HR Green Rate Fee Survey Report - Manual (Page 4)

Site Plan Review
Survey Results
3
Introduction and Purpose
Pressures on units of local government to keep property tax levy rates down and find alternative means
of offsetting operating costs, are forcing many city administrators/managers, community development
directors, and related public administrators to transition fees to the development community. By the
same token, elected officials want to be competitive when it comes to encouraging economic
development in their community and do not want to impose fees that might be considered excessive.
Ultimately, this situation provides the impetus for the series of studies being implemented by HR
Green
’s Government Services Business Line.
While the focus of this study is examining procedures
associated with requests for Site Plan Review, HR Green is also conducting similar studies to examine:
 Change in Zone Requests
 Conditional/Special Use Permits
 Requests for Zoning Variances
 Plats/Subdivision of Land
 Plumbing Permits
 Electrical Permits
 Mechanical System Permits
 Building System Permits
The results of these studies are meant to give you, the practitioner, some insight both into the
comparative rate structures and approaches used by communities in your state and other parts of the
country. In addition, the findings include details regarding other departments involved in reviews,
resources committed in terms of full-time-equivalent (FTE) staff engaged in the respective process,
general timelines regarding the disposition of cases, and procedures common to the procedure being
studied.
Our hope is that this information gives you some added insight on rate and fee structures as well as
insight on the organizational structure and procedures used to facilitate development related projects.
Methodology
This study targeted city and county administrators/managers, community development/planning
directors, code enforcement, and public works/engineering departments in communities with
populations of 5,000 and up. States included in this study include: California, Colorado, Georgia,
Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Texas, and Washington.
A written survey
1 was prepared by a team of former public officials that held leadership positions in
community development, engineering/public works, and code enforcement. All surveys were
distributed via an Internet link to an on-line questionnaire. Public officials invited to complete these
questionnaires were given approximately two weeks to respond and one reminder message was
forwarded to non-respondents one week prior to the deadline.
Summary of Findings
The summary of findings discussed in this section of the report reflects the combined results of all
respondents; however, all rate and fee data is consolidated according to the state where the data
originated and is further defined by the population ranges for responding communities. This approach
allows you to consider fees that are consistent with your state and community size. Results
corresponding to procedures are summarized in the aggregate.
1 Please refer to Exhibit A which includes a copy of the questionnaire.