Introduction Last comprehensive review was undertaken in 2012/2013

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
IMPACT FEES AFFORDABLE HOUSING COMPONENT. STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS W.Va. Code § a contains the mandate for an affordable housing component and provides.
Advertisements

Framework for Growth and Change Land Supply Monitoring and Analysis Sequencing and Prioritization Financing & Funding Budgeting Service Delivery Integrated.
Comprehensive User Fee Study
Regional Water Service Development Cost Charges Update October 2014 Bryan Shoji, P.Eng. General Manager, Infrastructure Services.
Presentation to CITY OF PALM COAST, FLORIDA WATER AND WASTEWATER RATE STUDY AND BOND FEASBILITY REPORT Prepared in Conjunction with the Issuance of Utility.
© 2007 Hay Group. All rights reserved. Salary Survey Report January 30, 2007 State of Kansas.
DMH1 Overview of Mental Health Services Act Funding: Collection to Expenditure Tom Greene, Chair, Mental Health Funding and Policy Committee Mark Heilman,
Supporting Small Communities: Doubling the Small Community Grant Program Overview of the new grant allocation formula.
FINANCIAL UPDATE May 16, Financial Update will Cover Four Main Topics 1.Review of local economic indicators 2.Review of financial results for year.
Presentation to CITY OF PALM COAST, FLORIDA WATER AND WASTEWATER RATE STUDY AND BOND FEASBILITY REPORT Prepared in Conjunction with the Issuance of Utility.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS vs DEVELOPMENT CHARGES.
Recommendation for Board approval of updated nodal fee filing Steve Byone Overview –Historical summary –Highlights from approved interim Nodal Surcharge.
Additional FTE - 11 Increase in overall Personnel – 5% (compares to 8% in FY2015, 7% in FY2014, 2% in FY2013) $87,225 in on-going operating $1,226,099.
Independent Review of FY 2008 Proposed Rates D.C. Water and Sewer Authority Public Hearing June 13, 2007.
Sunshine Coast Regional District Development Cost Charges July 3, 2014 Infrastructure Services Committee Bob Twerdoff.
1 WPL Regulatory Update Scott R. Smith Director, Regulatory Affairs.
2010 User Fee Study RESULTS ORIENTATION 2010 User Fee Study RESULTS ORIENTATION Presentation to the Missoula City Council by: Chad Wohlford, MPPA September.
County Financial Statements – The County Official’s Role
Transportation Utility Fees: Possibilities for the City of Milwaukee May 11, 2007 Prepared by: Deven Carlson Bill Duckwitz Karen Kurowski Lamont Smith.
NMA Report to City Council June 16, 2015 Presented to Newport Beach City Council 1.
Estimating Households’ Non-financial Assets Presentation to the OECD Working Party on Financial Accounts Patrick O’Hagan System of national Accounts, Statistics.
Presentation to Board June 17, 2008 Presented by: J. A. Sabo, Associate Director – Leading Services & Treasurer of the Board BUDGET York Catholic.
Commission Meeting November 18, 2015 WSSC Customer Use and Pricing.
City of Surrey Overview - Sustainable Futures: A Boot Camp for Long-Range Planners SFU – October 2007 Murray Dinwoodie City Manager.
Property Tax Principles and Indicators
1. FY Proposed Budget Jamie Justice, Town Manager & Piet Swart, Finance Director April 26, 2016 Fiscal Year Proposed Budget 2.
Napa County User Fee Study Board of Supervisors: Final Report Presentation May 12, 2009.
Proposed 2013 Budget Highlights 1. Executive Summary Proposed City tax increase of 4% with an overall impact of 1.9% – Delivers on City’s Long Term Financial.
WATER & SEWER ENTERPRISE FUNDS. Criteria for Rates  Overall Goal – to set rates to recover costs & avoid significant fluctuations Criteria: o Project.
City of Fernley, Nevada – 164 th Ave. NE, Suite 300, Redmond, WA April 18, 2007 Rate Study Findings Water and Sewer Utility Rates.
AUSTIN FOR ALL : A REAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING SOLUTION Housing Linkage Fees.
City of Burlington Planning Applications Fees Review Community Development Committee Presentation January 14, 2013.
THIRD QUARTER 2012 RESULTS.  Year-over-year revenue growth of 5.5% to $32.0 million, at the high end range of guidance  Adjusted fully diluted EPS of.
City of Fernley, Nevada – 164 th Ave. NE, Suite 300, Redmond, WA April 18, 2007 Rate Study Findings Water and Sewer Utility Rates.
1 Budget Presentation Fiscal Year 2011 May 10, 2010.
May 31, 2016 WATER & SEWER RATE STUDY PRESENTATION 5/9/2016 City of Greenfield, California.
Budget Introduction – April 18 , 2017
City of Petersburg Water and Wastewater Rates
Environmental Quality Board
2018 Proposed Executive Budget
Water & Wastewater Capacity Charge Work Shop
Commercial Linkage Fee Research
Budget Development Discussion
Tax Reform Session 5-6.
March 8, 2011 County of San Diego Economic Update
City of Sisters, OR 2017 Water & Sewer Rate Study
Consultation with Disability Representative Bodies 13th January, 2017
General Fund Fiscal Year Mid-Year Budget Review
Updates to the Traffic Reduction and Transportation Improvements Fee (TR/TIF) City Council July 24, 2017.
Utilities Department Wedgefield Water November 28, 2017.
Town of Los Gatos FY 2006/07 Recommended Budget
State Government Special Revenue Fund Update
PAD 505Competitive Success/tutorialrank.com
Municipality of Central Elgin
Fire Protection Impact Fee
The Economic Impact of the Conceptual Plan for the Redevelopment of the Green Bay Correctional Institution Site Commissioned by the Village of Allouez.
Financial Modeling and Forecasting Smart Practices
Proposed 2018 Budget Truth In Taxation Hearing December 5, 2017
2010 Draft Budget.
BUDGET WORKSHOP February 15, 2017.
Presentation by Daniel B Edds, MBA, PMP Council Presentation
Town Manager’s Recommended Fiscal Year 2018 Budget and Financial Plan
Rate Commission Meeting
2017 FEE REVIEW WORKSHOP SENATE BILL NO. 512, CHAPTER 366, 79TH SESSION 2017, REQUIRES THE STATE LAND REGISTRAR TO ESTABLISH CERTAIN FEES BY REGULATION.
Financial Trends Analysis
Affordable Housing Fees Study
Small Cities Organized Risk Effort (SCORE) Target Funding Benchmarks
Capital Improvement Plans
Solid Waste Department Rate Stabilization Plan Recommendation
Town of Wrentham DPW Water Department
Presentation transcript:

City of Cornwall Building Permit Fee Review Presented by BMA Management Consulting Inc.

Introduction Last comprehensive review was undertaken in 2012/2013 Since 2014, there have been no building permit fee increases As processes and complexity of applications have changed since 2012 and a new building code in 2014, it is an appropriate time to undertake a comprehensive analysis of the building permit fees

Guiding Principles Fairness and Equity Equitably distribute costs between the various types of applications Cornwall will not set building fees beyond 100% of the full cost Transparency Pricing structure will be transparent Predictability Knowledge and certainty of fees allows applicants to make more informed decisions

Building Permit Fees Review Process Review background materials Process Mapping Estimate Productive Hours Identify Direct and Indirect Costs Fee Calculation Fee Comparison Bottom Up Approach

Overview of Budget and Actual Revenues and Expenditures

Analysis of Cost of Service As illustrated, above average building permit revenues only recover 58% of the costs

Revenue Trend Over the last 5 years, taxpayers have contributed approximately $500,000 annually toward the cost of service Building permit fees account for a small portion of the overall cost of construction that is not proven to be a significant location sensitive factor.  

Construction Activity and The Need for Stabilization Reserves

Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Benefits Spreads the impact of market fluctuations across an economic cycle Avoids fluctuations in fees Available to fund one-time capital requirements. Municipalities have established a target range for the reserve of 100%- 200% of operating costs – currently the City’s reserve balance represents less than 10% of operating costs   Recommendation Set reserve target of 100% of operating costs

Existing Fee Structure

Building Permit Fees – Current Fees New and Alterations Construction Value of $0-$1 million - $12.50/$1,000 of construction Construction Value of $1 million and over $12,500 + $9.45/$1,000 construction Separate Plumbing fee Other fees to be discussed

Fee Recommendations

Residential Fees - Observations Residential - Residential fee structure is based on a cost per $1,000 of construction There are basic resources required to process an application that are not being recovered from fees under the current fee structure This approach requires the City to monitor and update construction costs Construction costs have not been updated since 2005 Residential – Plans review and inspection costs are more closely aligned to square footage rather than construction value Over 88% of the municipalities surveyed in Ontario use a per sq.ft. approach or a base plus a cost per sq.ft. approach

Residential Recommendations and Rationale Charge a base fee and a cost per square foot for New Residential Construction as opposed to construction value: Rationale: Fairness and Equity — a base fee plus a cost per square foot fee for above the average dwelling size is more reflective of the actual cost of the building inspection and application processing services. Objectivity and Consistency - Size of the building is available, objective and easily validated Predictability & Transparency— Easier for applicant and municipality to determine fees.

Plumbing Fees There is currently a different fee for single, semi-detached, multi family (apartment), multi-family (row) and condos Underlying cost of service does not vary by type of structure Recommendation Establish one base fee for all types of residential construction with an additional charge for each plumbing fixture

Non-Residential Rates - Observations City currently charges non-residential fees based on a cost per $1,000 construction and a 25% discount for applications over $1 million The tiered rate structure in Cornwall reflects an assumption that as the construction cost increases beyond $1 million, the cost of service decreases Construction costs are more readily available in the non-residential sector and is a good proxy for building permit fees in commercial, industrial and institutional projects Recommendations Continue to charge based on cost of construction at $/$1,000 construction Eliminate the tiered rate for commercial and institutional applications Increase the City’s threshold for industrial properties to $3 million

Occupancy Permit The City has an obligation to ensure the health and safety of the general public An Occupancy Permit or Partial Occupancy Permit indicates compliance with the Ontario Building Code. Recommendation Charge a fee for formal occupancy prior to final inspection. A fee would not be required if an occupancy permit was provided in conjunction with a final inspection.

Refundable Inspection Fee Consistent with the experience in other Ontario municipalities, Cornwall has a large number of open building permits without a final inspection Another issue identified by the City which increases workloads and/or the cost of service is when an applicant books an inspection prematurely or when the inspector arrives at the site and the construction was not ready or substantially not ready for that stage of inspection Recommendation Leading practice is to establish a refundable deposit

Fee Benchmarking

Residential New Construction

Retail Non-Residential Construction

Industrial Construction

Residential New Construction Building Permit Fees and DCs