The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07 0325 96 In the Matter of } An Ordinance Amending } The Fee Schedule for the } Department of Public Works } Ct', P'¡;V'13-;¿iP-qee. F.t - SECTION I. JEFFERSON COUNTY State of Washington ORDINANCE NO. 7-.0325-96 PURPOSE AND SCOPE: The public is entitled to efficient and effective administration services provided by the Jefferson County Department of Public Works. The purpose of this ordinance is to amend the fee schedule which will pay for the rising costs of these services. This schedule shall apply to all fees required by the Department of Public Works, except solid waste fees. All fees are non-refundable. SECTION ll. FEE SCHEDULE: The following fee schedule is hereby adopted for administration services provided by the Jefferson County Public Works Department. C. A. RIGHT OF WAY USE APPLICATIONS 1. Application for Road Approach 2. Application for General Permit 3. Application for License to Use Right of Way 4. Application to Open Right of Way $35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 B. UTILITY APPLICATIONS 1. Franchise Applications Fee 2. Franchise Re-application Fee 3. Utility Installation Fee (a) 150.00 150.00 35.00 MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATIONS 1. Application: Road Vacation Petition (b) 2. Application: Road Improvement District (RID) Petition (e) 3. RID Petition Bond (d) 4. Application for 911 Emergency Locator Number (e) Replacement 911 Emergency Locator Number Plate 5. Oversize Vehicle permit 6. Petition to Change County or Private Road Name (t) 50.00 100.00 300.00 25.00 5.00 5.00 25.00 (a) In addition, hourly inspection costs may be charged. (b) Preliminary fee only; in addition, other fees will be charged by the Department of Public Works and other departments. (c) Includes preliminary costs up to filing of petition by applicant. (d) Bond accompanies filing of petition. Bond amount is applied to total cost of RID. If district is not established, unspent amount is refundable. (e) Includes plate. If both road approach and 911 locator number are applied for at once, TOTAL FEE is $45.00. (t) In addition, the publication costs for the hearing notice for the petition and the cost of street sign replacement will be charged. 1 22 rM,> 779 Department of Public Works Fee Schedule VOL D. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW 1. Administrative Review: Subdivisions Short Subdivisions $47. oo/hour Long Subdivisions 5-14 lots (g) $1,000.00 plus $100 per lot Long Subdivisions 15 or more lots (g) $1,000.00 plus $150 per lot (g) The fee for review of long subdivision applications submitted prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall be $47. OO/hour. Binding Site Plans For Mobile Home And Recreational Vehicle Parks: Fees shall be based on the number of lots created, as per the subdivision schedule Variance (does not include administrative variances) $200.00 Pre-Application Meeting $75.00 (applied to subdivision application fee at time of application) 2. Administrative Review: Zoning Approval 3. SEP A Review 4. Review Erosion Control and Stormwater Management Plans $47.oo/hour $47.oo/hour $47.oo/hour SECTION ill. REVOCATIONS: This Ordinance amends Ordinance No. 12-1214-92 Jefferson County Department of Public Works Fee Schedule. SECTION IV. SEVERABILITY: In any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or figure of this ordinance or its application to any person or circumstances is held invalid, the remainder of the ordinance or the application to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected. SECTION V. EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall become effective the 26th day of March, 1996 and shall apply to applications submitted on or after the 26th day of March, 1996. . SECTION VI. ADOPTION: This ordinance is hereby adopted this 25th day of March, 1996. SEAL: JEFFERSON COUNTY BOARD.. SIONERS ,./" . . (Opposed) Glen Huntingford, Member ATTEST: ~YL~ca~ ~Q~ Lorna L. Delaney Clerk of the Board 2 22 rAC,: 780 Department of Public Works Fee Schedule VOL DEVELOPMENT REVIEW FEE SCHEDULE PROPOSED INCREASE COEFRaENT EXISTING REVIEW FEE PROPOSED REVIEW FEE ON 12/31/95 PROPOSED REVIEW FEE ON 3/8/96 TY'Æ I a= $ $ Fæ AVERAGE AVERAGE $ % IMPACT OVERALL $ % IMPACT OVERALL OCCURRENCE * PER HOLR 1X2 LOTS f-O...fIS PER HOUR ** I!\CREASE I!\CREASE PER HJLR I!\CREASE I!\CREASE 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Short Subdivision 0.45 $ 35.00 $ 15.75 $500+$100/lot 3 10 $ 80.00 $ 36.00 $ 47.00 $ 21.15 Long Subdivision 5t014 lots 0.14 $ 35.00 $ ..4.90 $1000+$100/lot 10 30 $ 66.67 $ 9.33 $ 66.67 $ 9.33 Long Subdivision 15 or more 0.25 $ 35.00 $ 8.751 $1000+$150/lotl 29 I 95 I: 14.081 14.08 Other Rev. SEPA, Erosion Control, Stormwater 0.16 $ 35.00 $ 5.60 $ 40.00 - - 6.40 7.52 Total 1.00 $ 35.00 <: = I * Coffecient of occurrence is based on 1995 information and hours billed ** Per hour fee is based on proposed flat fee+per lot fee x average lots/average hours N N -,- þo -~ ., Note: calculation of average hours and average lots is based on limited information -.J 00 ~ (l PW ~-\6 -q~ Feb-15-96 03:5lP Ron Gregory 360 437 9638 ¡ '- P.Ol r --... ~ ~_efferson County Home Builders Assoc. . P.O. Box 1399, Port Hadlock, WA 98339 Bus. 206-379-8184 Fax 206-319-8185 , ._.__.__~III_.III._._._- 1 .oIII4:...:1.....IIII.LIIII_- February 13, 1996 Jefferson County Commissioners Jefferson County Courthouse Port Townsend, W A 98368 11,"0""\' \',¡:_1 ('i.':',Ù fIC,:",', ¡ii, H¿ } ~:~ I ' .:J I lr~ tL ~!) !, ~, .. i; FEB 1 5 1996 hit ','\Â n F~ \iJ) ",.. JEffERSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSiONERS Gentlemen: The Jefferson County Bomebuilders Association wishes to go on record as being in opposition to the proposed Public Works Fee Increase. The proposed fee increases have no basis in merit and it is our understanding the present fee structure is currently covering either all or most of the costs incurred by public works. It is our feeling that public works sees this as an opportunity to take advantage of a small segment in our county who wish to improve their property for personal use or to sell. If a "fund raiser" is needed to assure the economic health of public works, may we suggest Public Works look within to clean up their fiscal problems. Management, department heads and staff need to demonstrate their performance and production warrents current levels of funding. Instead of fee increases, may we suggest the Commissioners closely examine all departments to determine if efficiencies are in order or do we continue to bear the burden of additional fees? If public works is attempting to justifY fees increases as a cost of county business, then public works must also look at the revenues generated by development, Jack Westerman's analysis clearly shows as substantial increase in county revenues due to development. The Building Industry in Washing state is working with bi-partisan legislative support to either eliminate fees such as those proposed by public works or modify the time of payment until occupancy when so called "impact" occurs. We would suggest to those who seek additional fees for development and building in this county, that anything that adds to our cost of doing business needs to be carefully scrutinized. Respectiï:l!itted. Dave Clevenger, President Jefferson County Homebuilders Association c=Jr~\...,,/,,~ -:: '"" ".' ;;; Jé!l' '~""',~r~,'J<C-.,,':"",,. ',- . \.~~¡?;,(-, ~-~""",4 ¡)I <%" . f ',- ~ '1' JEFFERSON COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 1820 Jeffersc;m Street P.O. Box 1220 Port Townsend, WA 98368 (360) 385-9160 Dave Clevenger, President Jefferson County Homebuilders Association P.O. Box 1399 Port Townsend, W A 98339 February 23, 1996 Dear Dave, Thank you for taking the time to write a letter expressing your concerns about the fee proposal for Development Review that is presently before the Jefferson County Board of Commissioners. In a continuing effort to support community concerns, Public Works is constantly striving to implement and monitor procedures that produce the highest quality, lowest cost solutions for things such as Development Review inspection. Unlike other departments, Public Works is able to adjust staffing levels expensed to Development Review as the needs fluctuate based on the current application load. At present the funding for Development Review comes from Roads funds which are primarily generated from timber harvests, property taxes and gas tax. Statutorily, Roads revenues are only spent on activities inside the road right of way or facilities that support roads. Based on this we have asked that the Current Expense budget support the expenses for Development Review or that inspection fees would have to be raised. The request to establish a 100% funded flat fee for development review has two main effects: 1. It raises the level of development review funding to 100% in an effort to meet the adopted 1996 budget goals as outlined in Resolution 124-95. 2. It also will allow Public Works to discontinue the use of Roads funding in subsidizing the Development Review budget. Roads funds can then be used for roads construction and maintenance. I hope that this helps you understand that we are not interested in raising the costs to the public for Development Review inpspection. We always will be looking for ways to reduce this expense. Any suggestions that you have for our department in this regards are welcome. ifford sf. Public Works Director cc: Board of County Commissioners KIara Fabry, PWD 100% Recycled Paper