Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Community Development staff outline modest fee increases and new resubmittal charges for permitting
Summary
Community Development staff presented a proposed fee schedule update—memorializing a $50 upload fee, adding rereview and reinspection fees, and proposing concurrent-variance charges—with examples showing typical projects could face roughly 15–18% higher total fees; no action was taken at the July 15 work session.
Community Development staff presented a proposed update to Cherokee County’s development-services fee schedule at the July 15 work session and asked commissioners for feedback before bringing a final proposal to the board on August 5.
Staff said the proposed changes are modest and intended to recover staff time and administrative costs, not to create profit. The package formally memorializes an existing $50 digital upload fee, proposes a rereview fee after a second submittal, and adds a $50 reinspection fee for a second reinspection by the county arborist.
The proposal also would add a concurrent-variance fee when applicants request variances at the same time as rezoning or special-use permit applications; staff said other jurisdictions charge up to $100 per concurrent variance. Staff told commissioners the rationale is that each variance requires separate review criteria and staff resources.
Staff provided two examples to illustrate the fiscal impact: a recent residential project (Courtyards at Hickory Flat) would have paid roughly $1,000 more — an 18% increase — under the proposed fees; a commercial project (a recently completed Circle K) would have paid about $500 more, or roughly 17% higher. Staff described the increases as primarily tied to additional submittals and re-reviews rather than the base application fee.
Commissioners pressed for clarity on how resubmittal fees would be collected (staff said permit fees are collected when a permit is approved and that resubmittal charges would be added at that time) and whether the modified fee schedule could require a public hearing (staff said they were not aware a hearing is required for these changes).
No vote was taken; staff will produce a more readable draft of the fee schedule and return for formal consideration at the August 5 meeting.
Ending: The board asked staff to refine the proposal and, if possible, provide additional project examples showing revenue impacts before the August meeting.
