HomeMy WebLinkAboutPH - Fee Schedule Revision (8/23/82) 1 kw
Renton City Council
August �3? 19.82
Page 2
Public Meeting continued
1983i89 Capital Mayor Shinpoch noted that no sources of income for these projects
Improvement exist at the present time (except for current funding on Shop) ;
Program and should funds become available, no project will progress without
first being reviewed by Council .
Audience Versie Vaupel , 400 Cedar Avenue South, questioned the use of "CBD"
Comment (Central Business District) in connection with sewer replacements
for North and South Renton residential areas. Policy Development
Director Clemens explained the report was prepared using CBD in
terms of the original Renton area rather than meaning specifically
the commercial area. Mrs. Vaupel made inquiries regarding replace-
ment of sewer/water lines in the Central Business District and funding
for these projects, noting that improvements should be paid for as
they are used and those benefiting from such improvements should be
liable for payment.
continued Councilman Reed questioned the cost listed for construction of Fire
Station 14 in Kennydale of $550,000 versus the million dollar figure
discussed during the Port Quendall hearings. Policy Development
Director Clemens explained the $550,000 represented ground and facility
only and, should the facility become a reality, it would be decided
what percentage of the additional cost of trucks and/or building would
become the responsibility of Port Quendall developers. Councilman Reed
noted the Supporting Factors of this project listed 3500 existing resi-
dents would be served and 2000 new residents were anticipated in the
Port Quendall project, and this should be considered when costs for
this project are discussed. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL,
Council advance to the next order of business. Motion failed. MOVED
BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL ACCEPT THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT
PROGRAM AS PRESENTED WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE DESIGNATION OF
CBD WILL BE CHANGED TO THE COMMERCIAL AREA. CARRIED.
PUBLIC MEETING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and
Fee Schedule published according to law, Mayor Shinpoch opened the public meeting
Revision - to consider revision of the fee schedule regarding increase of zoning
Increase in and subdivision filing fees. Policy Development Director Clemens gave
Zoning/Sub- a brief basis for the request for filing fee increases, noting building
division Fees permit fees remain unchanged. Clemens compared Renton fees to adjacent
jurisdictions and urged review of filing fees for appeals and variance
applications.
Audience Del Bennett, 18004 SE 147th, requested Council have a staff survey of
Comment individual zoning and subdivision application requests (rezones, re-
. plats - industrial and residential , etc.) to determine actual costs
involved and increase fees on a type of application basis rather than
an across-the-board increase. Mr. Bennett also encouraged Council to
study King County' s fee schedule and processing procedure.
Steve Eastman, 317 Powell Avenue SW, stated all fees required to
make a change of any kind should be charged to the person making that
change.
Delores Newlands, 1668 Lake Youngs Way, inquired regarding the fee
schedule for vacation applications.
MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY HUGHES, SUBJECT MATTER OF ZONING AND
SUBDIVISION FILING FEES BE RETURNED TO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
Ff� COMMITTEE FOR RECOMMENDATION. Councilman Clymer recommended that
developers assume more responsibility for adherence to ordinance
requirements. Councilman Rockhill requested Council notify the
Planning and Development Committee of their views regarding how
much, if any, the general public should defray the cost of applica-
tion fees. MOTION CARRIED.
AUDIENCE Sanford E. Webb, 430 Mill Avenue South, objected to any change to the
COMMENT Board of Ethics in either its composition or function. Mayor Shinpoch
Board of Ethics explained that her recommendation to the Committee of the Whole on
8/12/82 has been reviewed and a meeting has been scheduled in the near
future with the Board of Ethics.
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
Regular Meeting
August 23 , 1982 Municipal Building
Monday , 8 : 00 P . M . Council Chambers
MINUTES
CALL TO ORDER Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag
and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order.
ROLL CALL OF EARL CLYMER, Council President, ROBERT J. HUGHES, RANDALL ROCKHILL,
COUNCIL MEMBERS RICHARD M. STREDICKE, JOHN W. REED, NANCY L. MATHEWS AND THOMAS W.
TRIMM.
CITY STAFF BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; DANIEL KELLOGG, Assistant City Attorney;
IN ATTENDANCE MICHAEL PARNESS, Administrative Assistant; MAXINE E. MOTOR, Acting
City Clerk; DAVID CLEMENS, Policy Development Director; RICHARD
HOUGHTON, Public Works Director; MICHAEL MULCAHY, Finance Director;
LT. DONALD PERSSON, Police Department; ED HAYDUK, Housing and Community
Development Coordinator.
PRESS Deeann Glamser, Renton Record Chronicle
MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, MINUTES. OF AUGUST 16, 1982 BE
APPROVED AS PRESENTED. CARRIED.
CONTINUED This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and
PUBLIC HEARING published according to law, Mayor Shinpoch opened the public hearing
Jackson to consider annexation of a portion of proposed Cypress Point Multiple
Annexation Family Development, an area of approximately 3.34 acres east of Fred
A-01-82 Nelson Middle School and north of Southeast 162nd Street (Jackson
Annexation File 0-01-82) . Policy Development Director Clemens re-
quested, on behalf of the applicant, the public hearing be closed
at this time and the application be held for re-advertising at a
future date. Applicant to pay city 's actual cost for re-advertising
and re-opening this public hearing. There being no audience comment
on this hearing, it was MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL
CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED.
PUBLIC MEETING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and
1983-89 Capital published according to law, Mayor Shinpoch opened the public meeting
Improvement to consider the 1983-89 Capital Improvement Program. Policy Develop-
Program ment Director Clemens reviewed the program.
MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION - 1983-89 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Priority Project Description and Location
1 Maintenance Shop Facilities (Adjacent to County Shops)
2 Heather Downs Park Acquisition
3 Renton High School Field Reconstruction
4 Main Public Library Addition and Renovation
5 Cedar River Park Community Center
6 North Third Street and Sunset Boulevard Intersection
Improvements
7 South Seventh Street and Rainier Avenue South Inter-
section Improvements
8 Construct Fire Station #14 in Kennydale
9 Old Shop Site Redevelopment
10 Entry Point Street Enhancement
11 Street Lighting Modification in the CBD
12 Senior Housing and Pedestrian Corridor
13 Signal Controller Modernizations
14 Relocation of Fire Station #12 in Highlands
15 Sierra Heights/Glencoe Park Acquisition
For.Use By City Clerk's Office Only
A. I . #
AGENDA ITEM
RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING
SUBMITTING
Dept./Div./Bd./Comm. City Clerk For Agenda Of 8/23/82
' (Meeting Date)
Staff Contact Maxine Motor
(Name) Agenda Status:
SUBJECT: Public Meeting - Revision Consent
� Public
of Fee Schedule - Increase in Zoning
Correspondence
and Subdivision Filing Fees
Ordinance/Resolution
Old Business
Exhibits: (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc.)Attach New Business
Study Session
A. Proposed Planning and Development Other
B. Committee Report
C. Memo from Policy Development DirectorApproval :
Legal Dept. Yes No N/A
COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMENDED: Determine Finance Dept. Yes_ No. N/A_
Other Clearance
whether Ito accept proposed fee
schedule revisions
FISCAL IMPACT:
ExpenditurelRequired $ Amount $ Appropriation-
Budgeted Transfer Required
SUMMARY (Background information, prior action and effect of implementation)
(Attach additional pages if necessary.)
Public Meeting to consider analysis of cost of processing zoning and sub-
division applications with recommendations revising the fee structure to
be commensurate with the city' s cost of providing these services.
PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED:
SUBMIT THIS COPY TO CITY CLERK BY NOON ON THURSDAY WITH DOCUMENTATION.
Renton City Council
August 9, 1982
Page 3 -
Correspondeice and Current Business continued
Second-hand Letter from Doug and Helen Beth Betts, Doug's Shooter's Supplies,
Firearms 217 Wells Avenue South, and Holger Ingoldby, H&J Leather & Firearms,
Licensing 224 Wells Avenue South, requested reconsideration of ordinance requiring
two business licenses for second-hand firearms dealers and lack of en-
forcement for other second-hand dealers. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY
HUGHES, THIS CORRESPONDENCE BE REFERRED TO THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE.
CARRIED.
OLD BUSINESS
Aviation Aviation Committee Chairman Trimm presented a committee report recommend-
Committee ing Council approve the following priority order for Airport Capital
1983-88 Airport Improvement Projects (1983-88) : 1 . Water main - upgrading of southwest
Capital Improve- corner. 2. Water main - completion of loop system. 3. Instrument
ment Projects Landing System (ILS) . MOVED BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL
CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE AVIATION COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
Block Party Councilman Stredicke questioned whether the matter of the Dayton Court
Approval 1 NE cul-de-sac block party could be considered by the Transportation
Committee and reported back to Council by the 8/21/82 party date. MOVED
BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL, ITEM 6f ON THE CONSENT AGENDA BE RE-
WORDED THAT COUNCIL APPROVES THIS BLOCK PARTY SUBJECT TO APPROVAL OF THE
POLICE DEPARTMENT. CARRIED.
Planning and Planning and Development Committee Chairman Rockhill presented committee
Development report recommending the proposed revisions and amendments to the Zoning
Committee and Other Land Development Codes regarding storage areas as submitted by
Storage Area the Building, Zoning and Policy Development Departments be referred to
Changes to the Ways and Means Committee for proper legislation. Recommended revisicr,
Zoning/Other Land include clarifying the definition of 'bulk storage' uses, creating a defi -
Development nition for 'outside storage' , providing screen and surfacing requirements
Codes for 'outside storage' , correcting procedural discrepancies in the Bulk
Storage Ordinance, amending the definition of 'parking lot' under Parking
and Loading Ordinance, adopting a definition for 'storage lot' in the
Parking and Loading Ordinance, and establishing screening and surfacing
requirements in the Parking and Loading Ordinance for 'storage lots' .
MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL CONCUR IN RECOMMENDATION
OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
Zoning and Planning and Development Committee Chairman Rockhill requested a public
Subdivision meeting be set for 8/23/82 to obtain public input regarding revisions
Filing Fee to the zoning and subdivision filing fees to more adequately reflect the
Change City's true cost for providing this service. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED
BY HUGHES, SET PUBLIC MEETING ON 8/23/82 FOR PUBLIC INPUT ON THE MATTER
OF INCREASED FEES. CARRIED. Councilman Rockhill noted that copies of
the proposed fee changes would be available.
Public Safety Public Safety Committee Chairman Hughes gave an informal committee report
Committee stating that the matter of collecting delinquent parking fines had been
Delinquent discussed with Chief of Police Wallis. Chief Wallis reported he has been
Parking Fines using volunteers from the police college and the program has been pro-
gressing well . He is also considering using officers on disability to
help in this problem.
Silent Witness Public Safety Committee Chairman Hughes also noted that the Silent Witness
Program Program had been discussed with Chief Wallis. This program was started
in 1972 as the Citizens' Council Against Crime and offers cash rewards
to citizens providing information leading to the arrest of people involved
in violent crime. Councilman Hughes explained that no Council action was
required; this is informational only.
Renton City Council
August 9, 1982
Page 2
Consent Agenda continued
Garbage Request from Rainier Disposal to include a garbage collection information
Collection sheet in the next monthly utility billing. This information sheet compile'
Information with ordinances and has the concurrence of the Public Works Director.
Sheet Council concur.
Block Party Request from residents of Dayton Court NE cul-de-sac to close off cul-de-
Request sac on 8/21/82 from approximately 3:00 p.m. until 9:00 p.m. for a block
party. Refer to Police Department and Transportation Committee.***See
item 3, page 3: Council approve this block party subject to the approval
of the Police Department.
Municipal Report from Mike Parness, Administrative Assistant, noted Municipal Court
Court revenues for 1982 are anticipated to exceed budget estimate by approxi-
Appropriation mately $80,000. Due to increased workload, an additional $11 ,500 has
been requested to provide for overtime and operational costs for remainder
of 1982. Refer to Ways and Means Committee for recommendation.
Appeal - Appeal has been filed by Loren Davis of Holvick deRegt Koering of the
Holvick Hearing Examiner' s Decision of 7/16/82 for approval with conditions of
deRegt Koering site plan approval for construction of five one-story buildings to be
SA 095-81 used as a business park or light warehousing; also requested a variance
to permit joint access driveways on common property lines. SA 095-81/
V 014-82 (North side of Powell Avenue SW at SW Seventh Street) . Refer
to Planning and Development Committee.
Appeal - Appeal has been filed by Loren Davis of Holvick deRegt Koering of the
Holvick Hearing Examiner's Decision of 7/15/82 for approval with conditions of
deRegt Koering site plan approval for construction of four one-story buildings to be
SA 094-81 used as business park or light warehousing; also requested a variance
to permit joint access driveways on common proeprty lines. SA 094-81/
V 014-82 (Southwest corner of Powell Avenue SW and SW Seventh Street) .
Refer to Planning and Development Committee.
Mike Mastro Report from Land Use Hearing Examiner regarding Mike Mastro (R.W. Poitras
(R.W. Poitras) Final Plat, File FP-093-81 , stating appeal period for this recommendation
Final Plat expired on 7/28/82 and the matter is now forwarded to Council for review.
FP 093-81 Refer to Ways and Means Committee for resolution.
LID 314 Finance Department recommended acceptance of low bid for interim financin'
Interim of LID 314 (street improvements, sanitary sewers, water mains, fire hy-
Financing drants and all associated improvements in the vicinity of SW 16th Street
from Lind Avenue SW to East Valley Road and East Valley Road from SW
16th Street to SW 41st Street) in the amount of $4,886,538.56 from
Peoples National Bank. Council concur and refer to Ways and Means
Committee.
Consent Agenda MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY TRIMM, COUNCIL ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS
Approved PRESENTED. CARRIED.
CORRESPONDENCE AND CURRENT BUSINESS
Executive Council President Clymer announced that Council would meet in executive
Session session following this meeting to discuss pending legal matters.
Pipeline Letter from Lawrence S. Braund, P.E. , JohnsonBraund Design Group P.S. ,
Right-of-Way Inc. , requested review of existing use of City of Seattle pipeline right-
Usage Review of-way between 304 Main Avenue South and Houser Way easterly to Mill
Avenue South. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL, THIS CORRESPONDENCE
BE REFERRED TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE WITH A REMINDER OF THE`CITY' S
•
FISCAL SITUATION. CARRIED.
PLANNING AND DEIIELOPII34T COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE REPORT
August 6, 1982
REVISIONS TO ZONING AND SUBDIVISION FILING FEES
The Planning and Development Committee has reviewed the recommendations of the Adminis-
tration regarding revisions to the zoning and subdivision filing fees. The attached memorandum
of August 3, 1982, from the Policy Development Director describes the Administration's recom-
mendation with regards to this matter.
After due consideration of the recommendations, the Committee preliminarily recommends the
adoption of the revised fee schedule subject to public comment and review at a public meeting •
which should be held on August 23, 1982. Subject to public comment, the only revision the
Committee suggests in the proposed fee schedule is establishing the filing fee for appeals of
Hearing Examiner decisions or appeals of administrative or environmental decisions be revised
to $75 rather than the Administration's recommendation of $125.
Therefore, the Planning and Development Committee recommends that a public meeting be
held on [August 23, 1982, to consider the Administration's proposal for increasing the fee
schedules for zoning and subdivision filing fees to more adequately reflect the City's true cost
for providing this service.
Randy Rockhili, Chairman
John Reed
Robert Hughes
•
OF RE'�
THE CITY OF RENTON
u 6 ® Z
POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 235-2552
G MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON.WASH. NOSE
MEM
9 �P August 3, 1982
TE° SEI2 °'
BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH
MAYOR MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Development Committee
FROM: David R. Clemens, Policy Development Director
RE: REVISIONS TO ZONING AND SUBDIVISION FILING FEES
At the Mayor's request, the Policy Development Department has undertaken a
detailedIstudy of the cost of processing Zoning and Subdivision applications.
The initial phase of the study focused solely on the costs directly
associated with the Planning staff members (including clerical support). We
have now expanded that review to include the following Departments:
Building (inspection)
Fire Marshal
Parks and Recreation
Police
Public Works- Engineering, Traffic Engineering, and Utilities
As discussed in my memo of July 16th to the Mayor, and attached to the
agenda bill for your review, our initial findings concluded that doubling
the base filing fee would cover the cost of the "planning staff" review
of the current applications. However, including all of the additional
Departments listed above has shown that the City's actual cost is approximately
three (3) times our current revenue.
The issue is relatively simple, too what extent should the general public
defray the cost of development application review by the City? Should
new development pay for its full cost of processing? In reviewing the
current application structure, approximately one-half of the total fee
is comprised of a fixed base fee. In comparing the City's fee structure
with other agencies, we a well below some, and comparable to others, but
in general , about one-third to one-half of the average.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based upon the analysis we have just completed, it is recommended that the
Fee Schedule Ordinance be revised by increasing the base filing fee for
most applications, and adopting a filing fee for administrative appeal
appl icati'ons.
attachment: Fee Schedule Ordinance proposal
cc: Mayor Shinpoch
Mike. Parness, Administrative Assistant
Mike' Mulcahy, Finance Director
r
• 1-4101 1-4101
CHAPTER 41
FEE SCHEDULE
SECTION:
1-4101: Fee Schedule Adopted
1-41101: FEE SCHEDULE ADOPTED: There is hereby adopted as the Fee
Schedule for the City, Title IV (Building Regulations) and Title IX
(Public Ways and Property) the following:
FEE SCHEDULE •
Type of Application Fee Code Section
Appeal]of Hearing Examiner's
Decision or administra- $ 75 4-25:99- 4-3016
tive or environmental decisions
Rezone $300 $+O0 99 plus $10.00 per acre 4-722 (H)
Special, Permit/Temporary
Permit/Conditional Permit $300 3t9066 plus $10.00 per acre 4-722(H)
Site Approval $300 St6O160 plus $5.00 per acre 4-722(H)
Comprehensive Plan
Amendment $450 415099
Waiver $150 4-50:96 9-1105 6(B)
Open Space $ 30.00 set by RCW RCW
• $50,000.00
Shoreline Management S100 S-50 06 if value less than 44%000.00
00
$150.00 if value from $50,000.00 to
$100,000.00 •
$200.00 plus .01% of value over
$100,000.00
Grading and Filling Permits $300 $100:99 plus $25.00 per acre 4-722(H)
I '
•
•
cM �
•
f
1-4101 1-4101
Type of Application Fee Code Section j
Plats:
Short Plat, Residential $300 .125-90
1 Commercial/Industrial $ 75 $46.00 plus $1.00 per 1,000 swore
Tentative Plat feet (not less than $75:60) $175 9-1105 1
$150 $-50:96 plus $2.00 per acre 9-1106 1(A)
Preliminary $300 $l00 6Gplus $8.00 per lot 9-1106 2(A)
Preliminary Industrial $600 $200410-plus $1.00 per 1,000 square
feet of land area 9-1106 2(A)
Final $225 0-75:0O-plus $4.00 per lot 9-1106 3(8)
'Final Industrial $375 $1-25:00-plus $10.00 per acre 9-1106 3(B)
Environmental Impact Review No change, recently revised
!Environmental Checklist $ 55.00 if value less than $10,000.00
Review/Threshold Determination $ 60.00 plus $1.00 per $10,000.00 if
value greater than $10,000.00 4-2814
Pre-Draft Consultation Report $100.00 plus $25.00 per acre 4-2814
Environmental Impact Statement
Draft and Final (Costs of $100 plus equivalent of City
Coordination and Review) costs incurred 4-2914
Environmental sensitive lands
or lands covered by water 134 times the above listed fees 4-2814
Mobile Home Parks
Tentative $150 g-3g;00-plus $1.00 per acre 4-2003 1(A) •
Preliminary $300 $496:00-plus $5.00 per lot 4-2004 1
Final $150 S-50700 plus $2.50 per lot 4-2005 2
PUD
Tentative $100.00 plus $10.00 per acre 4-2710 4
Preliminary $750 4250 plus $20.00 per acre with
Final Plan $750 �$1,000.00 maximum 4-2710 3
efl@-plus $20.00 per acre 4-2710 6
(Ord. 3515, 3-2-81)
Annexation No change, recent $200.00 for 10% petition Res. 2429
adoption $300.00 for 75% petition Res. 2429
Lot Line Adjustment No change, $ 50.00 for record of survey 9-1104 5(c)
(Ord. 3612, 2-22-82) recent .adoption
Signalization Latecomer No change, recent adoption
Agreement Deposit $1,000.00 9-1108 7(P)
Street Paving Latecomer No change, recent adoption
Agreement Deposit $1,000.00 9-1108 7(Q)
(Ord. 3622, 4-19-82)
•
•
•
5• j
I ,
Cie.4-4_
I '
PUMPING AND DEVELOPMENT cotalarrEE
COMMITTEE REPORT
August 6, 1982
REVISIONS TO ZONING AND SUBDIVISION FILING FEES
The Planning and Development Committee has reviewed the recommendations of the Adminis-
tration regarding revisions to the zoning and subdivision filing fees. The attached memorandum
of Aug I st 3, 1982, from the Policy Development Director describes the Administration's recom-
mendation with regards to this matter.
After due consideration of the recommendations, the Committee preliminarily recommends the
adoption of the revised fee schedule subject to public comment and review at a public meeting
which should be held on August 23, 1982. Subject to public comment, the only revision the
Committee suggests in the proposed fee schedule is establishing the filing fee for appeals of
Hearing Examiner decisions or appeals of administrative or environmental decisions be revised
to $75 rather than the Administration's recommendation of $125.
Therefore, the Planning and Development Committee recommends that a public meeting be '
held on August 23, 1982, to consider the Administration's proposal for increasing the fee
schedules for zoning and subdivision filing fees to more adequately reflect the City's true cost
for providing this service.
Randy Rockhill, Chairman
John Reed
Robert Hughes
•
•
• `''``• Ofi
410 Telephone,2061 94 -1812
r'{ON ASSOc
SCAN 23-7319
r 4 WASHINGTON
ASSOCIATION OF COUNTY OFFICIALS
'�
105 E.8th Ave.,Suite No.307
i` Olympia,Washington 98501 •
��'Nrr 00%C—
July 8,, 1982
I ,
•
TO: County Auditor III
FROM: i James Goche' , ACO Administrative Assistant
SUBJECT: Maps and Sury s Filing Surcharge
•
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) held a hearing on
June 22, 1982, on proposed •fee increases and rule changes per-
taining to maps and surveys submitted for filing. After DNR
received comment from WACO and other local government agencies,
it reformulated its regulations and produced the final copy which
is attached. The regulations alter the definition of certain
instruments to be filed and place a $15 per instrument surcharge
on each instrument filed in addition to other fees required to be
collected. These regulations were signed by the Commissioner and
will be effective on July 30, 1982.
JG:kk� . .
Attachment
•
•
•
•
•
•
I
1
1100 41411
CHAPTER 332-150 WAC
SURVEY, PLAT AND MAP FILING AND RECORDING FEES
NEW SECTION
WAC 332-150-010 AUTHORITY AND SCOPE. This chapter is pro-
mulgated pursuant to the authority granted in Chapter 165, Laws
of. 1982. WAC 332-150-010 through WAC 332-150-040 are intended
to implement section 7 of Chapter 165, Laws of 1982 .
NEW SECTION
WAC 332-150-020 DEFINITIONS . As used in WAC 332-150-010
through WAC 332-150-040, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) "Surveys . " All records of surveys reqruied to be filed
by law pursuant to Chapter 58 .09 RCW and all other land division
plats or maps required by local ordinance to be filed and recorded.
(2) "Subdivision plats. " All plats required to be filed by
law pursuant to Chapter 58 . 17 RCW.
(3) "Short plats . " All short plats required to be filed by
law pursuant to Chapter 58. 17 RCW.
(4) "Condominium surveys, plats or maps. " All surveys , plats,
ormaps required to be filed by law pursuant to Chapter 64.32 RCW.
(5) ' Instrument. The total document filed and recorded
of each of the above regardless of the number of pages . This
term also includes corrections to such instruments , including but
not limited to boundary line adjustments , correction affidavits,
and correction plats and surveys.
NEW SECTION
WAC 332-150-030 FILING AND RECORDING FEES
After the
effective date of this regulation, each county auditor shall
collect the fee of fifteen dollars per instrument in addition to
any other fees required by law, as a condition precedent to the
filing and recording of any surveys , subdivision plats, short
plats or .condominium surveys , plats or maps .
NEW SECTION
WAC 332-150-040 FILING AND RECORDING FEES - DESIGNATION
OF FEES. The fees imposed by the foregoing rules are designated ,
for and related solely to the purposes and provisions of Chapter
58. 24 RCW and not for the maintenance, sale and distribution
of: publications authorized by RCW 43 . 99. 142.
NEW SECTION
1
WAC 332-150-050 BIENNIAL REVIEW. The fee established by
these rules shall be reviewed subsequent to the adoption of each
biennial budget for surveys and maps to determine the sufficiency
of such fee. If revenue is determined to be inappropriate for
the program need the department shall adjust the fee accordingly.
•
...,. . . ,
. . " NbTic
,, ,.:,
•
}'
. •
•;. ,
i 1 I ,+, I. '
.,•
.. , • •, • •••, ,,,,.. oror. .,,
. 1,0,.... .. ,!, „.p:;:.,„„„:4, ,y,..1,.. 1.,„.
„ • . r Ai t'.4' 11,14 1"i,".: '
ill , .'''•',? 11;+'J i ill I.'�i •,.
' RENTON CITY COUNCIL y
' . ' ',1 ' . ' ''" :: • '' y '':H'"iI0, '
MEETING
.11
) ' ' ,a ;r f ' ; ;t
r ON AUGUST 23rd). 1982 • ' ' . 8:001
;ATtR „
zla p' ,
„._ i1' '8
, ,1,1 n ng , I,)j'I,,,,. , ,•,. , 0 Pi•
,p ,
RENTON MUNI IP L B I `'C A U IDING COUNCIL. .�HA���•R�.
`,
•
. , , ,
200 MILL •AVENUE SOUT ,,,f„i,,,',;, :,
H ' `. " i ' } 41,,,
,„ ,,,. ,
,
" ` { , i IFor the purpose of consideringaproposed a,, :, ,,;REVISION '0�;'P SEDE ,TO r INCREASE FILING FEES FOR ZONING 'AND;SUBDIVISION' '�PP,LIC�1 `, ,, 15'',. , '!'
• 'GENERAL LOCATION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: ±1, x l) •. . :.,F
CITYWIDE'. 1;, 'I '"xl,.,-t' ,
li i7K ' ill�4 '.j'�'J •' •I ,y �d x5
f5 1 I! ,i '.4ti1' •`! ,r•!1• AY`,n1,,f�V
., .ti1 ,. ,„ ri',ii�,,;. ViI�'i,t#: I'.{i;'L wB r;;N:
x ,-. , ;,x,,, �* "}r ,1 , r
`
1,. R , y � t Ix ^.'Y
l{ a »•� 1'. •4, ! i.. ',d I , .74(
ry
. S•
'11' • •,i ' d ai 1' ,ill 1Y r 4 ,y 0' ii>>, '1',t1
•
R �I f; • ,,1�r.ff 1pl w,i(�
1 ;i � ' '' r., .. '' ' 11' ,ip ' k'.,ir.; ` + ^,IkI i1rt, ',1 , • tn. i{::F,,, l dit
j l; i.
l Y 1 , ' •
ll�l .i• ' r,,,{1�,� �� 'l' , '''"I
: lr' 'K f,
1 I�., .lii1.`C•1 .�', , l;""E{ tryryst , 'ki
Date of Publication: AUGUST 13, 1982 • ,.;,R ,I =" '''' , .''',, ?'
• . • '; • F .i ii :I is {.i" q i i,s
5 I I ' ,,• y' rf ,•;;.:ri., if,If ,i a,'.f
I . ;1I •'li'. ,`l ,'ti. YA ,`I''pr'� q Eck'1'•
•
,
(Complete. legal, description &further information available in the- City'Clerks.,(Y r1 ;:=+,2 i 'y2.50
11,1; i,, "i' 't
,t 1,a I'14 ,."' ,p4.',
'I rl'11 Ifir '
0 III I
The removal; wsvtili lee; illosihreetioe
oreoweealw+ontofthis
demeanor p wish - I - y • 'floe •'a
leeprie ww+ewt. : 1. ; ' ' Il!' +
:1' 'r'�,:.c�.- - - - - - ---'�rti.►ri►tirrri - -.._._. ... ,.2_,—...._,__.� 11:�1,_ ,;i4'.,`r,11.4',�.t'�iu„ E"e,�i � 4' 'I' ti,,Aa.1 ,1,.
00 •
PubUc1eeffLing
Rugust 23)982
Re v)510n Qi Fee 5che8u)e To crece
/ipp!'�cotlonsFor Zoning /7»d S�r��iYisio�r�
L ocQtio» Postinp Done AAr3ust )2 )982
Wi »Ivms Ave S. P 5 Y�S�`.
Shattuck'I9re s, t 3, Ott st.
8 Tq lo� �I AYe N.w. t N.W t. �.
N.�1 = 3 yfitdrhre to
rl E.$* Sf •, kJo rd d ye A1.F
N• � � � Kir
I �
CERTIFICATION
STATE OF WASHINGTON)
) ss.
COUNTY OF KING )
1 , Leslie L. Ph;nlis hereby ri fy that SllX
(6) copies of the above notice werep sted by me in a or more conspicuous
places on the property described and two copies were posted at t Renton
Municipal Building, 200 Mill Ave. South, Renton, WA on date of e LISt ,J
198 9
signe/a2gg444.4.
Notary Public in and for the State of
Washington, residing in King County
1/80
CERTIFICATION
i 1
CITY OF RENTON '
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
BY
RENTON CITY COUNCIL
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has
fixed the 23rd day of August , 1982, at 8 : 00 p .m.
in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building
200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington, as the time and
place for a public hearing to consider the following:
REVISION OF FEE SCHEDULE TO INCREASE FILING FEES FOR
ZONING AND SUBDIVISION APPLICATIONS
Any and all interested persons are invited to be present to
approval, disapproval or opinions on same.
CITY OF RENTON
>47-)er
Maxine E. Motor
Acting City Clerk
Date of Publication; August 13, 1982
OF RA,
4.4
0 THE CITY OF RENTON
0 40 p z
POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 235-2552
AL
o MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE.SO. RENTON,WASH.98055
ro
9�1.47. EP���O�P August 3, 1982
S
BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH
MAYOR
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning and Development Committee
FROM: David R. Clemens, Policy Development Director
RE: ' REVISIONS TO ZONING AND SUBDIVISION FILING FEES
At the Mayor's request, the Policy Development Department has undertaken a
detailed study of the cost of processing Zoning and Subdivision applications.
The initial phase of the study focused solely on the costs directly
associated with the Planning staff members (including clerical support). We
have now expanded that review to include the following Departments:
Building (inspection)
Fire Marshal
Parks and Recreation
Police
Public Works- Engineering, Traffic Engineering, and Utilities
As discussed in my memo of July 16th to the Mayor, and attached to the
agenda bill for your review, our initial findings concluded that doubling
the base filing fee would cover the cost of the "planning staff" review
of the current applications. However, including all of the additional
Departments listed above has shown that the City's actual cost is approximately
three (3) times our current revenue.
The issue is relatively simple, too what extent should the general public
defray the cost of development application review by the City? Should
new development pay for its full cost of processing? In reviewing the
current application structure, approximately one-half of the, total fee
is comprised of a fixed base fee. In comparing the City's fee structure
with other agencies, we a well below some, and comparable to others, but
in general , about one-third to one-half of the average.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based',upon the analysis we have just completed, it is recomended that the
Fee Schedule Ordinance be revised by increasing the base filing fee for
most applications, and adopting a filing fee for administrative appeal
applications.
attacfiment: Fee Schedule Ordinance proposal
cc: Mayor Shinpoch
Mike Parness, Administrative Assistant
Mike Mulcahy, Finance Director
Ron Nelson, Building Director
1-4101 1 4101
CHAPTER 41
j FEE SCHEDULE
•
SECTION:
1-4101: Fee Schedule Adopted
1
l
11-4101: FEE SCHEDULE ADOPTED: There is hereby adopted as the Fee
Schedule for the City, Title IV (Building Regulations) and Title IX
(Public Ways and Property) the following:
FEE SCHEDULE •
Type of Application Fee Code Section
Appeal of Hearing Examiner's
Decision or administra- $ 75 4-25 9- 4-3016
tive or environmental decisions
Rezone $300 100-.09 plus $10.00 per acre 4-722 (H)
Special Permit/Temporary
Permit/Conditional Permit $300 9160-.80 plus $10.00 per acre 4-722(H)
Site Approval $300 $100.00 plus $5.00 per acre 4-722(H)
Comprehensive Plan
Amendment $450 4450:09
Waiver $150 4- 0:09 9-1105 6(B)
Open Space $ 80,00 set by RCW RCW
$50,000.00
Shoreline Management $100 $ SS0..O if value less than 44E000.00
$60700041*-
$150.00 if value from $50,000.00 to
$100,000.03
$200.00 plus .01% of value over
$100,000.00
JGrading and Filling Permits $300 i400:99 plus $25.00 per acre 4-722(H)
582
J L
1
1-4101 1-4101
•
Type of Application Fee Code Section
Plats:
Short Plat, Residential $300 41-25:00
Commercial/Industrial , $ 75 $-25.00 plus $1.00 per 1,000 s Qcare
feet (not less than ?75r66) $175 9-1105 1
Tentative Plat $150 4-50760-plus $2.00 per acre 9-1106 1(A)
Preliminary $300 $100 plus $8.00 per lot 9-1106 2(A)
Preliminary Industrial $600 $200790plus $1.00 per 1,000 square
feet of land area 9-1106 2(A)
Final $225 $4500plus $4.00 per lot 9-1106 3(B)
Final Industrial $375 $i-25:9(-plus $10.00 per acre 9-1106 3(B)
Environmental Impact Review No change, recently revised
Environmental Checklist $ 55.00 if value less than $10,000.00
Review/Threshold Determination $ 60.00 plus $1.00 per $10,000.00 if
value greater than $10,000.00 4-2814
Pre-Draft Consultation Report $100.00 plus $25.00 per acre 4-2814
Environmental Impact Statement
Draft and Final (Costs of $100 plus equivalent of City
Coordination and Review) costs incurred 4-2814
Environmental sensitive lands
or lands covered by water 114 times the above listed fees 4-2814
Mobile Home Parks
Tentative $150 $-50700-plus $1.00 per acre 4-2003 1(A)
Preliminary $300 $496-0O-plus $5.00 per lot _ 4-2004 1
Final $150 S-50700 plus $2.50 per lot 4-2005 2
PUD
Tentative $100.00 plus $10.00 per acre 4-2710 4
Preliminary $750 4259fl8-plus $20.00 per acre with
$1,000.00 maximum 4-2710 3
Final Plan $750 4256{)6-plus $20.00 per acre 4-2710 6
(Ord. 3515, 3-2-81)
Annexation No change, recent $200.00 for 10% petition Res. 2429
adoption $300.00 for 75% petition Res. 2429
Lot Line Adjustment No change, $ 50.00 for record of survey 9-1104 5(c)
(Ord. 3612, 2-22-82) recent adoption
Signalization Latecomer No change, recent adoption
Agreement Deposit $1,000.00 9-1108 7(P)
Street Paving Latecomer No change, recent adoption
Agreement Deposit $1,000.00 9-1108 7(Q)
(Ord. 3622, 4-19-82)
•
I
.�M,.,/
582.
1
Renton City Council
July 26, 1982
Page 3
Appeal by Mt. Olivet Cemetery Appeal . ROLL CALL: 3 AYES: TRIMM, REED, HUGHES;
Mt. Olivet 4 NOS: CLYMER, MATHEWS, STREDICKE, ROCKHILL. MOTION FAILED. SUBSTITUTE
Cemetery MOTION BY REED, SECOND BY HUGHES, Refer the matter back to the Hearing
SP 012-82 Examiner for review of the Colt Appeal in light of the Segale*decision.
continued ROLL CALL: 3 AYES: TRIMM, REED, HUGHES; 4 NOS: CLYMER, MATHEWS,
STREDICKE, ROCKHILL. MOTION FAILED. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND BY
CLYMER, TO DENY THE APPEAL AND UPHOLD THE HEARING EXAMINER' S DECISION.
Mr. Colt called attention to Councilman Clymer's statement that all
applicable city ordinances would be in force and enforced. ROLL CALL:
4 AYES: CLYMER, MATHEWS, STREDICKE, ROCKHILL; 3 NOS: TRIMM, REED,
HUGHES. MOTION CARRIED. *Segale Decision (SP 032-82)
Audience Comment
continued Marian Jordan, 13265 - 89th Avenue South, addressed the Council to
West Hill oppose the West Hill Pump Station Annexation explaining prior unsuccess-
Pump Station ful attempt to annex residence. Public Hearing having been closed, Ms.
Annexation Jordan was instructed to contact the King County Boundary Review Board
Opposition for further information.
CONSENT AGENDA The following items are adopted by one motion which follows the items
included:
South Talbot Utilities Engineering recommended project and final pay estimate be
Hill Pump approved and retainage of $18,433.85 be released after.30 days if all
Station Final taxes have been paid and no liens have been filed on W-600 (CAG 017-81 )
Payment South Talbot Hill Pump Station - Teem Ventures, Inc. Council concur.
Zoning and Policy Development Department submitted a preliminary analysis of cost
Subdivision of processing zoning and subdivision applications recommending revisions
Fees to the fee structure commensurate with the city's actual cost of pro-
viding the service. Refer to Planning and Development Committee.
DAV "Forget Proclamation from Mayor Shinpoch delcared period of August 5-7, 1982,
Me Not" Days as "Disabled American Veterans Forget-Me-Not Days".
Consent Agenda MOVED BY CLYMER, SECOND BY HUGHES, ADOPT THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED.
Approved CARRIED.
CORRESPONDENCE AND CURRENT BUSINESS
Planning ! Letter from Planning Commission Chairman Michael G. Porter (by David
Association Clemens) requested Council approval to proceed with sponsorship of the
1983 Fall 1983 Fall Conference of the Planning Association of Washington. MOVED
Conference BY CLYMER, SECOND BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE REQUEST OF THE
PLANNING COMMISSION. CARRIED.
'I
OLD BUSINESS
I
Utilities Utilities Committee Chairwoman Mathews presented committee report
Committee approving the transfer of $20,000 from May Creek/Honey Creek/Kennydale
Honey Creek Sanitary Sewer Reserve Account to current working funds to obtain
Surveying professional land surveying services for the Honey Creek Sanitary
Sewers. Committee also recommended referral to Ways and Means Committee
for proper ordinance. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECOND BY TRIMM, CONCUR IN THE
RECOMMENDATION OF UTILITIES COMMITTEE. CARRIED.
1983-89 I Utilities Committee Chairwoman Mathews presented committee report
Capital approving the proposed Capital Improvement Programs and recommended
Improvement a public meeting be held to accept public comments. MOVED BY MATHEWS,
Program SECOND BY CLYMER, CONCUR IN THE UTILITIES COMMITTEE REPORT AND SET
AUGUST 23, 1982, AS THE DATE OF THE PUBLIC MEETING. CARRIED.
Cascade Sewer Utilities Committee Chairwoman Mathews presented committee report
District - approving Administration' s recommendation to provide oversite on city
ULID 62 i residents and property owners affected by this ULID, to review assess-
II
C
Renton City Council
July 26, 1982
Page 4 •
Utilities Committee continued
Cascade Sewer ments and LID formation, and, if approved, to issue right-of-way
District construction permits and develop an interagency agreement to provide
ULID 62 for transfer of the completed sewers within Renton. MOVED BY MATHEWS,
continued SECOND BY TRIMM, CONCUR IN UTILITIES COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
Water Utilities Committee Chairwoman Mathews presented committee report
District 58 recommending directing the Administration to investigate transfer of
water service from Water District 58 to Renton in the vicinity of
Rolling Hills/Tiffany Park neighborhoods by negotiation with Water
District 58. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECOND BY TRIMM, CONCUR IN UTILITIES
COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED.
CHG Councilman Stredicke inquired regarding citations and/or fines issued
Citations in connection with the CHG/Sunpointe operation. City Attorney Warren
responded that the paperwork is being processed and will be filed with
the court with a possibility of 40 citations including fines of up to
$500 per citation. Mr. Stredicke noted this developer is having similar
problems in other developments near Renton and urged close developer
supervision in the future.
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTION
Ways and Means Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke recommended second and final
Committee readings of the following ordinances:
Ordinance 3648 An ordinance was read approving and confirming the assessments and
LID 317 assessment roll of. Local Improvement District 317 for th construction
Assessment Roll and installation of an eight-inch water line and appurtenances in the
vicinity of South 132nd Street and South Langston Road. #MOVED BY
STREDICKE, SECOND BY ROCKHILL, ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL
CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED.
Ordinance 3649 An ordinance was read imposing an excise tax on sale of real estate,
Real Estate providing for the collection thereof, limiting the use of the proceeds
Transfer Tax therefrom and fixing penalties for violation of. Tax to be one-quarter
of one percent of the selling price. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECOND BY
ROCKHILL, ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES.
CARRIED.
First Readings The Ways and Means Committee recommended first reading of the following
ordinance:
McWilliams An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of certain
Rezone properties within the City of Renton from General Classification (G)
030-82 to Residence District (R-3) . MOVED BY REED, SECOND BY ROCKHILL, CONCUR
IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT AND REFER ORDINANCE BACK TO COMMITTEE FOR ONE
WEEK. CARRIED.
VOUCHER APPROVAL The Ways and Means Committee recommended approval of Vouchers 40845
through 41100 in the amount of $582,183.13 having received departmental
certification. that merchandise and/or services have been received or
rendered. Vouchers 40840 through 40844 machine voided. MOVED BY
STREDICKE, SECOND BY CLYMER, CONCUR IN RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE VOUCHERS.
CARRIED.
NEW BUSINESS
Political Councilman Stredicke inquired regarding the city sign code as it con-
Signs cerns political advertising. City Attorney Warren responded that
political signs are classified as temporary and have a duration of 60
days, but must be removed ten days after the election unless it was
a primary election. Mayor Shinpoch reported that policing of political
signs would hold a priority directly relative to city staff and time
available.
1:.
For Use By City Clerk's Office Only
A. I . k WC!‘
AGENDA ITEM
RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING
� SSi>3S2 3�7i5=S���
SUBMITTING
Dept./Div1./Bd./Comm. Policy Development For Agenda Of July 26, 1982
(Meeting Date)
Staff Contact David R. Clemens
(Name) Agenda Status:
SUBJECT: ZONING & SUBDIVISION FEES Consent )(
II Public Hearing
Correspondence
1
Ordinance/Resolution
Old Business
•
Exhibits: l(Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc. )Attach New Business
I Study Session
A. Memo of July 16, 1982 Other
B.
C. Approval :
Legal Dept. Yes No N/A
COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMENDED: Refer zoning Finance Dept. Yes. No. N/A_
and subdivision filing fees to the Planning Other Clearance
and Development Committee for review and
recommendation.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Amount Appropriation-
ExpenditurelRequired $ Budgeted $ Transfer Required $
SUMMARY (Background information, prior action and effect of implementation)
(Attach additional pages if necessary. )
The Policy Development Department has prepared a preliminary analysis
of ',the cost of processing zoning and subdivision applications. This
analysis suggests that only a fraction of the City' s actual costs are
recovered in the filing fee. A comparison with other agencies also
finds our fees lagging behind.
Since no fee revision has occurred during the past 6 years, the Plan-
ning and Development Committee should recommend revisions to the fee
structure commensurate with the City's actual cost of providing the
service.
PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED:
il,u 'T _^.7`: T n r — i - r _ - �.-�'1\! ^\I T�J i I p C n n./ _ ^ n 11,w,I T 1 n 4
OF RA,
�,� ell THE CITY OF RENTON
POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT • 235-2552
MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055
9,o i Pam.
O-r4 I sEP1 '
BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH
(MAYOR MEMORANDUM
DATE: July 16, 1982
TO: it Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor
FROM: David R. Clemens, Policy Development Director
RE: III Analysis of Zoning and Subdivision Fees
One of the major projects set out as a 1982 objective by the Policy Development
Department was to provide a detailed analysis of the cost of processing zoning and
subdivision applications and the amount of that cost which is covered by filing fees.
We have completed the detailed analysis for 1981 and preliminary analysis for the first
• half of 1982, and have drawn the following conclusions:
1. Even using conservative estimates of personnel costs, current zoning and
subdivision fees will cover less than one-half of the total real cost of
processing these fees.
2.
There has been no comprehensive revision to the zoning and subdivision filing
,fees since the Hearing Examiner process was introduced. During that time, the
cost of services provided by the City of Renton have risen by 76%.
3. 'The review of other agencies zoning and subdivision fees indicates that the City
\of Renton is currently charging about one-half of the average total filing fee.
As a result of these findings, the Policy Development Department has commenced a
more detailed analysis. of the City's real cost for processing zoning and subdivision
applica',tions including the cost of other departments besides Building and Zoning. We
believe' that this detailed analysis will indicate that the City's filing fee structure
covers Only about one-third of the actual cost of providing permit review services.
The review process also indicates that appeals of Hearing Examiner decisions (which
have a low filing fee), and appeals of administrative decisions (which have no filing
fee) have represented a significant drain on the City's resources with no compensation.
We believe that the detailed analysis which we are currently undertaking will provide
us with\ sufficient justification to establish more rigorous filing fees for these two
appeal processes.
I ;
•
. I
Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor
July 16, 1982
Page Two
The I attached table summarizes 1982 application fees for the months January through
May., If the City had implemented an increase in the filing fees on January 1st to
double the base fee, the City would have accrued some $3,550 worth of additional fees
thusfar, or approximately $7,000 extrapolated for the entire year. If the City had
doubled both the base and the variable fee on January 1st, the City would have
accrued nearly $15,000 in additional fees in 1982. As a part of the 1983 budget
process, the Policy Development Department will recommend revisions to the zoning
and subdivision filing fee structure consistent with the City's actual cost of processing
zoning and subdivision applications.
Attached is our analysis of the 1981 costs and revenues for zoning and subdivision
processing.
cc: I Ronald G. Nelson, Building & Zoning Director
Roger J. Blaylock, Zoning Administrator
I Jeanette Samek, Planning Intern
•
II
I •
• I
•
•
• I
• ;
•
1982 APPLICATION FEES
(January - May)
TOTAL BASIC FEE (BASIC FEE) TOTAL VARIABLE FEE (VARIABLE)
i
Variance (8) $ 300.00 . ($ 50)*
Rezone (12) $1,200.00 ($100) $1,642.00 ($10 per acre)
Special Permit (8) . $ 800.00 ($100) $ 900.00 ($10 per acre)
Sitel Approval (3) $ 300.00 ($100) $ 45.00 ($ 5 per acre)
•
Preliminary PUD (1) $ 250.00 ($250) $ 344.00 ($20 per acre)
Preliminary Mobile
Home (1) $ 100.00 ($100) $1,015.00 ($ 5 per acre)
Temporary Use
Permit (1) $ 100.00 ($100) —
Short Plat (2) $ 250.00 ($125) —
Preliminary Plat (1) - $ 100.00 ($100) $ 72.00 ($ 8 per acre)
Administrative
Appeal (6) $ • 150.00 ($ 25) --
TOTALS
$3,550.00 $4,018.00
-- OTHER FEES ---
I
o Substantial Development Shorelines $ 150.00
o Environmental •
I o Checklist $ 872.00
o Construct Value $ 411.00
$1,433.00
SUMMARY OF FEES RECEIVED
APPLICATION FEES $ 7,568.00 (Base & Value/Acre)
OTHER FEES $ 1,433.00
11982 GRAND TOTAL $ 9,001.00
I •
DOUBLE (BASE FEE +$ 3,550.0Q
1982 TOTAL FEES COLLECTED
FOR JANUARY - MAY
IF BASE FEE DOUBLED $12,551.00
i
* NOTE: 1 The discrepancy between number of variances and fees collected is due to some variances
being combined into one.
•
SUMMARY OF TABLES
TABLE 1 : PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROFESSIONAL STAFF TINE -
RE: DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
Table 1 shows the number of man hours per month* the
Planning Department Staff spent on 1 ) reports to the Hearing
Examiner regarding proposed development projects and 2) various
zoning and subdivision requests compared with the number
of development applications each month.
' These projects varied in their degree of complexity
and in the issues associated with each project. Most of
the development applications were filed after the nineteenth
of each month and generally the last week of the month.
Two factors may explain the varied levels of applications
per month. First, permit activities are greatest during
the late winter/early spring months and the month of July
in preparation for construction activity during the summer/fall
months. Secondly, the level of activity is also affected
by the ability of potential developers to secure funds for
their, projects.
The staff time shown on Table 1 represents only the
time spent by the Planning Department ' s four professional
members. The discrepancy between the number of staff. hours
spent ', on applications compared with the number of applications
may be explained by the following facts . First, development
applications tend to run in a cyclical pattern as explained
in the above paragraph. And, secondly, staff man hour peaks
differ from application peaks due to 1 ) the tendency for
applications being filed at the end of the month so that
they are not evenly dispersed throughout the year and 2)
the varying complexity of the issues involved in the appli-
cation's. Figure 1 lists the staff activities and the typical
amount of time spent on each activity for the average, uncom-
plicated development application. Depending upon the complexity
of the activity, the staff may spend a minimum of thirty-one
(31 ) hours or if complex, at least two hundred (200) hours.
* Note: Staff time for the months of January, February, and
December are not shown since accurate staff records were
not available.
. i
-2- •
FIGURE 1 : ACTIVITIES/ESTIMATED MAN HOURS FOR
"TYPICAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
ACTIVITY MAN HOURS
•
Set-up 2
Distribution of Application to Departments 2
Response to Applicant Inquiries 4
Environmental Review Committee 4 •
Legal 2
Typing Legal 1
Staff Reports 2
•
. Typing/Copying Staff Reports 4
Publication 1
Posting 1
Public Hearing 3
Reports Following Public Hearing 2
Typing/Distributing 2
Notice of Action • 1
. 1 •
1 Total 33 Man Hours
(Average)
TABLE 2: HUMBER OF APPLICATIONS PER MONTH
One hundred seventeen (117) applications were received
in 1981 . Table 2 summarizes the number of development appli-
cations* by month and by type of application. The three
exceptions in the month of March are exceptions from the
Subdivision Ordinance. These are now classified as variances.
TAB I 3: ADDITIONAL NON-APPLICATION ACTIVITY
Table 3 shows the additional non-application activity
for 1981 . This activity is broken into the following categories :
1 ) Environmental Impact Statement -- projects requiring environmental
impact statements; 2) Exceptions -- projects seeking an exception
fromiithe Subdivision Ordinance; and 3) applicants appeals to the
Hearing Examiner either of administrative decisions or of environmental
determinations required by the City' s Environmental Ordinance.
TABLE 4: MAN HOURS PER APPLICATION BY MONTH •
Table 4 summarizes the average number of professional staff
man hours per application for each month. These hours represent
the total professional hours spent on Zoning and Subdivision and
Hearing Examiner activities. A comparison of Table, 4 and Figure 1
showsithat the average number of hours spent on applications is
nearly the same 26. 66 MH/APP (Table 4) compared to 33 MH (Figure 1 ) .
* Development applications in this report refer to those projects
in which applicationswere filed and permit fees paid.
1 • •
-3-
•
The figures are derived from separate sets of data which
accounts for the slight difference. The estimated amount
of time on an application in Figure 1 includes both professional
staff time and typing and copying time while the figures
of Table 4 represent only the professional staff time spent
on applications.
The differences in the hours for the months of May through
August are explained in part, by the fact that a number of
• applications were received during the last weeks of May and
July. Thus June and August reflect this by more man hours
being spent on applications during these months relative
to the number of applications filed. Vacations also in part
affect the man hours shown since staff time becomes concentrated
around the vacation periods which are not evenly distributed
throughout the months.
TABLE 5: MAJOR PROJECTS
Some major projects have been separated from the staffs
normal work file. Table 5 provides an example of some of
the hours professional staff of the Planning Department spent
on these selected projects . The figures in the table represent
• a minimum amount of hours spent on the selected projects
since many of the projects were already being reviewed when
members began recording their time and the staff did not
always separate out all of the hours spent reviewing ,projects
from time spent on other activities .
TABLE 6: APPLICATION FEES BY MONTH
The City collected approximately $18, 200. 00 in Zoning
and Subdivision fees during 1981 . Table 5 shows the amount
of development application fees received by the City for
each month and the total amount of fees for the year. In
addition to the application fees, $4 ,408 . 00 were collected
to offset costs of the EIS Review.
TABLE 7: ESTIMATED COST OF STAFF TIME FOR 1981 APPLICATIONS
Table 7 shows the estimated cost of the Planning Department ' s
professional and clerical staff time spent on the various
applications. The inclusion of clerical staff in this table
provides a more accurate estimate of the time spent answering
questions and helping clients at the counter as well as typing
and copying materials necessary to process applications.
TABLE 8: APPLICATION FEE INCH COMPARED WITH STAFF EXPENDITURE
Table 8 graphically depicts the relationship between
amount of money brought into the City by applications and
the amount of money expended for Planning Department ' s professional
staff time on the applications.
-4-
The months of January, February and December show only
the amount of application fees received for those months
due tq incomplete staff records.
TABLE 9: COMPARISON OF RENTON'S DEVELOPMENT FEES WITH OTHER
JURISDICTIONS
•
Communities in surrounding jurisdictions charge development
fetes similar to the types required by the City of Renton.
Table 9 provides a comparison of Renton's fees with those
of other communities. The figures in the first column, AVERAGE
FOR OTHER AGENCIES, represents approximate averages due to
the differences and complexity of fee schedules of some
communities and the lack of certain types of fees in other
communities. With this limitation noted, the table shows
that for most types of development fees Renton is less than
surrounding jurisdictions.
CONCLUSION
The tables presented in this document illustrates the
need to increase development application fees. It should
be noted that the base fees have not increased since 1976.
Since 1976, the City' s cost of service has risen by 76%.
The City' s expenditure to process applications in this document
represents only the Planning Department staff. Generally,
applications require professional and clerical staff time
from the Building Division of the Building & Zoning Department, •
the Engineering Department, the Hearing Examiner' s office
and the City Attorney' s office. If these additional costs
were taken into account, the City' s total expenditure as
shown on Table 7 (Estimated Cost of Staff Time for 1981 Appli-
ca•hions) would be far greater, perhaps as much as - $70, 000. 00
(estimate) instead of $33,800. 00.
For 1981 , the application fees received by the City
only accounted for a little more than half the expenditure
for staff time on the applications. The City' s expenditure
is 1 . 86 times greater than the application fees. This figure,
of course, would be even greater if this document had included
the' staff costs from the other departments.
•
(1�) 3� - 1� 1
1'yu ,tt E, ;,UV 111/,
c SrAl : M►,u kmrti zc►►tmc pubdtgi•to+s
(1°SO ► o. aS e6cpriAlc +t►a1. —jco
•
(I4) 2 -
(13) 24° —
Olt) NO
c. Li
a uo
04 aoo
./\//\
4 ((o)
O 100 6
(4) 80 -
/ter
( ‘,o ►-
t) 40
n) 26 •
(o) o I • . �, _
•IAN Fib MAr Apr MAy 60146 July 6apt Nov
•
T•'•\;::]LSE 2: NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS PER MONTH
(1981 ) •
{° `° /...;(/.4iC\•?'
4y a ��� �' Qo� ��ti11
'PLICATION QQ4 Q yC' ' G� �,a yt,� �,ciTYPE ya o� ay yti yQ y�� °ia �� ��� 4ygti400 4�tinti �� � ati •4 o y fiy As. •,NTH5G.. 4 iy °� g'r caa �a �O
.nuary 2 2 3 1
• bruary 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 14
trch • 2 . 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 3 • 14
+3 Exce
>ril 4 3 1 1 2 1 12
:y 1 2 2 2 1 8
.ne 1 1 1 - 3
ly 3 2 2 1 1 • 1 2 1 13
.gust 1 1 1 1 -1 1 6
•ptember 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 !'
•
tober 2 1 3 2 8 .
vember 2 1 1 1 2 • 3 10
•ember _1 1 2 • 2 1 1
8
GRAND TOTAL 117
•
i TABLE 3: ADDITIONAL NON—APPLICATION ACTIVITY — 1981
I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT
• February: Pierotti
Homecraft
• April: Mastro
to May: Highland •
o June: RaMac •
July: Superstructure, Inc.
o September: Gary Carner
• October: Lake Terrace Park •
November: Brown/Moody (Land by Oakdale & Longacres Dr. )
• December: Lincoln Property 0
•
II. i EXCEPTIONS
•
o February/March: Three for Mark Hecock
III. APPEALS
o Administrative:
• September: Schultak & Associates •
•
o October: Glen Ahrans •
• November : LeRoy A. Bowen
o Environmental :
o March: Pierotti
Blood
• • June: Blood
• July: Ewing Associates
• Homecraft
• September: Terra Northwest Homes
• October: Homecraft
ABLE 4: MAN HOURS PER APPLICATION BY MONTH
MARCH
328 MH/17 (includes exceptions) = 19. 3 MH/APP
APRIL
306 MH/12 = 25. 5 MH/APP
MAY
258. 5 MH/8 = 32. 3 MH/APP
JUNE
269. 5 MH/3 = 89. 8 MH/APP
JULY1 •
194 . 5 MH/13 = 15 MH/APP
AUGUST
239 MH/6 = 39 . 8 MH/APP
SEPTEMBER
257 . 5 MH/9 = 28 . 6 MH/APP
OCTOBER
275. 5 MH/8 = 34 . 4, MH/APP
NOVEMBER
164* MH/10 = 16 . 4 MH/APP
TOTAL HOURS/TOTAL APPLICATIONS = AVERAGE
2292. 5/86 = 26. 66 MH/APP
* Adjusted for missing timesheet.
I i
TABLE 5: MAJOR PROJECTS
• 1981 January to November
Port Quendall
15. 0 hrs - Associate Planner
27. 0 hrs - Acting Planning Director
7. 5 hrs - Assistant Planner
49. 5 hrs Total (June/July)
•
Homecraft Terrace
35 . 0 hrs - Associate Planner
5. 0 hrs - Acting Planning Director •
;4 . 5 hrs - Assistant Planner
44 . 5 hrs Total (May/July)
Black River
9. 0 hrs - Acting Planning Director •
9 . 0 hrs Total (February)
Victoria Hills
12 . 0 hrs - Associate Planner
13 . 5 hrs - Assistant Planner
25. 5 hrs Total (July/August)
Highland Village
6. 0 hrs - Associate Planner
' 7. 0 hrs - Acting Planning Director
13. 0' hrs Total (November/December)
• I
TABLE 6: APPLICATION FEES BY MONTH 1981
• I
JANUARY 110. 00 AUGUST 131 . 00
50. 00 110. 00
345. 00 260. 00
170. 00 1 , 563 . 23
1 446. 77 $ 2,064 . 23
$ 1 , 283.77
1 SEPTEMBER 125. 00
FEBRUARY 223. 00 190. 00
195. 00 1 , 988 . 00
181 . 00 225. 00
74 . 33 76 . 92
75. 00 140. 22
$ 748 . 33 50. 00
$ 2,795. 14
MARCH 300. 00
164 . 00 OCTOBER 570. 91
197. 50 562. 67
225. 00 $ 1 , 133. 58
75 . 00
$ 1 ,076. 50 NOVEMBER 125. 00
105 . 00
APRIL 125. 00 1 , 218 . 00
225. 00 318. 00
498. 23 9. 60
863. 80. • 75. 00
627. 00 $ 1 ,850. 60
215. 00
$ 2 , 554 . 03 DECEMBER $ 275 . 00
MAY 160. 00
182. 50
269 . 00
189. 00
$ 800. 50
JUNE 165. 00
260. 00
210. 00 GRAND
235 . 00 TOTAL $ 18, 189. 09
$ 870. 00
JUL Y 225. 00
1 ,000. 00
684 . 00
170. 00
166. 00
50. 00
112. 41
$ 2,737.41
I .
TABLE 7: ESTIMATED COST OF STAFF TIME FOR 1981 APPLICATIONS •
(March - November)
I. PROFESSIONAL-STAFF--
ZONING -- - ---------
ZONING AND So i.DIVISION
Acting Planning Director: *216 . 0 x 16 . 7192 = $ 3 , 611 . 35
Associate Planner: 751 . 5 x 11 . 3538 = 8, 532. 38
Assistant Planner: 462. 0 x 11 . 4115 = 5 , 272 . 11
Assistant Planner: 231 . 0 x 10. 8058 = 2,496. 14
Sub Total $19, 911 . 98
*Includes estimated 10 hours for 11/15
HEARING EXAMINER
Acting Planning Director: 16. 0 x 16 . 7192 = $ 267. 51
Associate Planner: 117. 0 x 11 . 3538 = 1 , 328. 39
Assistant Planner: 469. 5 x 11 . 4115 = 5 , 357 . 70
Sub Total $ 6 , 953. 60
GRAND TOTAL $26 ,865. 58
II. CLERICAL STAFF
ZONING SUPPORT -
Administrative Secretary: 432. 0 x 9. 0923 = $ . 3, 927. 87
Administrative Support Secretary: 121 . 5 x 7. 1769 = 871 . 99
Administrative Clerk: 24 . 5 x 8. 8788 = 217. 53
Sub Total $ 5, 017. 39
HEARING EXAMINER
Administrative Secretary: 142. 5 x 9 . 0923 = $ 1 , 295. 65
Administrative Support Secretary: 52. 0 x 8 . 8788 = 461 . 70
Administrative Support Secretary: 32. 0 x 7. 1769 = 229. 66
•
Sub Total $ 1 , 987. 01
GRAND TOTAL $ 7, 004 .40
OVERALL TOTAL $33,869 . 98
(*cooAbe
1CG 1 A►ml;ciA;oa Fad Into►', Couuwma
wi 4-\ .D cc 'E Kca ldi'Iwa MouN
• 6300 \s?V c.aMc*. Fa45
Soon
moo
Woo
y000
Moo
Loot +�
t�no
I Cep
.5oo
5AK Nob MAY hire MA,y SuNt duly Aug `npt Oct Nov
MoNth
TABLE 9: COMPARISON OF RENTON•S DEVELOPMENT FEES WITH OTHER JURISDICTIONS
JURISDICTION
AVERAGE FOR
OTHER KIFOTNED MERCEISLAND
•
SEATTLE BOTRELL SOOml1 CO DES WINES IOINTLAKE TERRACE EVERETT PUYALLUP TACO
DEVELOPMENT FEE AGf,rCIEt RE11TON KENT TtUf�A REDMOND (SF/OTRERS) ISLA1p
REZONE $335 • 25/acte 5100 •$10/ __$200 •_$TO/ _$203_ $300—--- $225/$225-4 --_$500-IRezon.) - —$500-4-$50/-- i 75 •-$15- --Table-based—$150 - --- -$300 upto 2 $500 • $20/ -- $ 50
— — acre GCVO aV $10/acre $200 (Damson) hr A Ste/ on overage acres acre
I fraction $200 (Cods acre Yin $500 Res $20 each $150 (less
f thereof • Ohags) $1.00 Non-Res additional than i acre)
acre
4
SPECIAL PEITRT/TEIPOF.ARY .2 • 10/acre $100 •$10/ $200 • $10/ $175 $100/$225 • $250 SF $300 $ 50 • $15 $225 (CU) $ 50 $250 MO CU S 50 • $25
PERMIT/CONDITIONAL PERMIT I acre OC=y Or $10/Gera N.S.F. $ 50 S150 TU $10/ocr.
fraction $350 Non_
Usersof Conforming
Use Exp.
Permit
SITE APPROVAL { $150 • $100 • $/ $ 50 1st $25/hr.
aCPO 10,000 eq.ft..
$10 for Ood1
add. eq. ft.
(Non-Res)
. $20/colt ,
Preliminary
4Reeldenttal)
$20/unit final ,
(Residential!
.
CMPRE}E IVE PLAN $:100 • $150 $200 $250
ALE OSE71T
VARIANCE $145 $ 50 $200 $150 $110 S250 (Density) SO00 (SF) $50 • $15 $175 $50 $ 75 NSF) $75(RS,R.1
$150 (Other) (NSF) $150 (ail R-2)
othsre) $150 (all
others)
OPEN SPACE I S30 $ 30 $ 30
I
a
SHORELINE MAMAGDENT $125.15 $50 if value $200 • $10/ $100 $180 $ 50/$100 $ 50 (greater Table K 1/105 value of $150 $50
lees than acrO Of 5100/5225 • then $10,000) Revision at improvements Shoreline
$10,000 fraction $10/acre $100 (greater $ 0/hr. $35 Clcllst Variance
$100 if value thereof than $10,OOD) $30 Legal $150
from $10,000 Notice
to $50,000 $25 min •
$150 if value 1/1005 value
from $50,000 up to $1000
I to $100,000
1
GRADING AND FILLING PERMIT I $100 • $25/ M S4.00 CU Min
1 aces $400 CU Ezco.
I $r.0001
1 Sanitary .
landfill
$175 (SU)
PLATS: 1
910RTPLATt $150/$A0 per $125 $100 $ 50 $ BO $150/S1`..3 $300 $500 for A $10/lot not S30 let 2 lots $20/lot $250 $ 50
Residential lot $25 • SI/ ' (10/lot) $50 (minor lots • $100 exceeding no road
Commercial/Industrial 1 1000 sq. ft. property line ea. add. lot I. lots 5 10 ea. add.
(note $75) revision) lot '
$50 Involver S25 revision
acreage of short plat
llaltotlon) S`.o with ,
If V50 L...r, .
•
•
S ice%"": • is 'AiS) AG j eu 1i0.+i� paaanoul .
OSLS 41T■ possnoui loop
•�O°� �O� W TuT IJOOStf low lii7
1603 TT'/ / PP° • COGS 1f 0•1 OGES 40 ooTum To Toiol o'ig s1 "IIV OCCS p •^Id A00If a; so GM ( •TA0J f uotlou W000
40 •1003) TOVTd T 14O40
•WWiS 1 1101u•ouoJTAu3
w1 •sao and
01w.osd 0St at • 001f SLS 1306•41
u0T1ounsv03 1/0sQ-sad
�+M+1'wpmOTTTA MOB 0000OIf
'w Joao UO 001$ /0rias Ot�TTUI sy0'TD*
! •ITT //016 1•fTOA uOTTTT. 0112202 //010 •T lsoo say /T 000•01f
Imo amyl 4^0 IT ODZS S C a•AO I.OsOyP /ll • CIS
OS S •••T) OS $ 001$ OCS SCl 0T0P1 10 SDI 001$ ou •i4 C-0 OS I uoul sun
PT0406341/•0T0.00
•^T0A IT 99S 09S 10TTt>•tO Toluoo 10JTAu3
'*3IA30 17Y(S41 1111N3NNO1lIAA3
:::1/0:f
OOlS OnT0•Inn OOZE OS S/OS $ OS f 001$ 39IMO 30I1 101
1 est-u•11)
•UT0 001$
•1/•011/10'S
1T071=10T••r1
• •uP• 0ptf
1/•b•
/SOO'S 7D •ax/OZS 6220
nP/SS • SLS • OOZS/SL f /004 • 0G4 •120/OZ • SCIS uOTd W+14
• (TOTTu•PT1*►s
'um) 001$
um - soot/
os0s5 /o
•1/•b0 103 •suoTTd000 /O
(TOTTIPT••41) 0W31/Tim 0
/A0S0tft
'Wm 001f 20/ 24/ OS f • '+OTi00.4 •KOM 0001f
62712 •106/9003 30 4200 •ao0/OZY 20 •220 4112 6220
/0CS • 00SS OS S . 0P/SS • SL $ 44/OSS • 0004 + 009$/SLS /01S • 00ZZ /OLS • OSZS 0s30/OZ • OC1X 1J0Td IsouT0'TtLad
. v011'd
••272
/Otf • SZ1S TOTai•rcul t .qj
• 10T 'PM Wm 1.
ImmTuTm 0SS) SS IS1-II 101 P'WT00•m ma i0l00s0 •T
•14430 001/15 Wee OZS IOi il••0+ 101/0ZS 0sa0 /0 ••rTW 14121
101/ Tot/ WI 4000 SCS 10T/ semi snow (SI3 • 00ZS /10T /OZS s0 101 0 e1 do us •200 TWI
CS • OS $ 01$ • 0055 101/0ZS 010T S lot 00SS OS • 00SS 101/S9S • 09$ 0SS • 0001$ '*ni) 00Zt$ /Ozf • aces /ss • aim /01S • 09S /02S • OSZS 101/1$ • LLS 101/0Z • 9°(S touTj
I T0Ta;a uI) ri owl' /0
(OnoTuTar Opt) •TI•M 0001
•TI'b• 001/lf /1S • 0004 TDTai0nWI ASOuTOTtCad
1
ango mo3
(t0T1'••PT00tl) Sl! • 101/0Zf • 0900 6272 460 20 10T
W0119$ • 001$ l0T/0Z S OS $ 10T/9S • OTS — —-- l01/OZ$ • Oti= - - WT/OZS--•-OSL$--101/1f-•-001f- ----isd-si$/OCt$ In Tud -----
SIM
K/lf • sal /ES • 06S 101/0S'i • 09$ •ATWItal
•SOld 0Y1t1930
Weft d*Tlrlfld 11303A3 DV/RIM 371r INCO11 S3tT01 S30 03 11SDOOIIS 1130100 3111V3S OHNISI (S03H10/4S) ONCMC30 i!1111ff11 LION 1011130 s w 33.4 11t311d013/►
313
!133d3l OIIIl110Ii tow
00/ 3OVO3AY
NOII3IOSI0(U'
JURISDICTION
AVERAGE FOR
OTHER
KIRKLAND METIER
DEVELOPMENT FEE AGED RE111O1 KEITT TU AILA REDMONDNSF/OTTERS) ISLAND SEATTLE BOTIELL '9IOIOMISH C0 OES MODES MOUNTLAKE TERRACE EVERETT PUTALLIP TACd
MOBILE HOME ►ARICSI
Tentative ! 'A ♦ $1 pee
C .
Prellaina y $1O0 •$5 per
acre
Final $ 90 • $2.50
per acre .
DESIGN miasmal
al S25 (Minor lee
than 15,000)
$50 (Mid.
$,000-$50,000)
$100 (lg. over
S50,0001
MODIFICATION
S100/5100
SPECIAL DEVELOPMFRT PERMIT $400
f 75/S50 for
daycare/141mi
daycare
•
DETELOFI'E]IT GUIDE A1E]OIEUR $300
UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT 5100/$225 •
310/acre S50
PLAN MCOIFICATIOI/APPROVAL
$325
LAD CLEARING APPLICATION $ a/lot i 20
•
VACATION
$150/5150
BONG PERMITS $ IS No fees far
IN
eppl./Sits
approval,
Eseptiane,
Waiver. _ . •