Laserfiche WebLink
CC Work Session 2. 1. <br />Meeting Date: 08/23/2011 <br />By: Patrick Brama, Administrative Services <br />Title: <br />2011 Development Costs Study <br />Background: <br />As part of the Ramsey City Council's 2011 strategic goals, "Reviewing development fees and standards regarding <br />construction" was identified as a council priority. <br />This study, the "2011 Development Costs Study," aims to understand how different cities assess the costs of new <br />development. <br />In late April, the City of Ramsey sent a "Development Costs Survey" to 10 municipalities. The survey consisted of <br />200 questions. Completed surveys were received in mid June. <br />The purpose of this case is to review The 2011 Development Costs Study results. <br />Observations: <br />Each and every city in this survey assesses development costs differently. Some municipalities rely more on <br />developers to install needed infrastructure and to make site improvements than other municipalities. Some <br />municipalities install needed infrastructure and make site improvements independently and then charge developers. <br />Some cities put most of their costs into one part of a building permit and others break down their costs into separate <br />permit fees. Some cities account for nearly all costs through development fees and some cities absorb costs into the <br />general operating budget. Some cities pass on costs to end users rather than developers (i.e. residents and <br />businesses) through utilities and assessments. Furthermore, there is often times a difference in development fee <br />rates for fully developed communities when compare to developing communities. <br />Cities also assign expenses in several different ways: flat rates, area specific rates, escrows, per unit rates, per acre <br />rates, type of land use rates, per hour rates, assessments, trunk fees, etc. <br />The 2011 Development Costs Study results are broken down in two documents (both are attachments in this case). <br />First, being the executive report; and second being the appendix. <br />The attached executive report contains background information on the development study and an overview of the <br />results. <br />The attached appendix contains detailed background information on how the study was conducted, how the survey <br />was broken down and it also includes individual answers for each individual question asked in the survey. <br />When reviewing the results of this survey please consider the following: <br />• When cities rely on the developer to install (DI) needed public infrastructure; or, when a city assesses (ASSD) the <br />cost of public infrastructure to future property owners those costs are not reflected in this survey. The actual cost of <br />development (for a developer) would be greater than stated. <br />Take scenario #1 for example, the City of Blaine has a much lower total cost of development than the City of <br />Ramsey. However, the City of Blaine lists DI (developer installed) as an answer to five separate questions. Those <br />developer installed costs are likely to exceed $300,000. <br />• Leaving an answer space blank, writing "zero," writing the word "nothing," writing an answer that doesn't apply <br />