Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout75A - APPLICATION FEE - HISTORICAL PROPERTIES REQUIEST FOR a. COUNCIL ACTION CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: CLERK OF COUNCIL USE ONLY: FEBRUARY 1, 2010 TITLE: APPROVED ? As Recommended PUBLIC HEARING - ORDINANCE AMENDMENT NO. ? As Amended 2 0 0 9 - 0 2 TO AMEND CHAPTER 3 0 OF THE SANTA ? Ordinance on 15~ Reading ANA MUNICIPAL CODE TO ESTABLISH A NEW ? Ordinance on 2"d Reading ? Implementing Resolution APPLICATION FEE FOR THE PRIVATE PARTY ? Set Public Hearing For NOMINATION OF PROPERTIES TO THE SANTA ANA REGISTER OF HISTORICAL PROPERTIES CONTINUED TO ~ ~ FILE NUMBER CITY MANAGER RECOMMENDED ACTION 1. Approve and adopt Ordinance Amendment No. 2009-02 to add section 30- 2.4 to the Santa Ana Municipal Code establishing a fee requirement for applications to designate a building on the city Register of Historical Properties, or appeal to the City Council. 2. Adopt a resolution establishing the application and appeal fee, and adding these fees to the Miscellaneous Fee Schedule. DISCUSSION In March 2009, the City Council adopted a resolution that provided for a comprehensive update of the City's development processing fees and instituted several new fees. The new fee structure was the result of an extensive study by both City staff the consulting firm of MGT of America, Inc. and resulted in fees based on actual cost for service. However, the list of new fees did not include a fee for private party nominations of properties to the Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties. Since the establishment of the Register the staff services required to place a private property on the Register have been provided pro bono. Given the City's current and future projected budget status, the amount of staff work required to place private properties on the Register, and the current inventory of properties already listed on the Register, staff believes that it is now prudent to institute a fee for private party nominations of properties to the Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties. Fee Methodology The methodology used to study the appropriate fee amount to be established analyzed both the direct and indirect costs associated with providing the listing services. Direct costs were calculated by determining the actual time and materials involved in processing the 75A-1 New Application Processing Fee February 1, 2010 Page 2 applications from the submittal of the initial application through the final recordation of the property. Indirect costs were calculated based on either the number of full time positions (FTEs), the percentage of budget allocation or the percent of work product generated, whichever was most applicable to the type of work performed. This total indirect cost was then spread proportionately over the various services based on the percentage of applications/permits processed of that type. Examples of indirect costs include support from agencies such as the City Manager's Office, Finance and Management Services, the City Attorney's Office and Personnel Services. Listing Process Currently there are two ways for a property to be added to the Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties. The first is through a City sponsored nomination process. These are properties that have been identified by the City as having historic significance as a contributing property, key property or landmark. The second way is through a voluntary private party nomination, often called a self-nomination, by the property owner. These are properties that meet the eligibility criteria established by SAMC Chapter 30 - Places of Historical and Architectural Significance to be added to the register, but that were not identified by the City as having special historic significance. In most cases, the properties nominated through private property self-nomination process fall into the lowest qualifying category of Contributive. Mills Act The most common reason for property owners to request their properties be added to the historic register is to enter into a historic property preservation agreement known as a Mills Act contract. The property must be listed on the Register in order to be eligible for this benefit. This contract, enacted between the property owner and the City, requires the property owner to protect and preserve the historic nature of the property over the term of the contract. In exchange for this preservation, the property owner is able to take advantage of substantial property tax savings through tax credits for the life of the agreement. Impact of New Fee on Future Listings When the decision was made not to establish a fee for self-nominated properties it was believed that the establishment of a fee would discourage property owners from listing their properties. As the entire listing process was new and many historically significant properties were at risk of being lost of altered, the incentive provided by the free application was warranted at the time. However, in the almost 10 years that the program has been in existence the City, through a combination of City-initiated and self-nominated applications, has added over 540 properties to the Register. 75A-2 New Application Processing Fee February 1, 2010 Page 3 At this time the most significant properties have received historic status and further listings of self-nominated properties are primarily for the purpose of receiving the Mills Act tax reduction. The establishment of this fee, though it may result in a reduction of the number of self-nominated historic properties, does not restrict the City's ability to list properties through the City-initiated process. In this way, historically significant structures that may be identified in the future can still be listed without any cost to the property owner, thereby ensuring the City's ability to preserve significant historic properties. Fee Establishment While a fee already exists for Historic Property Preservation Agreements (Mills Act), there is currently no fee associated with a request to be added to the historical register. The lack of a fee results in the applicant receiving a sizable subsidy from the general taxpayer due to the great deal of time and materials required to process these requests. Given the City's current and future projected budget status, the amount of staff work required to place private properties on the Register, and the current inventory of properties already listed on the Register, staff believes that it is now prudent to institute a fee for private party nominations of properties to the Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties. The fee of $4,754 per application for private party nominations to the Historical Register establishment is based on full cost recovery fee for the staff services provided. It is also recommended that the City Council adopt a resolution adding this fee and its associated appeal fee to the Miscellaneous Fee Schedule. FISCAL IMPACT It is estimated that the proposed changes to the fee schedule will generate an additional $118,700 to the general fund revenue annually. This estimate is based on a maximum of 25 applications processed per calendar year, a cap established by the City Council sub-committee and approved at the City Council meeting held August 3, 2009. However, it is anticipated that with the introduction of a fee for private party nominations that this number will be markedly less in future years. . Trevino Executive Director Planning & Building Agency MF:rb mf\reporta\Historic Registry RFCA 75A-3 7 5A-4 ORDINANCE NO. NS-XXXX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AMENDING CHAPTER 30 OF THE SANTA ANA MUNICIPAL CODE TO AUTHORIZE AN APPLICATION AND APPEAL FEE TO BE CHARGED TO APPLICANTS SEEKING TO ADD A PROPERTY TO THE CITY'S REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana does hereby find, determine and declare as follows: A. Since the establishment of the City of Santa Ana Historic Register, staff services required to place a private property on the Register have been provided for free. B. In the almost 10 years that the program has been in existence the City, through a combination of City-initiated and self-nominated applications, has added over 540 properties to the Historic Register. C. Given the City's current and future projected budget status, the amount of staff work required to place private properties on the Historic Register, and the current inventory of properties already listed on the Register, staff believes that it is now prudent to institute a fee for private party nominations of properties to the City of Santa Ana Register of Historical Properties. Section 2. Section 30-2.4 is added to Chapter 30 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code to read in full as follows: Sec. 30-2.4. Same--Filing fees. Every application under this chapter to designate a building, or part thereof, structure, object or site for inclusion on the city register of historical properties or appeal to the city council shall be accompanied by a filing fee. No application shall be accepted for filing without the required fee, except that all governmental agencies are exempt from the fee requirement. The city council shall from time to time by resolution adopt a schedule of fees to be charged, a copy of which shall be maintained in the office of the planning department. 75A-5 Section 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Santa Ana hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion thereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, phrases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional. ADOPTED this day of , 2010. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher City Attorney By: Benjamin Kaufman Chief Assistant City Attorney AYES: Councilmembers NOES: Councilmembers ABSTAIN: Councilmembers NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers 75A-6 CERTIFICATE OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, MARIA D. HUIZAR, Clerk of the Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Ordinance No. NS- to be the original ordinance adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on ,and that said ordinance was published in accordance with the Charter of the City of Santa Ana. Date: Clerk of the Council City of Santa Ana 75A-7 75A-8 bk:10/27/09 RESOLUTION NO. 2010- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA ESTABLISHING AN APPLICATION FEE FOR PROCESSING OF APPLICATIONS SEEKING TO ADD A PROPERTY TO THE CITY'S REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA ANA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: The City Council hereby, finds, determines and declares as follows: A. The FY 2009-10 Miscellaneous Fee Schedule was established by the City Council by Resolution No. 2009-030. The Planning and Building Agency has continued to analyze the cost to administer certain programs, such as the placement of a property on the City of Santa Ana Historic Register, for which the City charges no application processing fee. B. A true and correct copy of the full study which substantiates this proposed fee, and the appeal fee already existing in the Miscellaneous Fee Schedule for all appeals, has been placed on file with the Clerk of the Council for the statutory period required by Government Code § 66000, et seq. The study methodology analyzes the average volume of applications during a year. A separate evaluation analyzed the time and motion of processing the various project types. The third and final analysis calculated the average overhead and indirect expenses required to provide these city services. C. Section 200 of the City's Charter; state law, including but not limited to Article XI, section 5 of the Constitution and Government Code 65943, 66014, subdivisions (a) & (b), and 66451.2; and various provisions of the Santa Ana Municipal Code authorize the imposition of the fees and charges set forth herein. The City Council further finds, determines and declares that the fees and charges set forth herein do not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which such fees and charges are charged. D. The Request for Council Action for this resolution dated November 2, 2009 and duly signed by the City Manager shall, by this reference, be incorporated herein, and together with this resolution and accompanying ordinance, any amendments or supplements, the materials and study on file with the Office of the Clerk of the Council, and oral and written testimony constitute the necessary findings for this action. 75A-9 Section 2: An application fee pursuant to Section 30-2.4 of the Santa Ana Municipal Code of $4,754.00 shall be levied upon applicants until further resolution of this Council. The standard Planning and Building appeal fee as set forth in Resolution No. 2009-030, of $3,480.00(applicant) $350.00 (non-applicant), shall apply to appeals to the City Council pursuant to said Section 30-2.4. Section 3: That without further action of the City Council said charges, fees and service charges shall be incorporated into the City's Miscellaneous Fee Schedule. Section 4: If any charge, fee, service charge, section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or word of this Resolution is for any reason held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed and adopted this Resolution, and each and all provisions hereof, irrespective of the fact that one or more provisions may be declared invalid. Section 5: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the Clerk of the Council shall attest to and certify the vote adopting this Resolution, except that, as required by Government Code § 66017(a), the fee modifications set forth herein shall not take effect for sixty (60) days after adoption of this Resolution. ADOPTED this day of , 2010. Miguel A. Pulido Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: Joseph W. Fletcher, City Attorney By: Benjamin Kaufman Chief Assistant City Attorney 75A-10 AYES: Councilmembers: NOES: Councilmembers: ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: NOT PRESENT: Councilmembers: CERTIFICATION OF ATTESTATION AND ORIGINALITY I, PATRICIA E. HEALY, Clerk of Council, do hereby attest to and certify the attached Resolution No. to be the original resolution adopted by the City Council of the City of Santa Ana on Date: Clerk of Council City of Santa Ana 75A-11 75A-12