ: Development Fee Schedule
IILast year, the City Council approved staff's proposal to
significantly revise our development fee schedule. These are the
fees associated with the city's view of development proposals.
1 These had not been updated in a number of years, were significantly
out of step with what most o tie metro area communities were
charging and in no meaningful wa he 4p ed to off set the costs of a
1 development review process. Staff bought background information
to the City Council for rev `+ew. ,F was our belief that the
development permit fees should probab° not be designed to fully
off set development review costs sinc=,this would make our review
II significantly more expensive than most other metro area
communities; however, it was a goal to recoup a larger portion of
our expenses.
IH.
Thus far, our revises . ee schedule has A orked relatively well.
There is, however one instance where , have become somewhat
I convinced that sqie of our fees is exc=' sive. The fee I am
referring to . ie ,xU app a .• f - present fee schedule
establishes a fee'of'' 750 5. '°:e r r. for a PUD application.
I This is significantly xE o : pens'3 t$A... o _ :. ° . ing which
has been $500. :We believe that it is not out of lj .e., to charge
more for a PUD reviw however, in many cases it, . -7Th the city's
benefit to review projects s PUD. c a - Aare looking at
I extensive use of the PUD design-tip, ong` the Hwy. 5 corridor to
ensure that the city's quality 410'dards, as they are developed,
can be met. ..
1 This issue came to my attention when Ryan Construction, the
developer who is proposing a large new industrial park PUD along
1 Audubon Road, indicated that their application fee for the PUD
rezoning alone was something along the order of $5,000-$6,000.
Upon further research, I concluded that the $750 application fee is
reasonable, but the $50 per acre surcharge is excessive to be
II h
%s" PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
1
I
Development Fee Schedule
August 22, 1991
Page 2
successful in convincing developers to use the PUD as often as we
believe to be appropriate. Furthermore, we note that we will be
' getting additional fees out of the PUD in the future. For example,
the PUD in question will also have to go through a subdivision
process which has a fee of $400 plus $15 per lot and in addition,
each building proposed will have to go through a site plan review.
I have also had an opportunity to review the newly updated
information provided by the Association of Metropolitan
Municipalities concerning Municipal License and Permit Fee surveys.
From this too, I have concluded that the $750 flat fee puts us in
an acceptable range for the PUD. I have included the data from
this survey on PUD applications. In all fairness; however, to
compare apples to apples, it must be noted that many of the cities
listed in this survey require the escrow of funds in addition to
the permit application fee. The escrowed funds as used to draw
down charges against staff time used to review the proposal so in
effect their actual fees are considerably higher.
To facilitate processing of the Ryan proposal, I have indicated to
them that we were willing to accept their application based solely
upon the $750 flat fee. I further indicated that revisions to the
fee schedule must be approved by the City Council and if this
approval is not gained, the balance of the fee would have to be
paid.
URECOMMENDATION
Staff believes that the $750 flat fee for the PUD application is
reasonable and it is recommended that it be approved.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Staff report dated January 9, 1991.
2. AMA survey.
I
1
I
II
IPLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
CITIES 0 - 2,500 FEES CITIES 10,000 - 20,000 FEES II
1 St. Francis Anoka 1,000 escrowed
Spring Park 100.00 Champlin _ Varies + escrow
II
Woodland NONE Chaska - varies
I Chanhassen
Columbia Heights 250.00 I
CITIES 2,500 - 10,000 Hastings N/A
I Hopkins 75.00
Mahtomedi II Arden Hills 100 + consult. Mounds View 50+deposit
Bayport 250.00 No. St. Paul 100.00
I- Oakdale 200+escrow
100
Circle Pines 100.00 Prior Lake +4/acre
II
Dayton NONE Ramsey
1 Deephaven N/A Robbinsdale 85 base fee
Falcon Heights 300.00 Shakopee PR-200+15/acre;FIN-100
II
Stillwater 250+escrow/fin/250+escrow
Mendota Heights 500.00 West St. Paul 250.00
Mound 200.00 II Orono 250 + 35/unit'
Osseo
I Rosemount 25 + per lot + 750 dep. .
St. Anthony NONE
St. Paul Park NONE
1 Savage 300+10/acre
Shorewood 650.00
Spring Lake Park SUP
Wayzata Concept/250;gen/250 ,-
I CITIES OVER 20,000 •
II
! Apple Valley 500.00 Golden Valley Prl/200;Gn/254;Ad/150
Blaine Plnd.Bus.Dist.-250 Inver Grove Hgts. 175.00
II
Bloomington 2500.00
1 Brooklyn Center 600.00 Maple Grove 200+5/lot or 20no res
Brooklyn Park 150+500 esc. Maplewood 328.00
Burnsville 700.00 Minneapolis 500.00
Coon Rapids Con/220;Pre/435;Res110/220Minnetonka 500.00
Cottage Grove 250.00 New Brighton 550.00
Eagan Crystal 150/request w Hope 500 + 250 dep.
I
9 Plymouth Prl/130/final/130
1 Eden Prairie Richfield 350.00
Edina 600.00 Roseville 750.00
II
Fridley 500/20units St. Louis Park 400.00 •
1 St. Paul
Shoreview 200+5/lot
II
South St. Paul N/F • -
Woodbury 300.00 •
I
II
11
I -82-
II
f-7
1
CITYOF -
1
Y\ .
\ _ 690 COULTER DRIVE • P.O. BOX 147 • CHANHASSEN, MINNESOTA 55317
I �'7 y; ' (612) 937-1900 • FAX (612) 937-5739
I A4.:.4, by CY.{ p?..;,,' 4,�,,.
MEMORANDUM /
E,,e, ._--.-K-- '",- ''''.`
TO: Don Ashworth, City Manager ' e+ !----
FROM: Paul Krauss, Planning Director . ,_ 1- .io-al
IIDATE: January 9, 1991
SUBJ: Development Fees -�- 1 - 1-1 - ii
N.
IBACKGROUND
II I have been made aware that it has been a period of at least five
years since the City has last re-evaluated it's schedule of
development fees. This list covers the charges we require for
II submittal with applications for development reviews, variances,
planning related actions and planning publications.
Re-evaluation of this schedule on a relatively constant basis
U should be undertaken to ensure that fees are consistent with those
being charged by similar communities elsewhere in the Twin Cities.
In addition, due to budgetary constraints that we are all familiar
II with, it may behoove the City to consider looking into having new
development pay the full cost of the city review procedure.
Traditionally, the Planning Department has operated from General
I Fund Revenues charging development review fees that are nominal and
do not approach covering the costs in staff time associated with
review of the proposal. This has been viewed in the past as having
a positive approach towards development in the community which is
1 certainly a worthy goal. On the other hand, it has resulted in
essentially having existing property owners in the city subsidize
the cost of reviewing new development. In this time of budgetary
II constraints, a number of communities are looking into alternatives
that would result in more accurately reflecting costs of
development on the applicant. A third reason for reviewing the fee
schedule is that as administrative procedures and ordinances are
IIrefined, there are new actions requiring fees such as the new
grading and mining ordinance, ir:‘ rim use permit ordinance,
administrative site plan review and involvement of the City
IIAttorney in filing of plats and other development approvals.
Our reviews of the fee structure are predicated upon the goal of
maintaining low cost access to the City for individual homeowners
II
1
Development Review Fee Schedule I
January 9, 1991
Page 2
and small property owners. Consequently, costs associated with
applications such as those which we normally review from these
individuals are proposed to be kept artificially low.
The following constitutes our recommendations for a revised fee
schedule for 1991.
ITEM 1 - DEVELOPMENT SIGNS 11
As the Council may recall, late last summer an ordinance was
approved requiring the posting of development signs on projects
undergoing rezoning, comprehensive plan amendment, site plan
review, conditional use permits, interim use permits or platting of
more than 3 lots. The purpose of this ordinance change was to
require the posting of signs that would help in notifying adjoining
property owners of development proposals being reviewed by the
city. Towards this end it would supplement the publication of
legal notices and mailings that are already undertaken. The City
Council decided that the signs should be acquired by the city and
rented to the applicant for a fee of $100 with a damage deposit of
an additional $100. Under the approved program, the applicant
would be responsible for obtaining the sign from the city,
installing it and returning it to the city at the completion of
action of the proposal. The Council authorized the acquisition of
20 signs to initiate the program. Staff ordered the signs and
related installation materials in December and expects to receive
them shortly. The signs read, "Proposed Development - This Site -
Contact the City of Chanhassen for Further Information" and are
white with a background of the City Maple Leaf logo.
The original fee structure was based on the assumption that the
signs would cost $200 each. Ultimately, we were able to procure
them for substantially less. The signs and related materials cost
$110 a piece. Therefore, we are recommending that a $50 rental fee
be required along with a $100 damage deposit that will be returned
when the sign is received back in good condition.
ITEM 2 - ADMINISTRATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW '
Last year the site plan review ordinance was amended to recognize
that staff may sometimes be in a position to approve limited
additions or modifications to site plans. These are extremely
limited in scope and do not represent new development on parcels.
An example of this would be the addition of pollution control
equipment on The Press Building and Instant Web and addition of .a
canopy and modified parking currently being reviewed for the
Chanhassen Dinner Theatre. Since this is a new item, no fee
structure has been established for it. Given the relatively small
amount of staff time involved in reviewing these items and
administering them, we believe the fee should be set at $100 per
I
Development Review Fee Schedule
January 9, 1991
Page 3
' application.
ITEM 3 - GRADING AND MINING
Last spring, the City adopted a new ordinance regulating all
grading, excavation and. mining activities within the city. The
scope of activities covered by this ordinance ranges from a
' homeowner who wishes to move more than 50 cubic yards of dirt to a
request to move several hundred thousand yards of clay for the Eden
Prairie Landfill. To undertake this work, staff has been relying
' on the fee schedule for these activities specified in the Uniform
Building Code. This has worked rather well except for the fact
that because the fees are not established in the City Fee
Structure, they have only been assessed as a part of an approval
and are not obtained as an up front cost with the submittal of the
application. The UBC fee schedule be established as outlined
below:
TABLE NO.70-B-GRADING PERMIT FEES
50 cubic yards or less $15.00
51 to 100 cubic yards $22.50
101 to 1000 cubic yards - $22.50 for the first 100 cubic yards plus $10.50 for each additional 100 cubic yards or fraction
thereof
' 1001 to 10,000 cubic yards -$117.00 for the first 1,000 cubic yards, plus$9.00 for each additional 1,000 cubic yards or fraction
thereof
10,001 to 100,000 cubic yards-$198.00 for the first 10,000 cubic yards,plus$40.50 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction
thereof
100,001 cubic yards or more-$562.50 for the first 100,000 cubic yards,plus$22.50 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards or fraction
I thereof
Other Inspections and Fees:
' 1. Inspections outside of normal business hours $30.00 per hour
(minimum charge-two hours)
2. Reinspection fees assesed under provisions of Section 305 $30.00 per hour
' 3. Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated $30.00 per hour
(minimum charge-one-half hour)
The grading fee schedule works well with applications for more than
100, 000 cubic yards that require approval of an interim use permit.
However, staff processes a large number of these applications for
' smaller amounts of material such as may be requested by a homeowner
or contractor undertaking a small job. For these we are
recommending that a $50 fee be established since we are not trying
I
I
I
Development Review Fee Schedule I
January 9, 1991
Page 4
to be punitive but are desiring to be in a position to work with - '
these individuals so that problems associated with their grading
activities may be avoided.
ITEM 4 - CITY ATTORNEY FEE STRUCTURE FOR FILING PLATS AND OTHER
DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS '
From time to time in the past, staff has outlined to the City
Council numerous problems that have developed due to our present
system of relying on the applicant to file plats, easements and
other development approvals. There have been numerous instances
where easements that were required as a part of the approval were
either omitted or incorrectly filed, where outlots that were to be
deeded to the city were not properly conveyed, where easements that
were expected were improperly drafted and .did not convey or meet
the city expectations. The city has attempted after the fact to
have conditions of approval filed against parcels unsuccessfully
only to find out that the property owner is now refusing to
cooperate or to provide the city with the required title
documentation. Most communities I am familiar with avoid these
problems entirely by controlling the process from start to finish.
What these communities do is require that the filing of all
documentation be handled by in-house staff so that reliance on the
applicant is omitted. A proposal on these lines has been discussed
with the Council and Planning Commission on several occasions and
is a goal that has been established for 1991. Staff has had
several meetings with the City Attorney to work out procedures that
would be applied and also to develop a fee schedule that hopefully
shifts the cost burden away from the small property owner or
homeowner as much as possible. The filing costs that are being
proposed in the attached memo from the City Attorney are not
entirely new costs for the applicant since they often have to pay
their own attorney to undertake the same work. We are confident
that handling matters in this manner will result in a more
efficient approval and documentation process and more effective
management of new development for the city. It should be noted
that this filing program is based upon the applicants having their
attorneys draft up accurate easement language and providing the
city with the required title documentation. Failure to undertake 11 these efforts will result in additional work effort by the City
Attorney which we anticipate billing back to the applicant.
ITEM 5 - INTERIM USE PERMIT i
The interim use permit ordinance is anew one that was approved in
1989. As you may recall, it was designed to provide for uses that
require special review and considerations such as conditional use
permits traditionally had done but are temporary in nature. For
example, horse stables in the RSF District are allowed as interim
I
I
Development Review Fee Schedule
January 9, 1991
Page 5
' use permits. There is no commensurate fee structure established
for interim use permits so staff simply started charging an
identical fee with the conditional use permit requirements. We are
recommending that this be the case and whatever fees are charged
for conditional use permits are also charged for interim use
' permits since they are quite similar in nature.
ITEM 6 - GENERAL FEE STRUCTURE
As was noted in the opening statements of this memo, costs
associated with development review have traditionally been born by
' the General Fund and therefore, by existing tax payers in the city.
Costs associated with development reviews include all those
functions of the Planning and Engineering Departments relative to
developing a project, taking it through the approval process and
ensuring that it is properly constructed and maintained. To a
certain extent, some of these costs are offset by excess revenue
generated by the Building Permit Fee Program but this is generally
' not taken into consideration. As budgetary constraints• grow on
local units of government, they are seeking new and innovative ways
to cover costs.
' Chanhassen has generally adopted a policy that new development is
intended to pay it's own way relative to hard capital costs
associated with supplying a development with new utilities and
' streets, etc. However, this has not been the case with staff time
associated with project reviews. Staff is aware that other
communities are considering methods to charge these costs back
' directly to the applicant for development proposals and undertook
an informal survey of a number of communities that have had similar
experiences. The communities that were contacted generally fall
into two groups. Those who undertake a traditional approach
' towards fee structure similar to what is already in place in
Chanhassen and those that have either raised their application fees
to recover costs or who require the escrow of funds by the
' applicant which are then drawn down by the city as costs are
incurred. Contacted communities that operate under the traditional
approach include:
' Apple Valley
Plymouth
Rosemount
I Fridley
Burnsville
11 Of those communities, Burnsville noted that they require payment
for all consultant fees relative to an application. Apple Valley
indicated that they had considered charging developers and thought
it was a worthy idea but that administratively the billing
1 •
I
Development Review Fee Schedule I
January 9, 1991
Page 6
procedures and verification procedures were too cumbersome.
Plymouth indicated that they had considered such a system in the
past but found it to be too cumbersome and have rather taken the
approach of trying to keep their fee structure current with
inflation. The City of Rosemount indicated that they charge out
for engineering staff and other consultant reviews since
engineering is undertaken by outside consultants in that community.
However, they also indicated that they are on the verge of
• undertaking an increased fee structure to cover costs. Fridley
indicated that only consultant fees are billed to developers. '
The communities that indicated that they have revised their fee
structure along the guidelines of having new development pay it's
own way include the cities of:
Eagan
Champlin '
Bloomington
Eden Prairie
Woodbury
Cottage Grove
Maple Grove
A summary of these communities' programs follow. Champlin requires I
the deposit of escrow fees in addition to application fees which
are drawn down as costs are incurred. For example, the escrow fee
for a 10 to 50 acre subdivision is $1000 which is in addition to
the $325 plus $10 per lot application fee. Site plan approvals are
$250 application fees plus a $300 escrow. We find that many of the
communities that undertake such fees handle them in a similar
manner. The City of Eagan charges back the costs of plats with an
escrow fee arrangement and consultant fees as well. Eagan has
considered charging for other types of review such as site plan
reviews and conditional use permits, however, it has not yet
embarked on a program to raise these fees. It should be noted that
Eagan has had problems with their fee program since their
accounting procedures were not up to the task. They essentially
wound up overspending the escrow deposits and then were unable to
collect from a number of developers. Since these funds had been
budgeted, the city wound up with a fairly significant shortfall in
revenues that they have thus far been unable to resolve. Eden
Prairie has raised their application fees to cover these costs.
The Community Development Director for the City of Cottage Grove
has indicated that he managed a program in Brooklyn Park in a prior
job that required the escrow of funds to cover costs.. In Cottage
Grove they are requiring the escrow of funds for platting as well
as an increase in permit application fees for other planning
functions. Maple Grove requires, for example, a $250 fee plus $5
per lot cash deposit to be applied for staff review expenses
relative to preliminary platting. An escrow for attorney fees and
I
I
11 Development Review Fee Schedule
January 9, 1991
Page 7
engineering expenses is also required. The City of Woodbury has
established a fairly straight forward program where they require
the payment of an initial application fee and then have sliding
formulas for the creation of an escrow fund to cover staff
expenses. Plats, lot divisions, site plans, conditional use
permits and other requests are all charged back to the applicant.
Of the cities that responded positively to this survey, the City of
Bloomington provided the most interesting information. They
' indicated that they had investigated the potential of requiring the
escrow of funds but ultimately went with a program of raising
application fees to cover the application process and costs. They
appear to have taken this approach due to the cost and complexity
associated with developing escrow funds and administering them.
They provided a calculation of 1988 department revenues relative to
proposed revenues when the new fee schedule is adopted. They
' experienced a 290% increase in fees from $25, 000 per year to
$98, 000 per year. The Bloomington fee structure, for example,
establishes a $500 charge for conditional use permits, plats cost
$300 plus $50 per lot for single family subdivisions and final
plats being $250 plus $10 per lot, thus the total charge is
equivalent of $550 plus $60 per lot. PUD costs are $2,500.
' Based upon the foregoing information and my personal discussions
with the planners of these communities, I believe that our fee
structure is in need of being overhauled. The amounts we charge
' are apparently low when compared with other communities and do not
even attempt to cover our costs. However, I am reluctant to
suggest a program that relies on the depositing of escrow funds.
' Most of the communities that utilize this approach have had
difficulties relative to administering the escrow funds. I know
that having worked with our Accounting Department in Chanhassen
that we are already taxing their time and capabilities to keep
' track of bonds, letter of credits and other financial guarantees
required with applications already and am reluctant to burden them
further. I believe that the Bloomington approach has considerable
' merit and have accordingly developed a revised fee structure for
those applications that hopefully reflects costs to a greater
extent then is currently the case. In keeping with prior city
' policies, fees for applications that would normally be received
from a homeowner are not proposed to be significantly altered. It
is hoped that by keeping fees for variances, grading permits for
small amounts of material and small plats to a minimum, the city
can keep these procedures available at moderate costs to our
residents.
' ITEM 7 - PUBLICATIONS, MAPS AND COPYING
Costs for provision of these materials should be provided in the
approved fee structure. In the interest of making this information
I
Development Review Fee Schedule I
January 9, 1991
Page 8
as available as possible, we are not proposing that the city make - II
any money for the materials but rather simply attempt to cover our
' costs in reproducing the materials.
I
COMPARISON OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE
•
- EXISTING PROPOSED II
Zoning Ordinance
• 1. Rezoning $250 $500
I
2. Planned Unit Development
a. Concept Plan $200 $750 + $50/acre
111
for combined application
includes a.,b.&c.
b. Preliminary Develop.
Plan $300 + $15/acre Included in one time fee
I
c. Anal Develop. Plan $200 Included in one time fee
d. Amendment $300 + $15/acre a. Minor Amendment-$100 I
b. Major Amendment-Same As PUD
Fee Above
3. Variance&Appeal $75 $75 1
4. Conditional Use Permit $150
a. RSF uses a. $75 I
b. All others b. $400
5. Interim Use Permit N/A
a. Residential Districts a. $75 I
b. All Other Districts P. $400
6. Site Plan Review $150 $250 + $10 per 1000 sq.ft.of building
' area for commercial and
I
industrial districts +
$5 per dwelling unit in
residential districts
7. Administrative Site Plan N/A $100
I
8. Comprehensive Plan Amendment $100 $5001$100 Minor MUSA line for
failing on-site sewers
I
9. Wetland Alteration Permit
a. Single Family Residence $25 $75 _ I
b. All other uses $150 $200 .
10. Zoning Ordinance Amendment $0 $0
Il
11. Sign Permit
a. Temporary $25 $35
I
I Development Review Fee Schedule
January 9, 1991
Page 9
Ib. Permanent $25 $50
I 12. Sign Plan Review N/A $150 9
(if separate from site plan)
13. Zoning Appeal $75 $0*Staff does not believe there should
be a charge to appeal our
I
interpretation
14. Notification Signs N/A $50 rental
$100 damage deposit
ISubdivision Ordinance
1. Create less than 3 lots $100 $150
1 2. Create over 3 lots $100 + 5/lot $400 + $15/lot
3. Final Plat $100 Included in one time fee
1 4. Metes and Bounds Division' $100 $150 + $50/lot over 3 lots
5. Consolidate lots $100 $100
I6. Vacation of ROW/Easements $100 $100
Building and Building Regulations
I1. Grading Permits N/A* a.Under 50 cubic yards-$0
Use Uniform Building Code fee b.50-1000 cubic yards-$50
schedule but not fees officially
I established c.Over 1000 cubic yards-processed
as IUP-use UBC
Filing Fees/Attorney Costs
1 1. Recording Documents N/A $10 + County Fees
2. Recording Plats& Related Documents
l a. 1-3 lots N/A
N/A $100 + County Fee
b. 4 10 lots $125 + County Fee
c. 11-30 lots N/A $200 + County Fee
d. 31+ lots N/A $350 + County Fee
I3. Attorney's time to ensure N/A Cost billed back to applicant
proper drafting &documentation
I Consultant Fees
•
1. Consultants required by the City to
review development proposal
I including but not limited to traffic
and water management issues N/A Cost based upon prior written
proposal and agreement. Fees
• placed in escrow..
I
I
I
I
Development Review Fee Schedule I
January 9, 1991
Page 10
•
Publicatlons/Documents
1. Zoning Ordinance Fees not $20
2. Selected ordinr,ce sections established $0
3. Comprehensive Plan Document $35
4. Zoning Map $3
5. Land Use Plan Map $3
6. City Maps $3
7. Aerial Topography-Half-section Maps $12.50/acre
8. Photocopies $ .20/page
1
STAFF RECOMMENDATION I
Based upon the foregoing discussion, staff recommends that the
City Council adopt the following fee structure.
Zoning Ordinance ,
1. Rezoning $500
2. Planned Unit Development
a. Concept Plan $750 + $50/acre for combined application
includes a.,b.&c.
b. Preliminary Develop.
Plan Included in one time fee '
c. Final Develop. Plan Included in one time fee
d. Amendment a. Minor Amendment-$100
b. Major Amendment-Same As PUD
Fee Above
3. Variance&Appeal $75
4. Conditional Use Permit
a. RSF uses a. $75
b. All others b. $400
5. Interim Use Permit
a. Residential Districts a. $75
b. All Other Districts b. $400
6. Site Plan Review $250 + $10 per 1000 sq.ft.of building
area for commercial and industrial districts +
$5 per dwelling unit in residential districts
7. Administrative Site Plan $100
8. Comprehensive Plan Amendment $500/$100 Minor MUSA line for
failing on-site sewers
i
I
I Development Review Fee Schedule
January 9, 1991
Page 11
1 9. Wetland Alteration Permit -
a. Single Family Residence $75
Ib. All other uses $200
10. Zoning Ordinance Amendment $0
11. Sign Permit
a. Temporary $35 -
b. Permanent $50
I12. Sign Plan Review $150
(if separate from site plan)
I 13. Zoning Appeal $0*Staff does not believe there should
be a charge to appeal our
interpretation
I 14. Notification Signs $50 rental
$100 damage deposit
Subdivision Ordinance
I1. Create less than 3 lots $150
2. Create over 3 lots $400 + $15/lot
3. Final Plat Included in one time fee
4. Metes and Bounds Division $150 + $50/lot over 3 lots
I5. Consolidate lots $100
6. Vacation of ROW/Easements $100
Building and Building Regulations
1. Grading Permits a. Under 50 cubic yards-$0
Ib.50-1000 cubic yards-$50
c.Over 1000 cubic yards-processed .
as IUP-use UBC
IFiling Fees/Attorney Costs
1. Recording Documents $10 + County Fees
2. Recording Plats& Related Documents
a. 1-3 lots $100 + County Fee
b. 4-10 lots $125 + County Fee
I c. 11-30 lots
d. 31+ lots $200 + County Fee
$350 + County Fee
I 3. Attorney's time to ensure Cot billed back to applicant
proper drafting &documentation
I
I
Development Review Fee Schedule I
January 9, 1991
Page 12
Consultant Fees
1. Consultants required by the City to
review development proposals
including but r ,t limited to traffic
and water management issues Cost based upon prior written
proposal and agreement. Fees
placed in escrow.
Publications/Documents
1. Zoning Ordinance $20
2. Selected ordinance sections $0
3. Comprehensive Plan Document $35
4. Zoning Map $3
5. Land Use Plan Map $3
6. City Maps $3
7. Aerial Topography-Half-section Maps $12.50/acre
8. Photocopies $ .20/page
ATTACHMENTS
1. Letter from City Attorney dated December 28, 1990. 1
2 . Returned surveys from communities that attempt to cover
staff costs associated with development review.
3 . Returned surveys from communities that do not charge
developers for relatd staff costs.
1
1
STATUTORY FEES (AUGUST 1, 1991)
I CARVER COUNTY RECORDER
AND
REGISTRAR OF TITLES
ABSTRACT DEPARTMENT:
IRecord any deed or other document $1.00 each page minimum of $15.00
' Certified copies of any records or papers $1.00 each page minimum of $5.00
Plat filing $.50 each lot minimum $30.00
1 Plat copies $9.50 plus $.50 for certification (see non-statutory
fees)
' Condominium floor plan or plat filing $.50 each apartment minimum of$30.00
Condominium floor plan or plat copies $1.00 each page minimum of $10.00
IMultiple filing fees $10.00 per document listed
Well Disclosure Certificate $10.00 per certificate
TORRENS DEPARTMENT
IOriginal (first issued) certificate of title $30.00
Transfer of fee simple title for which new certificate of $30.00
Ititle is issued
For entry of each new memorial on certificate of title $15.00
IIssuing mortgagee's or lessee's duplicate $10.00
' Issuing residue certificate $20.00
Exchange certificates $10.00 for each cancelled and $10.00 for each new
certificate
ICertificate showing condition of the register $10.00
1 Certified copies of any Instrument or writing $1.00 each page minimum of $5.00
Plat filing $30.00
Registered Land Survey filing $30.00
Certified copy of Registered Land Survey $10.00
IFiling Condominium plat or an amendment In $30.00
•
accordance with chapter 515 •
IFiling Condominium declaration and plat or $10.00 for each certificate and $30.00 for the plat or
amendment in accordance with chapter 515A amendment
ICopy of Condominium plat filed pursuant to chapters $1.00 for each page of the plat with a minimum fee of
515 and 515A $10.00
Well Disclosure Certificate $10.00 per certificate
I
CITY OF CHANHASSEN
690 COULTER DRIVE
CHANHASSEN, MN 55317
(612) 937-1900 1
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION
APPLICANT: OWNER:
ADDRESS: ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE (Day time) TELEPHONE:
1. Comprehensive Plan Amendment 11. Subdivision
2. Conditional Use Permit 12. Vacation of ROW/Easements
3. Grading/Excavation Permit 13. Variance
4. Interim Use Permit • 14. Wetland Alteration Permit 1
5. Notification Signs 15. Zoning Appeal
.1
6. Planned Unit Development 16. Zoning Ordinance Amendment
7. Rezoning 17. Filing Fees/Attorney Cost
8. Sign Permits 18. Consultant Fees 1
9. Sign Plan Review 1
10. Site Plan Review TOTAL FEE $
I
{
A list of all property owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property must
•
included with the application.
Twenty-six full size folded copies of the plans must be submitted. 1
81" X 11" Reduced copy of transparency for each plan sheet. 1
NOTE -When multiple applications are processed, the appropriate fee shall be charged for each application.
1
I
PROJECT NAME
LOCATION
LEGAL DESCRIPTION - -
I
•
1
PRESENT ZONING
IREQUESTED ZONING
PRESENT LAND USE DESIGNATION
IREQUESTED LAND USE DESIGNATION
REASON FOR THIS REQUEST
This application must be completed in full and be typewritten or clearly printed and must be accompanied by all information
and plans required by applicable City Ordinance provisions. Before filing this application, you should confer with the
Planning Department to determine the specific ordinance and procedural requirements applicable to your application.
IThis is to certify that I am making application for the described action by the City and that I am responsible for complying
with all City requirements with regard to this request. This application should be processed in my name and I am the party
I whom the City should contact regarding any matter pertaining to this application. I have attached a copy of proof of
ownership (either copy of Owner's Duplicate Certificate of Title, Abstract of Title or purchase agreement), or I am the
authorized person to make this application and the fee owner has also signed this application.
II will keep myself informed of the deadlines for submission of material and the progress of this application. I further
understand that additional fees may be charged for consulting fees, feasibility studies, etc. with an estimate prior to any
authorization to proceed with the study. The documents and information I have submitted are true and correct to the best
Uof my knowledge.
I also understand that after the approval or granting of the permit, such permits shall be invalid unless they are recorded
against the title to the property for which the approval/permit is granted within 120 days with the Carver County Recorder's
Office and the original document returned to City Hall Records.
Signature of Applicant Date
Signature of Fee Owner Date
Application Received on Fee Paid Receipt No.
1. This application will be considered by the Planning Commission/Board of Adjustments and Appeals on
1
I
DEVELOPMENT FEE SCHEDULE I
. Comprehensive Plan Amendment -
a. $500
b. $100 Minor MUSA line for failing on-site sewers r
2. Conditional Use Permit
a. RSF uses - $75
. b. All others - $400
3. Grading Permits I
a. Under 50 cubic yards $0
b. 50-1000 cubic yards $50
c. Over 1000 cubic yards - processed
as IUP-use UBC
4. Interim Use Permit
a. RSF uses - $75
b. All Others - $400
5. Notification Signs
$50 rental
$100 damage deposit
6. Planned Unit Development '
a. Concept Plan $750 + $50/acre for combined application
includes a., b. & c.
b. Preliminary Development
Plan
c. Final Development Plan
d. Amendment
Minor Amendment- $100
Major Amendment - Same As PUD
7. Rezoning - $500 '
8. Sign Permit
a. Temporary - $35
b. Permanent - $50
9. Sign Plan Review $150 '
(if separate from site plan)
1
1
I
10. Site Plan Review
a. $250 + $10 per 1000 sq.ft. of building
' area for commercial and industrial districts + $5 per dwelling unit in residential districts
b. Administrative Site Plan $100 -
' 11. Subdivision Ordinance
a. Create less than 3 lots $150
b. Create over 3 lots - $400 + $15/lot
c. Final Plat - Included in one time fee
d. Metes and Bounds Division $150 + $50/lot over 3 lots
e. Consolidate lots - $100
12. Vacation of ROW/Easements $100
13. Variance - $75
• ' 14. Wetland Alteration Permit
a. Single Family Residence - $75
b. All other uses - $200
15. Zoning Appeal - $0
' 16. Zoning Ordinance Amendment - $0
17. Filing Fees/Attorney Costs
' a. Recording Documents $10 + County Fees
b. Recording Plats & Related Documents
' 1) 1-3 lots
2) 4-10 lots $100 + County Fee
$125 + County Fee
3) 11-30 lots $200 + County Fee
4) 31+ lots $350 + County Fee
Attorney's time to ensure Cost billed back to applicant
proper drafting & documentation
18. Consultant Fees
' Consultants required by the Cost based upon prior written
City to review development proposal and agreement. Fees
' proposals including but not placed in escrow.
limited to traffic and water
management issues
I
NON-STATUTORY FEES (AUGUST 1, 1991)
CARVER COUNTY RECORDER
AND
REGISTRAR OF TITLES '
1
Copy of document (customer researches and makes $.25 per page
copies)
Copy of document (staff researches and makes $1.00 per page
copies)
Computer reports $1.00 per page
Duplicate recording information $.50
Attested copies $1.00 per page minimum of$5.00 1
Plat and Registered Land Survey copies $ 2.00 per page for a non-certified xerox portion of a
Plat or RLS I
$ 5.00 per Plat or RLS for a scaled, non-certified copy
$10.00 per Plat or RLS for a scaled, certified copy
FAX copies $5.00 plus cost of copies I
Certified Mail charge $3.00
Microfilm card duplicates $.10 per card ,
Tax lien search by phone $2.00 per name
Uniform Commercial Code search by phone $2.00 per name '
Lot size search by phone $2.00 per lot '
Tract index search by phone $5.00 per parcel
Deposit of papers pursuant to M.S. 600.23 $100.00 per person per year 1
Geneology searches $15.00 per search plus cost of copies
•
1
1