Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Administration topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission endorses shifting planning fees earlier and adopts planning-code corrections
Summary
The commission unanimously recommended an ordinance to collect planning fees at application submission (rather than at building-permit issuance) and approved a separate batch of planning-code corrections; staff said the changes improve cost recovery, predictability and streamline fee tables for CEQA.
On Oct. 23 the Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend a planning-fees ordinance that shifts fee collection from building-permit issuance to the submission of development applications and to approve a 2025 code corrections ordinance addressing cross-references and other technical fixes.
Veronica Flores (Planning Department) told commissioners the fee-timing change aligns fee collection with staff review, helps with departmental cash flow and ensures the department is compensated even if projects do not proceed to the permit stage. The proposal also consolidates CEQA categorical-exemption fee tables and establishes a flat environmental-review fee for very large projects (those with estimated construction costs of $100 million or more), while retaining a time-and-materials provision if work exceeds the flat fee.
Commissioners asked how fees would be billed administratively, whether flat fees would be CPI-indexed and how existing finance systems would handle the change; staff said the department already has a back-office mechanism and all fees are adjusted by CPI annually. Several commissioners welcomed the change as long overdue to better align work and compensation.
Separately, planning staff introduced a 2025 corrections ordinance to fix typographical errors, cross-reference issues and align the planning code with Department of Public Health practice regarding massage establishments (prohibiting massage businesses in residences). Staff recommended approval with a minor modification to remove a proposed entitlement-definition amendment that would conflict with other, pending family-housing code changes. The commission voted 7–0 on both items.
