San Carlos City Council
May 23, 2022

Table of Contents

1. Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................4

2. Form of Government ............................................................................................................................4

3. City Council Roles and Responsibilities.................................................................................................4

4. City Treasurer Roles and Responsibilities.............................................................................................5

5. Mayoral & Vice Mayoral Selection Process ..........................................................................................5

6. Mayoral, Vice Mayoral, Chair & Vice Chair Roles, Responsibilities, & Relationships...........................5 A. Mayor ................................................................................................................................................5 B. Vice Mayor.........................................................................................................................................6 C. Chair Person(s)...................................................................................................................................6 D. Vice Chair Person(s)...........................................................................................................................7

7. Discrimination in Appointments...........................................................................................................7

8. Legal and Ethical Standards..................................................................................................................7 A. Practice civility and decorum in discussions and debate...................................................................7 B. Honor the role of the presiding officer in maintaining order and equity. .........................................7 C. Demonstrate effective problem-solving approaches.........................................................................8 D. Base decisions on the best available information. ............................................................................8 E. Be prepared and knowledgeable.......................................................................................................8 G. Be respectful of other people's time..................................................................................................8 H. Treat others as you would like to be treated.....................................................................................8 I. Refrain from disclosing confidential information..............................................................................8 J. Limit the acceptance of gifts. ............................................................................................................8 K. Avoid even the appearance of conflict ..............................................................................................8 L. Implementation of Legal and Ethical Standards. ..............................................................................9 M. Legal Requirements (i.e. Brown Act). ................................................................................................9 N. Open Meeting Rules: The Ralph M. Brown Act..................................................................................9 O. The Political Reform Act. ...................................................................................................................9

9. Elected & Appointed Officials’ Conduct & Communication With and Participation in All Boards, Commissions and Committees....................................................................................................................10 A. Conduct............................................................................................................................................10 B. Communication................................................................................................................................11 C. Participation ....................................................................................................................................11

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1899 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

10. City Officials Relation with City Staff...............................................................................................12

11. City Officials Relation with the General Public ...............................................................................13 A. Meetings with the General Public ...................................................................................................13 B. Official Written Communication with the General Public (Printed or Electronic) ...........................13 C. Procurement....................................................................................................................................14 D. Proclamation Request......................................................................................................................14

12. Representing an Official City Position on an Issue/Item.................................................................14 A. Using their elected or appointed title when conducting official City business...............................14 B. Representing an official City position before a governmental agency............................................14 C. Letter of Support for Legislation......................................................................................................14 D. Sharing personal perspectives and opinions ...................................................................................14 E. Social Media. ...................................................................................................................................15

13. City Officials Relation with the Media.............................................................................................15

14. Giving Testimony.............................................................................................................................15

15. Discipline & Sanctions Procedures..................................................................................................16

16. Elected & Appointed Official Receipt..............................................................................................16

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1900 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS CODE OF CONDUCT & ETHICS POLICY
For Elected & Appointed Officials
“Leadership is an action, not a word.”
Richard Cooley -

1. Introduction
The proper operation of democratic government requires that decision-makers be independent, impartial, and accountable to the people they serve. The City of San Carlos has adopted this Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy to promote and maintain the highest standards of personal and professional conduct in the City’s government. All elected and appointed officials of the City subscribe to this Policy and understand how it applies to their specific responsibilities and actions. Because we seek public confidence in the City’s services and public trust of its decision-makers, our decisions and our work must meet the most demanding ethical standards and demonstrate the highest levels of achievement in following this Policy.

This Policy shall be deemed to set forth the minimum ethical standards to be followed by all elected and appointed officials serving on the City Council, Commissions, Boards and Committees or as the City Treasurer of the City of San Carlos, hereinafter collectively referred to as “City Officials” unless otherwise specified. This policy will be periodically reviewed by City Council.

2. Form of Government
The City of San Carlos operates under a Council-Manager form of government as prescribed by City Policy as set forth by City Council. Accordingly, Members of the Council who are elected at-large, provide legislative direction, set City policy, and ultimately answer to the public. The City Manager serves as the City’s chief administrative officer and is responsible for directing the day-to-day operations of the City and implementing policy as directed by City Council.

Neither the City Council, nor any member thereof, shall direct or request the hire or appointment of any person to or removal of any person from office or in any manner take part in the appointment or removal of an officer or employee in the administrative service of the City except the City Manager and City Attorney. Except for the purpose of inquiry, the City Council and its members shall deal with the administrative services solely through the City Manager, and neither the City Council nor any member thereof shall give orders to any City Employees or contract employees of the City, other than the City Manager and City Attorney.

3. City Council Roles and Responsibilities
Public officials are agents of public purpose and hold office for the benefit of the public. They are bound to uphold the United States and State Constitution and to carry out impartially the laws of the nation, State and the City and thus to foster respect for all governments. They are bound to observe, in their official acts, the highest standards of performance and to discharge faithfully the duties of their office, regardless of personal considerations.

A Council is a collection of diverse individuals who come together to constitute and act as an entity, and only when operating as an entity can they exercise authority and perform the fulfillment of their purpose. Working together as a Council involves acknowledging and balancing the unique interests,

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1901 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

expertise, and abilities of individual Council Members, and Council Members shall accept final decisions of the Council as the official City position on such matters.

The City Council provides the policy direction that guides the operation of the City, adopts ordinances and resolutions that constitute the legislative intent of the City, and sets the City's priorities through the adoption of an annual budget and the provision of direction to the City Manager. The City Council represents the City's residents through these actions and through the conveyance of constituent requests and concerns to the City staff. The City Council also appoints members to its commissions and advisory committees.

4. City Treasurer Roles and Responsibilities
The City Treasurer is an elected position entrusted to ensure safe management of funds, increase investment potential, minimize risk, and consider the financial needs of the community. The position oversees the internal control and safety of the City’s funds and works closely with the City’s Finance Division to meet the shared goals of appropriate internal control, prudent investments, and cost effective financial services. Additionally, the City Treasurer reviews and signs payroll and vendor warrants, provides investment advice, responds to rating agencies and public inquiries on financial data, and participates in professional development training focused on City Treasurer’s duties, responsibilities, and operational efficiency programs. The City Treasurer also researches and prepares lien release notices, participates in special financial projects with the Finance Division, and conducts internal control and financial efficiency reviews.

5. Mayoral & Vice Mayoral Selection Process
Serving as Mayor or Vice Mayor is considered to be a privilege, not a right. The Mayor and Vice Mayor serve at the pleasure of the City Council and may be replaced at any time by a majority vote of the council. At the time of selection (as described in the Municipal Code), any member of the City Council may be nominated to serve as Mayor or Vice Mayor. Individuals who are elected to serve as Mayor or Vice Mayor should be chosen because of their ability to fulfill the roles and responsibilities of these positions, establish a respectful and collegial working relationship with the Council, and ultimately, serve the community.

6. Mayoral, Vice Mayoral, Chair & Vice Chair Roles, Responsibilities, & Relationships
The following outlines some of the key roles, responsibilities, and relationships as they relate to the position of Mayor and Vice Mayor:

A. Mayor
The Mayor is the presiding officer of the City Council. In this capacity, the Mayor is responsible for reviewing and providing input to Council agendas in cooperation with the City Manager, and leading Council meetings. The Mayor is also responsible for recommending City Council Members to standing or ad hoc committees and to county and regional boards and committees.

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1902 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

As the presiding officer of the City Council, the Mayor is responsible for establishing a professional and respectful working relationship with the Council and public through cooperation and collaboration. This includes an obligation to listen and consider issues, questions, and concerns of the public and Council Members as they relate to Council meetings and the agenda setting process.

The title of Mayor carries with it the responsibility of communicating with the City Council, City Manager, and members of the public. In this capacity, the Mayor serves as the City Council’s ‘spokesperson’ representing the Council in official and ceremonial occasions.

As the official City spokesperson, the Mayor performs special duties consistent with the Mayoral office, including, but not limited to: signing of documents on behalf of the City Council, issuing proclamations, serving as the official voting delegate for various municipal advocacy groups, such as the League of California Cities, and delivering the State of the City Address. The City Council will determine any additional authority or duties that the Mayor shall perform.

Special duties consistent with the Mayoral office may be delegated to the Vice Mayor or any other member of the City Council.

It is the responsibility of the Mayor to interpret and investigate complaints of potential violations of this Code of Ethics Policy. The Mayor may, based on his/her initial investigation, recommend to the Council that either an attorney from the City Attorney’s office or an outside Investigator be selected to conduct a more formal investigation. The Mayor may counsel those City Officials covered by this Code of Ethics Policy about their behaviors or actions as applied to the rules set forth herein.

B. Vice Mayor
In the Mayor’s absence, the Vice Mayor shall perform the formal duties of the Mayor as noted elsewhere in this document.

When the Vice Mayor performs the duties of the Mayor in his/her absence, the Vice Mayor also carries the responsibility of communicating with the City Manager, City Council, and members of the public. This responsibility includes establishing a professional and respectful working relationship with the Council, City Manager and public through cooperation and collaboration.

In the event there is an alleged violation of the Code of Ethics Policy by the Mayor, the Vice Mayor shall interpret and investigate the alleged violation. The Vice-Mayor may, based on his/her initial investigation, recommend to the Council that an outside Investigator be selected to conduct a more formal investigation.

C. Chair Person(s)
The principal qualification to be Chair Person of a Board, Commission, or Committee of the City of San Carlos should be the ability to preside at meetings. This requires tact, courtesy, and familiarity with parliamentary procedures. The responsibility of the Chair Person of the body is to direct the discussion of and deliberation over the matters at hand. The Chair Person should encourage the input of ideas, clarify ideas, and re-state motions in order that all members understand the item on which they are voting. It is the Chair Person’s responsibility to insure that the body is operating within the confines of all applicable rules and regulations, and to act as the key liaison between the body and the City Council and City

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1903 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

Staff. The Chair Person should ensure that all members of the body have an opportunity to express their thoughts and opinions and should not allow any individual member or members to dominate the proceedings to the detriment of the remaining members or the members of the public.

Since the Chair Person must preside over meetings, he or she must maintain a certain degree of impartiality and be sure to allow all views on an issue to be expressed. However, the Chair Person may also participate in debate, expressing his or her own views, and may make or second motions.

It is the responsibility of the Chair Person to report complaints of potential violations of this Code of Ethics Policy to the Mayor in a timely manner.

D. Vice Chair Person(s)
All of the City’s Boards, Commissions and Committees shall elect a Vice Chair Person at the time elections for Chair Persons are held. The Vice Chair Person acts in the absence of the Chair Person. For all bodies, if neither the Chair Person nor Vice Chair Person is present at a meeting then the body should immediately elect a Chair Person Pro Tem to preside during the current session.

7. Discrimination in Appointments
The City Council shall not appoint, remove, or in any way favor or discriminate against any applicant of appointive position on the basis of race, color, age, religion, gender, sexual orientation, national origin, affiliations, or functional limitation as defined by applicable State or Federal laws. In evaluation of applications for appointive positions, this policy prohibits imposing unenforceable conditions on appointments, such as promises not to run for elective office in a future election or promises to vote in a particular manner on a matter likely to come before the Treasurer, Council or Commission. This provision shall not be construed to impair administrative discretion in determining the requirements of a position subject to review by the City Council.

8. Legal and Ethical Standards
Understanding that the City Officials’ primary concern is the public interest, such officials should work for the common good, rather than for private or personal interests. City Officials are expected to serve as a model of leadership and civility to the community and to treat all members of the public, each other, and the issues before them with respect, in order to promote open and effective government.

In order to promote the highest standards of respect and integrity, City Officials should:

A. Practice civility and decorum in discussions and debate. Difficult questions, tough challenges to a particular point of view, and criticism of ideas and information are legitimate elements of free democracy in action. This does not allow, however, City Officials to make abusive, slanderous, and personal comments, and/or take physical actions that could be construed as threatening. City Officials should be respectful of each other and diverse opinions.

B. Honor the role of the presiding officer in maintaining order and equity. Respect the Mayor/Chair's efforts to focus discussion on current agenda items. Objections to the Mayor/Chair's actions should be voiced politely and with reason.

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1904 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

C. Demonstrate effective problem-solving approaches. City Officials have a public stage to show how individuals with disparate points of view can find common ground and seek compromise that benefits the community as a whole. City Officials are role models for residents, business people, and other stakeholders involved in public debate.

D. Base decisions on the best available information. Decisions should be made upon the merits and substance of the matter at hand, and not through established coalitions or welldefined voting blocks.

E. Be prepared and knowledgeable. To effectively lead and inform the public, City Officials should be prepared and informed about issues on the agenda.

F. In public discourse, it is not uncommon for there to be a difference of opinion. When there is a difference of opinion, the goal is to disagree without being disagreeable, and to avoid making personal attacks on one’s colleagues, staff, members of the public and others.

G. Be respectful of other people's time. City Officials should stay focused, listen attentively, and act efficiently during public meetings.

H. Treat others as you would like to be treated. To maintain effective interpersonal relationships, City Officials should treat others the way they would expect to be treated.

City Officials should be professional in all situations and circumstances, conducting themselves in a consistent, confident, competent, and productive manner. City Officials shall treat all persons fairly, free of discrimination and of personal and sexual harassment, per the City of San Carlos Anti-Harassment Policy. For additional information, please request a copy of the policy from the Human Resources Office.

I. Refrain from disclosing confidential information concerning the property, government, or affairs of the City, whether it be provided in a closed session (see section 8N) or otherwise, unless the City Council authorizes such disclosure by majority vote. Confidential information shall not be used to advocate financial or other personal interests. Confidential information means all information, whether transmitted orally or in writing, which is of such a nature that it is not, at that time, a matter of public record or public knowledge. Confidential information of any nature and from any source is to remain confidential. Confidential information includes those items identified as confidential at the time the information is conveyed as well as information described or defined as confidential as a matter of regulation law or statute including those items described in the California Public Records Act (Government Code Section 6254), items from closed sessions under the Brown Act (Government Code Section 54950 et seq), and items subject to the attorney-client privilege.

J. Limit the acceptance of gifts. City Officials shall obey all applicable laws and requirements of the Political Reform Act relative to the acceptance of gifts. The California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) in interpreting the Political Reform Act has established guidance on limits on and reporting of gifts. For additional information, please request a Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 from the City Clerk’s Office.

K. Avoid even the appearance of conflict between public duties and personal interests and activities in all City forums. A conflict or the appearance of a conflict exists in a matter before an official for consideration or determination if the public official:
i. Has a material financial interest in the outcome; or

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1905 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

ii. Has a personal or organizational responsibility or relationship in an entity or organization that will be affected by the outcome, including an association as owner, member, partner, officer, employee, broker or stockholder.

L. Implementation of Legal and Ethical Standards. Legal and ethical standards will be included in the periodic orientations for City Officials; Candidates for elected positions; members of appointed positions; and newly elected Council Members and City Treasurer.

New City Officials shall sign the Statement of Receipt of San Carlos Code of Ethics Policy (received from and filed with the City Clerk) affirming they have received the City of San Carlos Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy.

M. Legal Requirements (i.e. Brown Act). The City Council, Boards, Commissions and Committees operate under a series of laws that regulate their operations as well as the conduct of their members. The City Attorney serves as the City’s legal officer and is available to advise these bodies on these matters. Council Members and appointed officials recognize the importance of following the law so as not to compromise the effort to achieve the goals of the community.

N. Open Meeting Rules: The Ralph M. Brown Act. The Act requires that meetings of the City Council and its subsidiary/advisory Boards, Commissions and Committees be open and public. ‘Meetings’ occur whenever a quorum of members of the body discuss, or deliberate on any matter that is relevant to the City. This includes discussions that occur face to face, serially, through third parties, or through written, telephonic, e-mail or any other such communication (such as chat rooms, online forums, blogs, twitter feeds, Internet forums, etc.).

These rules apply to all ‘legislative bodies,’ which are defined to include the City Council and all subsidiary/advisory Boards, Commissions and Committees.

This Act also requires that the agenda for meetings be posted in advance and that discussions and actions be limited to items appearing on the posted agenda.

Closed session discussions and actions in limited circumstances, including pending or anticipated litigation, property acquisition, labor negotiations or the appointment or evaluation of certain personnel are allowed under this Act. The Act provides that closed sessions and the discussions that occur therein shall remain confidential and can be revealed only with the approval of the City Council. No City Officials shall, without proper authorization of the Council, disclose any closed session discussion or confidential information, nor shall they use such information to advance the financial interest of themselves or others.

The above is a summary of the Brown Act. For additional information or clarification, contact the City Attorney’s Office.

O. The Political Reform Act. The Act controls conflicts of interests through disclosure of financial interests and prohibition in participating in decision-making.

City Officials are prohibited from making, participating in or in any way attempting to use their official position to influence a governmental decision in which they know or have reason to know they have a financial interest. Financial interests can arise out of property ownership, business investment, leadership in a business entity, or receipt of income and gifts. Nevertheless, under certain circumstances, City Officials with conflicts may be allowed to participate in decision-making.

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1906 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

Regulation 18702.3 explains how to determine when an official is using or attempting to use his or her official position to influence a governmental decision:

With regard to a governmental decision which is within or before an official’s agency or an agency appointed by or subject to the budgetary control of his or her agency, the official is attempting to use his or her official position to influence the decision if, for the purpose of influencing the decision, the official contacts, or appears before, or otherwise attempts to influence, any member, officer, employee or consultant of the agency. Attempts to influence include, but are not limited to, appearances or contacts by the official on behalf of a business entity, client, or customer.

The above is a summary of the Political Reform Act. For additional information or clarification, contact the City Attorney’s Office.

9. Elected & Appointed Officials’ Conduct & Communication With and Participation in All Boards, Commissions and Committees.

There are committees that City Officials are appointed to, or may have an interest in, including but not limited to, standing and ad hoc committees, City boards and commissions, regional boards and commissions, and community-generated committees. To avoid confusion and/or duplication of efforts, City Officials’ conduct and communication with and participation in these types of committees are governed by the following guidelines and rules:

A. Conduct
City boards, commissions, and committees are advisory to the Council as a whole, not individual City Council Members. The City Council appoints individuals to serve on City boards, commissions, and committees. It is the responsibility of City Officials to follow policy established by the Council. City Council Members should not feel they have the power or right to influence a board, commission, or committee member in any way. These appointments should not be used as a political ‘reward.’ City Officials should be respectful of diverse opinions. A primary role of boards, commissions, and committees is to represent many points of view and to provide advice based on a full spectrum of concerns and perspectives. Council Members may have a closer working relationship with some individuals serving on boards, commissions, and committees, but must be fair and respectful of all board, commission, and committee members and their opinions.

Keep political campaign support away from public forums unless duly agendized and acted on by City Council. The City Treasurer, City Council, and Board, Commission and Committee Members may provide verbal, financial or in-kind assistance to other City Officials, but not in a public forum while conducting official City duties. Conversely, City Officials may provide verbal, financial or in-kind assistance to individuals who are running for office, but not in an official forum in their capacity as the City Treasurer, City Council Member or appointed official. Support or opposition of political initiatives may be agendized and acted on by the City Council.

City Officials should make no personal comments about other City Officials with whom they serve while conducting official business. In unofficial settings, while it is acceptable to

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1907 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

publicly disagree about an issue, it is unacceptable for City Officials to make derogatory comments about other City Officials, their opinions and actions.

B. Communication
The City Treasurer and City Council Members may attend any board, commission, or committee meeting, which are always open to any member of the public. However, if the Treasurer or a Council Member wishes to attend the meeting of a committee to which he/she has not been appointed to serve by the Council, the Treasurer or Council Member, as a courtesy, should advise the City representative, if any, as well as the respective committee chair, and should be mindful of the influence of his/her presence. Unless otherwise directed by the Council, comments made by any elected or appointed official attending a meeting of a City body to which he/she has not been appointed to serve by the Council should be made as an individual, not on behalf of any City body.

When serving as a primary or alternate representative on a board, commission, or committee, statements made by City Officials regarding City policy should reflect the majority opinion of the Council, board, commission or committee, which is defined by current or past official Council, board, commission or committee action via public vote or public consensus.

City Officials should update their primary body about their outside board, commission, and committee activities. When serving as the primary City Official on any board, commission, or committee, City Officials should periodically provide verbal update reports to the body during the Reports opportunity on the meeting agenda. Recommended actions should be reported in a timely manner.

When serving on a Council committee, whether standing or ad hoc, all work undertaken by the committee must be directed by the Council and all recommended actions of a Council committee shall be reported to the Council in a timely manner.

C. Participation
Appointed primary City Officials are responsible for attending and participating in applicable outside board, commission, and committee meetings. If a City Official has been appointed as the primary representative for an outside board, commission, or committee, that representative is responsible for attending the regularly scheduled meetings. In the event that he or she is unable to attend, the alternate representative should attend in the place of the primary.

Appointed alternate Council Members or appointed representatives should familiarize themselves with the practices and procedures of the respective outside board, commission, or committee. If a City Official is appointed as an alternate representative to an outside board, commission, or committee, the alternate should initially attend one meeting to orient himself/herself to the outside board/commission/committee’s practices and procedures and to avoid confusion or duplication of efforts. Alternates are discouraged from regular attendance at City or non-City board/commission/committee meetings when the primary representative is available to attend.

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1908 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

10. City Officials Relation with City Staff
The City Officials shall respect the Council-Manager form of government. The City Manager implements the Council’s vision, policies, and goals through the City staff and is responsible for directing the day-today operations of the City. City Officials value partnering and collaborating with the City Manager and the City organization to achieve the community’s vision. The Council-Manager relationship is affected by the expectations, styles, and personalities of the Council and Manager who are in place at the time.

Despite the value of partnership and collaboration, these policies are intended to establish boundaries and expectations based upon the role of the City Manager as set forth by the City Code and the CouncilManager form of government structure. As such, they transcend individual personalities and styles that might affect their implementation.

To enhance their working relationship with staff, City Officials should be mindful of the support and resources needed to accomplish City goals. When communicating and working with staff, City Officials should follow these ten guidelines:
i. They should treat staff as professionals. Clear, honest communication that respects the abilities, experience, and dignity of each individual is expected. As City Officials, practice civility and decorum in all interactions with City staff. ii. They should respect the Council-Manager form of government. Routine questions of City staff should be directed to the City Manager, City Attorney, or the Manager’s designee (i.e. staff assigned to support a subcommittee, project or specific task), or appropriate City department head (i.e. Planning Commissioner communicating with Planning Director). City Officials should not set up meetings with department staff directly, but work through the City Manager, Manager’s designee, or appropriate Department Head. When in doubt about appropriate staff contact, City Officials should ask the City Manager.
iii. The City Manager and staff are responsible for implementing City and/or Council action. The processing of City Code and decisions takes place with the City Manager and staff. City Officials should not direct policy/program administrative functions and implementation; rather it should provide policy guidance to the City Manager.
iv. City Officials as individuals should attempt to communicate questions, corrections, and/or clarifications about reports requiring official action to staff prior to Council, Board, Commission or Committee meetings. Early feedback will enable staff to address such questions and incorporate minor corrections or changes to a Staff report, resulting in a more efficient Council, Board, Commission or Committee meeting discussion.
v. City Officials should not direct the City Manager or City staff to initiate any action, change a course of action, or prepare any report without the approval of Council. The City Manager’s responsibility is to advise on resources available and required for a particular course of action as it relates to Council direction. vi. City Officials should not attend department staff meetings unless invited or requested by the City Manager.
vii. All City Officials should have the same official information as those serving with them on the Council, Board, Commission or Committee with which to make

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1909 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

decisions. Information requested by one City Official shall be shared with any other member of the body for which that official serves upon request. viii. Concerns related to the behavior or work of a City employee should be directed to the City Manager. City Officials should not reprimand employees directly nor should they communicate their concerns publicly.
ix. City Officials should not solicit political campaign support from City staff.

Although City staff may, as private citizens with constitutional rights, support political candidates, such activities must take place away from the workplace. x. City Officials are prohibited from using their official position to influence a staff or governmental decision in which they have a financial interest, as per the FPPC Regulation 18702.3, as noted in Section 8 of this Code.

11. City Officials Relation with the General Public
A fundamental principle of democracy is citizen access to elected and appointed officials. When meeting with members of the public, elected and appointed officials should follow the following conduct and communication guidelines when addressing the general public and specific interest groups:

A. Meetings with the General Public
City Officials should respect the collaborative process of Council, Board, Commission and Committee decision making and the Council-Manager form of government. City Officials routinely meet with members of the public to hear community concerns, explain Council, Board, Commission or Committee actions, provide opinions about a particular issue, and/or address service requests or inquiries. When meeting with members of the community, City Officials should avoid making commitments that are inconsistent with prior Council, Board, Commission or Committee action or existing policy. If City Officials desire the assistance of staff while meeting with members of the public, they should request that assistance from the City Manager.

City Officials should always clearly demonstrate their respect for members of the public, both in word and in deed. This means keeping meetings flowing smoothly and efficiently, giving members of the public feedback on their ideas, treating all sides fairly, not interrupting speakers unless they are out of order, not being afraid to admit that you have something to learn from the public, and always being as encouraging and constructive as possible. Public service is the first duty of all City Officials, and the public is best served when it is treated well.

City Officials should be mindful of their influence when attending community meetings that are not organized by the City. The presence of City Officials can sometimes create a perception of support for a particular issue or an expectation that a specific action will be taken.

B. Official Written Communication with the General Public (Printed or Electronic) City Officials should use City letterhead newsletters or other City supported methods of communication to recognize achievements or promoting a City event or conducting City business, and should keep the focus on matters of community-wide interest or official City

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1910 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

business. Individual City Officials should not make promises on behalf of the public body of which they are a member.

The use of City issued electronic devices is subject to the rights and obligations under the City’s Electronic Communications Resources Policy. In addition, City Officials shall not use City provided or personal electronic devices in any way as to violate the public meeting requirements of the Brown Act. Thus, use of any electronic devices to receive or send messages and/or emails related to items on the agenda during meetings is prohibited.

C. Procurement
Unless authorized by Council, City Officials should not become involved in administrative processes for acquiring goods and services. The procurement of goods and services is governed by provisions set forth in the Municipal Code. To preserve the integrity of this administrative process, elected and appointed officials should refrain from any involvement, unless otherwise directed by Council. Specific elected and appointed official’s interests, however, can be referred to the City Manager as appropriate.

D. Proclamation Request
The public either as individual (s), City Officials or organization(s) can request that the City issue a proclamation recognizing outstanding achievement in the community, special event(s) or day(s) that are noteworthy or historically significant. The City Manager and Mayor shall review and approve all proclamations prior to execution.

12. Representing an Official City Position on an Issue/Item In the event that individual City Officials are asked to represent or express an official City position, they should follow these guidelines:

A. Using their elected or appointed title when conducting official City business. City Officials may use their title when conducting official City business, for informational purposes, or as an indication of background and expertise, carefully considering whether they are exceeding or appearing to exceed their authority.

B. Representing an official City position before a governmental agency. If a City Official appears before another governmental agency organization to give a statement on an issue affecting the City, City Officials should communicate the majority opinion of the Council, Board Commission or Committee, which is defined by current or past official Council, Board, Commission or Committee action via public vote or public consensus.

C. Letter of Support for Legislation. Due to the rapid nature of changes in legislation, it is not feasible for many pending pieces of legislation to be presented to the Council to support or oppose the legislation within the timeframe available. As a result, when presenting the City’s position on a legislative support letter, the Mayor and City Manager need to be in agreement in supporting or opposing the legislation. If they are not in agreement, no letter will be sent. If needed, an item will be agendized.

D. Sharing personal perspectives and opinions. Personal opinions and comments may be expressed only if the elected or appointed official clarifies that these statements do not

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1911 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

reflect the official position of the City and without reference to his or her position in any matter.

E. Social Media. When using social media, City officials must clearly disclose that they are expressing their own personal opinion, and not an official position of the City or, if applicable, the body on which they serve. Where appropriate, posting a disclaimer to this effect is advised.

City officials must also use caution when communicating on social media in that it does not become a conduit to communicate with their fellow Council/Commission members.

13. City Officials Relation with the Media
City Officials are frequently contacted by the media for background information and quotes related to City business and/or community issues. When addressing the media, City Officials should follow these four guidelines:
i. They should be professional in all situations and circumstances, conducting themselves in a respectful manner. When speaking with the media, City Officials should choose their words carefully to ensure that comments and statements are not taken out of context.
ii. A Council member or Commissioner should clarify whether they are speaking as an individual City Official or representing the position of the City Council, Board, Commission or Committee on which they serve.

If a City Official is contacted by the media, he/she should be clear about whether his/her comments represent an official City position/policy or a personal viewpoint.
iii. They should coordinate with the City Manager when addressing questions related to administrative functions or processes. To provide accurate information, City Officials should work with the City Manager when making statements about administrative procedures and processes. iv. They should conform to the information policy governed by the City Emergency/Disaster Preparedness Plan in the event of a disaster or emergency.

To avoid confusion and ensure the dissemination of factual information during an emergency or disaster, requests for information should be routed through the appropriately trained public information personnel as prescribed by the City Emergency/Disaster Preparedness Plan. The City Manager serves as the Emergency Services Director during a disaster and is responsible for the response plan and the assignment of duties under that plan.

14. Giving Testimony
It is the duty of elected and appointed officials to answer questions submitted to them by respectfully constituted authority. If any City Official, after reasonable notice and an opportunity to answer, is called upon or requested to give testimony or to produce evidence upon relevant matters pertaining to his/her office or position in connection with any lawful or constitutional inquiry conducted by the Council, the San Mateo County Grand Jury, and State or federal legislative committee, or the Attorney General of the

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1912 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure)

State, such officer shall, to the best of his/her ability, truthfully answer such inquiries, or shall submit a statement of his/her reasons for refusal. City Officials may obtain legal advice before giving testimony.

Nothing in this provision shall be construed to impair a constitutional or civil right.

15. Discipline & Sanctions Procedures
The San Carlos Code of Ethics Policy expresses standards of ethical conduct expected of all City Officials.

Each individual covered by the Code of Ethics Policy has the primary responsibility to ensure that he or she understands and meets these standards and complies with all tenets of the Code, so that the public can continue to have full confidence in the integrity of City government.

When a City Official has doubt as to the applicability of a provision of the Code of Ethics Policy to a particular situation, he or she may apply to the City Council or City Attorney for an advisory opinion and be guided by that opinion when given. The City Official shall have the opportunity to present his or her interpretations of the facts at issue and of the applicable provisions of the Code of Ethics Policy before such advisory decision is made.

A City Official who is made aware of an alleged violation of the Code of Ethics Policy shall report the complaint to the Mayor, who shall interpret the allegation, and in the event that the Mayor determines that a violation may have occurred, shall inform the involved City Official that an investigation shall take place. The Mayor may, based on his/her initial investigation, recommend to the Council that an outside Investigator be selected to conduct a more formal investigation. Investigations may culminate in a formal Mayoral report being presented to the Council at a public meeting. The City Council will accept testimony on the matter and determine whether a violation of the Code of Ethics Policy has occurred. If the Mayor is the subject of the complaint, the Vice Mayor shall be responsible for interpreting the complaint and completing the required investigation and possible report. The Vice-Mayor may, based on his/her initial investigation, recommend to the Council that an outside Investigator be selected based on the advice of the City Attorney or their designee, to conduct a more formal investigation.

The City Council may impose sanctions on City Officials when it determines that a violation of the Code of Ethics Policy has occurred, including warning, formal censure, or, in the case of appointed officials, removal from office. If the City Council determines that a member of its body violated the Code of Ethics Policy and that such violation may warrant the official’s removal from office, it may refer the issue to the San Mateo County Grand Jury, as provided for in Government Code Section 3060.

16. Elected & Appointed Official Receipt
I affirm that I have received the City of San Carlos Code of Conduct and Ethics for Elected and Appointed Officials.
___________________________________________ ___________________________ (Sign) (Date)
________________________________________________________________________________ (Print Name & Name of Office)

RETURN SIGNED & DATED RECEIPT TO THE CITY CLERK

8.a.1
Packet Pg. 1913 Attachment: Code of Conduct and Ethics Policy (Treasurer Censure) From: Inge Tiegel
To: Jeff Maltbie
Cc: Inge Tiegel Doherty
Subject: Fwd: HIA - Important Notice to All San Carlos Property Owners Date: Monday, April 18, 2022 1:56:15 PM
Attachments: Short history HIA.pdf
SC City letter to HIA.pdf
HAC letter to Property Owners.pdf
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of San Carlos -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Hi Jeff,
Is there anything that you or staff can do to convince the CIty Council that a moratorium on the East Side is a really bad idea? I am planning to reach out to the council members but wanted to get your thoughts. (BTW, below is my email to the HIA property owners who I am hoping to stir up a bit and come out in opposition.) Are there any fiscal/financial repercussions that I can bring up at the meeting as City Treasurer to help oppose this item?
Thanks!
Inge
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Inge Tiegel <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 1:40 PM
Subject: Re: HIA - Important Notice to All San Carlos Property Owners To: Morales, Maria <[email protected]>
Cc: Lockenmeyer, Mark <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>
Hi all,
If you haven't planned to already , I strongly encourage everyone to please email the San Carlos City Councilmembers (as will I) opposing residential uses in the industrial or light manufacturing zones within the San Carlos East Side. The current council members don't know or understand the likely negative consequences of their actions. History has shown us that allowing residential uses in (and the registered voters that they bring) can all but eliminate commercial and manufacturing uses (as evidenced by the land north of Harbor Boulevard, which used to be zoned light industrial.) As an aside, I have heard that even the City's Planning Staff are opposed to this moratorium. There are many other areas within the city boundaries that can support increased housing densities without impacting our vibrant and profitable community.

When the HIA was annexed into the city of San Carlos, Howard Jones and I (as co-chairs of the annexation committee) made sure that certain promises were made to the HIA to prevent any gentrification and/or

8.a.2
Packet Pg. 1914 Attachment: Email to City Manager (Treasurer Censure) changes in use or character to the HIA area. It appears that these have been forgotten in the rush to make the HIA and SC East Side a victim of the current Councils' desire to push housing into areas where the uses are clearly incompatible. I have attached a short history of the HIA as well as a few of the correspondence from the annexation (thanks again to Howard and Cathy Jones for these documents many years ago) in case anyone is interested in reading them.

BTW, here is the city council members email
address: [email protected]. FYI, Sara McDowell is the current Mayor with Adam Rak as Vice-Mayor.

Please also cc' the following city staff: City Manager Jeff Maltbie, Asst. City Manager Nil Blackburn, City Attorney Greg Rubens and the Planning Department.

Thanks!
Inge Tiegel
3rd generation property owner and current San Carlos City Treasurer On Mon, Apr 18, 2022 at 11:10 AM Morales, Maria <[email protected]> wrote:

On behalf of Mark and Howard:

Dear HIA Members:

It has come to our attention that the City of San Carlos intends to create a 2-year moratorium for all development within its portion of the HIA. The proposed moratorium will allow the City to modify its General Plan as it pertains to the HIA. We have been advised that the revision will allow for some high-density residential development on certain properties. At this point we don't know what properties may be involved.

The San Carlos City Council will discuss this matter at its Monday, April 25th meeting. The meeting starts at 7:00 pm and can be accessed remotely via Zoom. Information about the necessary access codes will be published by the City on Friday, April 22nd at its public meeting portal. The address of the portal is as follows:
http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Default.aspx

8.a.2
Packet Pg. 1915 Attachment: Email to City Manager (Treasurer Censure) As you know, both cities are under immense pressure to meet their housing objectives. This creates the potential for conflict. We will keep you advised of future developments. In the meantime, please consider attending the City of San Carlos City Council meeting.

Mark F. Lockenmeyer, President
Harbor Industrial Association
Maria Morales
Administrative Assistant

NEWMARK
2950 S. Delaware St., Suite 125
San Mateo, CA 94403
t 650-572-6577
[email protected]
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the intended recipient, and may contain information that is confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not permitted to read, disclose, reproduce, distribute, use or take any action in reliance upon this message and any attachments, and we request that you promptly notify the sender and immediately delete this message and any attachments as well as any copies thereof. Delivery of this message to an unintended recipient is not intended to waive any right or privilege.

Newmark is neither qualified nor authorized to give legal or tax advice, and any such advice should be obtained from an appropriate, qualified professional advisor of your own choosing.

8.a.2
Packet Pg. 1916 Attachment: Email to City Manager (Treasurer Censure)

8.a.2
Packet Pg. 1917 Attachment: Email to City Manager (Treasurer Censure)

8.a.2
Packet Pg. 1918 Attachment: Email to City Manager (Treasurer Censure)

8.a.2
Packet Pg. 1919 Attachment: Email to City Manager (Treasurer Censure)

8.a.2
Packet Pg. 1920 Attachment: Email to City Manager (Treasurer Censure)

8.a.2
Packet Pg. 1921 Attachment: Email to City Manager (Treasurer Censure)

8.a.2
Packet Pg. 1922 Attachment: Email to City Manager (Treasurer Censure)

8.a.2
Packet Pg. 1923 Attachment: Email to City Manager (Treasurer Censure)

8.a.3
Packet Pg. 1924 Attachment: NextDoor Posts (Treasurer Censure)

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: May 23, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Approving the Placement of Past Due Balances for Sidewalk Repairs on the County Property Tax Bill Pursuant to Section 12.04.030 of the San Carlos Municipal Code.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution approving the placement of past due balances for sidewalk repairs on the County Property Tax Bill (“Tax Bill”) pursuant to Section

12.04.030 of the San Carlos Municipal Code.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The On-Call Sidewalk Repair Project C9465-20 (“Project”) was completed in November 2021.

The Project completed sidewalk repairs for approximately 455 properties and exhausted the full contract amount of $900,000.

Approximately 425 of the 455 property owners have reimbursed their portion of the repair costs, while the 30 remaining properties still have outstanding balances. The past due balance for the 30 property owners is $33,275.16.

San Carlos Municipal Code Section 12.04.030 delineates a process for placing unpaid balances on the Tax Bill in order to collect from properties with past due balances. San Mateo County charges the City a $1.35 per parcel fee for this service. In order for the City to recover its costs, the per parcel fee will be added to the amount to be collected. The total amount that San Mateo County will collect is approximately $33,315.66.

BACKGROUND:

San Carlos Municipal Code Section 12.04.020 and Chapter 22 of the California Streets & Highways Code assign responsibility for the maintenance and repair of the sidewalk area adjacent to a property’s frontage to the property owner.

The property owner is responsible and liable for the sidewalk area fronting their property, including the sidewalk, curb, gutter, landscaped areas, and driveway approaches. This assignment of responsibility is typical for cities throughout the peninsula, and has been the case in San Carlos for over 50 years.

9.a
Packet Pg. 1925
2 To assist property owners with the financial burden of sidewalk repair, the City implemented the Sidewalk Maintenance Program (“Program”), in which the cost of repair is equally shared between the City and the property owner.

The Program is administered by the City to eliminate tripping hazards and vertical offsets within the sidewalk area and address drainage or ponding issues along property frontages. By grouping together multiple properties in need of similar repairs and bidding the work to a single qualified contractor, the Program ensures both competitive pricing and compliance with State and City codes. As part of the Program, property owners do not have to apply for or pay the administrative costs of permits. The City absorbs administrative costs as a courtesy to the property owner.

The latest Project was finished in November 2021. Sidewalk repairs for 455 properties were completed under a $900,000 contract. Staff provides the Finance Department with a list of completed repairs and their related costs so that it can invoice property owners their portion of the repair cost.

Of the 455 property owners, 425 have reimbursed the City for their portion of the repair costs.

Despite invoices and reminders, 30 property owners have yet to pay their portion and retain past due balances as shown in Exhibit A to the Resolution. Property owners for the 30 properties were sent the initial invoices as the repairs were completed.

A reminder notice dated March 1, 2022 was sent to property owners requesting that past due balances be paid by the end of day on May 6, 2022. Any property owners that have not paid their past due balance may be added to the property’s Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2022-23 Tax Bill.

A final reminder notice dated May 3, 2022 was sent to property owners informing them that since they had not paid their past due balance, it will be added to the property’s FY 2022-23 Tax Bill after a Public Hearing is held at the May 23, 2022 City Council meeting.

ANALYSIS:

Per section 12.04.030 of the Municipal Code, prior to the City placing a balance on the Tax Bill, the City Clerk shall notify the property owner(s) of the intent to place the cost of the repairs, reconstruction, or improvement on the Tax Bill, and shall give the property owner the opportunity to appear before the City Council to show cause why such sums should not be placed on the Tax Bill to be collected for the benefit of the City.

The County of San Mateo Assessor’s Office has requested that the City submit the final list of property owners and balances for the County Tax Bill prior to July 31, 2022. Any property owner that pays their balance prior to that date will be removed from the list and the past due balances will not be included on the County Tax Bill.

Therefore, staff recommends approving the placement of past due balances for sidewalk repair on the Tax Bill pursuant to Section 12.04.030 of San Carlos Municipal Code.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

9.a
Packet Pg. 1926
3 1. Adopt a Resolution approving the placement of past due balances for sidewalk repairs on the County Property Tax Bill pursuant to Section 12.04.030 of the San Carlos Municipal Code; or

2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Steven Machida,
Public Works Director
Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A to Resolution - Property Balances

9.a
Packet Pg. 1927
RESOLUTION NO. 2022 –_____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

APPROVING THE PLACEMENT OF PAST DUE BALANCES FOR SIDEWALK REPAIRS ON THE COUNTY PROPERTY TAX ROLL PURSUANT TO SECTION 12.04.030 OF THE SAN CARLOS MUNICIPAL CODE.

WHEREAS, the City Municipal Code Section 12.04.020 and Chapter 22 of the California Streets & Highways Code assigns responsibility for the maintenance and repair of the sidewalk area adjacent to a property’s frontage to the property owner; and WHEREAS, this assignment of responsibility is typical to cities throughout the peninsula, and has been the case for over 50 years in San Carlos; and WHEREAS, to assist property owners with the financial burden of sidewalk repair, the City implemented the City Sidewalk Repair Program (“Program”), in which the cost of repair is equally shared between the City and the property owner; and
WHEREAS, the latest On-Call Sidewalk Repair Project (“Project”) was completed in November 2021 and completed sidewalk repairs for 455 properties and up to the full contract amount of $900,000; and
WHEREAS, of the 455 property owners, 432 have reimbursed their portion of the repair costs; and
WHEREAS, there are 23 property owners that have been invoiced and sent reminders, but have a past due balance remaining to be paid as shown in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, the 23 properties were sent the initial invoice as repairs were completed; and WHEREAS, a reminder notice (dated March 1, 2022) was sent to property owners requesting that past due balances be paid by the end of day on May 6, 2022; and WHEREAS, a final reminder notice (dated May 3, 2022) was sent to property owners informing them that since they had not paid their past due balance, it will be added to the property’s Fiscal Year 2022-23 Tax Bill after a Public Hearing is held at the May 23, 2022 City Council meeting; and
WHEREAS, Section 12.04.030 of the Municipal Code specifies a process where the unpaid balances can be placed on the Tax Bill for collection for properties with past due balances; and
WHEREAS, prior to the City causing the lien to be placed on the County Tax Bill, the City Clerk shall notify the property owner of the intent to place the cost of the repairs, reconstruction or improvement on the County Tax Bill, and shall give the property owner the opportunity to appear before the City Council to show cause why such sums should not be placed on the County Tax Bill to be collected for the benefit of the City; and WHEREAS, staff sent notices to those 23 property owners on May 3, 2022 notifying them that a public hearing has been scheduled for the May 23, 2022 City Council meeting to discuss

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 1928 Attachment: Resolution (Sidewalk Repair Inv on County Tax Bill) the past due balances for sidewalk repair as well as consideration of placing these past due balances on the County Tax Bill; and
WHEREAS, the City Clerk also published a public notice on May 13, 2022 notifying of the same; and
WHEREAS, County of San Mateo Assessor’s Office has requested that the City submit the final list of property owners and balances for the County Tax Bill prior to July 31, 2022; and WHEREAS, any property owner that pays their balance prior to that date will be removed from the list and the past due balances will not be included in the County Tax Bill.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby approves:

1. That the properties listed and the amounts due for each parcel contained in Exhibit A shall be placed upon the County Property Tax Roll.

2. That any sums determined to be due and owing by this Resolution shall accrue a simple interest at the rate not to exceed 8% per annum.

3. That pursuant to Streets and Highways Code Section 5628.1, assessments shall be paid in annual installments at a minimum of $200; not to exceed five years.

4. That the Administrative Services Director of the City of San Carlos is authorized to approve corrections of said roll when investigation of requests for corrections indicate the charges were incorrectly computed or erroneously entered on the roll. * * * * *
I, Crystal Mui, City Clerk, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 23rd day of May 2022 by the following vote:

AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS: _______________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS: ______________________________________________ ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS: ______________________________________________ _________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
__________________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibit A: Property Balances

9.a.1
Packet Pg. 1929 Attachment: Resolution (Sidewalk Repair Inv on County Tax Bill) Exhibit A – Property Balances
Property Address Total Cost
of Repairs
Past Due Balance
by Property Owner
1 113 Garnet Ave $1,141.25 $1,141.25
2 1963 Cedar St $828.94 $828.94
3 1505 Cedar St $487.27 $487.27
4 133 Colton Ave $895.07 $895.07
5 121 Colton Ave $996.77 $996.77
6 1927 Eaton Ave $563.46 $563.46
7 575 Chestnut St $1,517.30 $1,517.30
8 1601 Arroyo Ave $3,312.54 $1,312.54
9 2432 Melendy Dr $226.83 $226.83
10 575 Prospect St $828.19 $828.19
11 1091 Sunset Dr $640.43 $640.43
12 1010 Walnut St $2,368.47 $2,368.47
13 912 Woodland Ave $618.75 $168.75
14 1007 Inverness Dr $811.93 $811.93
15 1020 Riverton Dr $485.49 $485.49
16 1373 Elm St $866.60 $866.60
17 979 Springfield Dr $763.17 $763.17
18 2940 Eaton Ave $2,629.34 $2,629.34
19 420 Prospect St $2,389.75 $2,389.75
20 1332 Elm St $855.69 $855.69
21 11 El Camino Real $1,258.17 $1,258.17
22 1026 Holly St $774.90 $774.90
23 1020 Holly St $723.56 $723.56
Total = $23,533.87

9.a.2
Packet Pg. 1930 Attachment: Exhibit A to Resolution - Property Balances (Sidewalk Repair Inv on County Tax Bill)

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: May 23, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Adopting an Interim Ordinance Pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 (B) Extending a Moratorium on the Submission, Consideration, or Approval of Applications for Lot Line Adjustments, Subdivisions, Discretionary Land Use Approvals or Building Permits Necessary for Development Within the Northeast Area of the City of San Carlos, Subject to Certain Enumerated Exceptions.

RECOMMENDATION:

In order to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and prohibit the approval and development of uses that may be in conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of uses contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan, extend Ordinance No. 1581 enacted on April 25, 2022 for 22 months and 15 days, pursuant to Government Code Section 65858, and modify Ordinance No. 1581 pursuant to Option 2 presented in this staff report.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

On March 28, 2022, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million to prepare a specific plan for the Northeast Area Project #C2211, hereinafter the “Northeast Area Specific Plan,” and to prepare amendments to the 2030 General Plan, subject to review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). This allocation of public resources aligns with the City of San Carlos’ 2022 Strategic Plan goal to create a Northeast Area Specific Plan, which states as follows:

The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, stakeholders, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan in response to continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development.

Other than the aforementioned appropriation, there are no direct fiscal implications associated with the City Council extending Ordinance No. 1581 enacted on April 25, 2022 for 22 months and 15 days, pursuant to Government Code Section 65858, and modifying Ordinance No. 1581.

9.b
Packet Pg. 1931
2 BACKGROUND:

On April 25, 2022, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1581 to establish a development moratorium for the Northeast Area. In accordance with State law, the Ordinance No. 1581 is in effect for an initial forty-five (45) day period1, and the Council has the authority to extend the moratorium for an additional 22 months and 15 days.

To view the April 25, 2022 staff report with details about the need and justification for Ordinance No. 1581, visit the following link and see page 492:
http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=3328&Inline=True During the April 25, 2022 Council Meeting, the City Council (a) requested further refinement regarding which types of development activity the moratorium does and does not apply to (e.g. solar systems), and (b) requested that staff gather additional stakeholder input. City staff is returning this evening with responses to both requests.

Moratorium Boundary
The “Northeast Area” that is the subject of Ordinance No. 1581 and this public hearing is all land or sites within the area depicted in the map in Figure 1. 2 1 Government Code §65858 (b)
2 The site owned by the Palo Alto Medical Foundation (“PAMF”), which is an 18-acre site on Industrial Road, is not included in Ordinance No. 1581. The PAMF site is not included because it has an approved development agreement and an approved Planned Development Plan (“PDP”) to build a hospital within the next 10 years. Under the terms of the development agreement, the City is precluded from curtailing PAMF’s right to develop their site in a manner consistent with the terms of the approved PDP; thus, this site is not subject to the provisions of Ordinance No. 1581. However, the boundaries of the forthcoming Northeast Area Specific Plan will encompass the PAMF site.

9.b
Packet Pg. 1932
3 Figure 1. Moratorium Area for the Northeast Area
ANALYSIS:

Stakeholder Input
Since the April 25, 2022 City Council meeting, City staff has conducted additional stakeholder outreach to gather feedback and input about the development moratorium. To date, staff has:
 Presented at the May 5, 2022 Harbor Industrial Association Luncheon which was attended by property owners, developers, and other interested parties (approximately 35 attendees)
 Met with numerous business and property owners, including CelLink Corp (610 Quarry Road), Greymark Capital (150 Industrial Road), Bay Area Self Storage (151 Industrial Road), San Mateo Dog Training Club (595 Taylor Way, Suite 2), and GW Williams (owner of multiple properties in the Northeast Area)
 Held a public meeting on May 11, 2022 (over 30 attendees)  Responded to phone calls and inquires submitted via email City staff heard the following themes and questions from stakeholders about the moratorium:
 Property owners want to be able to move forward with both interior improvements and exterior (façade) improvements.

Response: Interior improvements are currently allowed by the moratorium. Exterior (façade) improvements are not currently allowed by the moratorium, but are included in Option 3.

9.b
Packet Pg. 1933
4  Property owners want to be able to make improvements for ordinary maintenance and upkeep of the buildings.

Response: This is not currently allowed in the moratorium, but is included in all three Options.  Business and property owners are interested in conditional use permits being exempt from the moratorium, especially when no exterior modifications are being requested.

Response: This is currently not allowed in the moratorium and is not presented in the Options. See below for rationale under section titled “Modifying the Ordinance: Options for Consideration.”
 Questions about whether the City will review development proposals or renderings during the moratorium.

Response: This is currently not allowed in the moratorium; however, the text has been revised in all Options to align with California law to allow the “submission” and “consideration” of applications.
 Questions about why there is a moratorium being placed on the Northeast Area and not other areas in the city.

Response: As staff shared during stakeholder meetings, a development moratorium is prudent for the Northeast Area to address future change due to developer interest in constructing life science and biotechnology uses in the area, and the size of the parcels which, if developed, would exceed the build-out of industrial commercial, and office uses.  Expressed concern with regard to the introduction of housing to thriving industrial area.

Response: The exploration of the introduction of housing will be considered as a part of the Northeast Area Specific Plan, but no decisions about the introduction of housing into the area have been made as of this time.

See Attachment 5 for additional details regarding stakeholder input. See Attachment 6 for correspondence from stakeholders to City staff.

Modifying the Ordinance: Options for Consideration
In response to the Council’s request for further clarification, staff has developed options for the Council’s consideration. These options are based on stakeholder input, City staff’s input, and general legal counsel’s expertise. (See Attachment 1 for additional details about each option.) Option 1: Revisions
 Extends the moratorium for 22 months and 15 days.
 Removes the text which states that the moratorium prohibits the “submission” or “consideration” of applications. Per the legal case Building Industry Legal Defense Foundation v. Superior Court (1999), the City must continue to process applications

9.b
Packet Pg. 1934
5 even if a moratorium is in place; however, no approval of any applications prohibited by the Ordinance No. 1581 can occur.
 Introduces a new Section Five: Request for Relief which provides an applicant with an avenue to submit an application to the City to obtain relief from Ordinance No. 1581, if the applicant contends the Interim Ordinance is somehow unlawful.  Revises the list of exemptions as outlined in the April 25, 2022 Interim Ordinance. (See Attachment 1 for more details.)
Option 2: Revisions and Exemption for PG&E Application (PLN2021-00200) – Staff Recommendation
 Same revisions as included in Option 1.
 Exempts planning permit sought by Pacific Gas & Electric Company pursuant to planning application number PLN2021-00200, as said planning application exists as of April 25, 2022, and building permit(s) as required to construct the improvements, if approved.

Option 3: Revisions and Exemption for Exterior Improvements  Same revisions as included in Option 2.
 Exempts exterior improvements that do not increase the square footage of the building.

Staff recommends that the City Council modify the Ordinance per Option 2 because it:
 Extends the moratorium for 22 months and 15 days.
 Includes revisions that respond to the City Council’s questions and feedback received during the April 25, 2022 City Council meeting.
 Includes revisions that respond to stakeholder input.  Includes revisions that conform with California law.
 Exempts the planning permit sought by Pacific Gas & Electric Company pursuant to planning application number PLN2021-00200; and allows for the exemption of an application on property controlled by a State regulated public utility.

These revisions would allow for greater flexibility under the moratorium while still prohibiting new development and large investments that may not align with the vision of the forthcoming Northeast Area Specific Plan.

Regarding Option 3, City staff has met with property owners who have expressed an interest in being able to submit applications for exterior (façade) improvements to modernize buildings and update the visual appearance. While staff appreciates the investment in both the properties and businesses, exterior improvements could represent a large financial investment which may be amortized over the course of 10+ years. This investment could disincentivize a property owner from future changes or redevelopment of the property in ways that achieve the vision of the forthcoming Northeast Area Specific Plan.

Staff has also received interest from property owners to allow for the issuance of conditional use permits. However, the prohibition on issuance of conditional use permits may be in conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of uses contemplated in the forthcoming Northeast Area Specific Plan, such as housing. In addition, use permits, unless expressly limited in duration, run with the land in perpetuity. Thus, prohibiting the issuance of further conditional use permits pending the preparation and adoption of the Northeast Area Specific Plan is a core element of the development moratorium.

9.b
Packet Pg. 1935
6 Staff has provided for minor modifications to the conditions of an existing conditional use permit, such as the hours of operation, provided the use is remaining in its existing space, there is no increase in floor area devoted to such use, and the modification does not otherwise result in an intensification or expansion of the use. Further, the moratorium does not impair the ability of a property owner to utilize their property for any uses that are permitted as of right by the City’s Zoning Ordinance, as reflected in Attachment 7. Accordingly, property owners continue to have a range of economically viable uses to which they may put their properties during this moratorium.

Required Written Report
Per State Law, ten days prior to the expiration of Ordinance No. 1581, the City Council must issue a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of Ordinance No. 15813. This staff report serves as the written report.

The conditions which led to the adoption of the Interim Ordinance persist and extend beyond the initial 45-day period of the Interim Ordinance. The conditions include:
 The shortage of housing, including affordable housing, in the City of San Carlos continues to constitute a threat to the public health, safety and welfare in the City of San Carlos;
 Developer interest in constructing new life sciences and biotechnology uses in the Northeast Area persists and remains strong. Thus, the adoption of a comprehensive Northeast Area Specific Plan that is responsive to continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, while at the same time develops policies and strategies to explore housing as a part of the mix of uses for the area, and thereby ensures that ad hoc development does not conflict with, constrain or impair the City’s ability to maximize the area within the Northeast Area that may be suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet San Carlos’ housing need for all income levels likewise remains; and
 The need to develop a General Plan amendment and General Plan EIR amendment to update the approved citywide build-out for industrial, commercial, and office uses in San Carlos since the City is on a trajectory to exceed the approved build-out for these uses, per the adopted 2030 General Plan and General Plan EIR.

The Northeast Area Specific Plan, 2030 General Plan amendment, and appropriate environmental review in accordance with CEQA will address the conditions that led to the enactment of the development moratorium.

Staff anticipates releasing the Request for Proposals (RFP) in the summer of 2022 to request the services of a consultant team to develop the Northeast Area Specific Plan and to prepare the 2030 General Plan amendments and 2030 General Plan EIR amendments. Staff anticipates that this process will take two years, concluding in the spring of 2024.

Staff has already begun outreach to stakeholders about the specific plan as a part of the outreach regarding this development moratorium. Extensive community engagement will continue throughout the process to develop the Northeast Area Specific Plan. (See Attachment

3 Government Code §65858 (d)

9.b
Packet Pg. 1936
7 5 for a summary of stakeholder input received during the stakeholder meetings and May 11, 2022 public meeting.)
Applications that are Approved or Deemed Complete
If Ordinance No. 1581 is extended, development applications that have been submitted and approved as complete or deemed complete prior to April 25, 2022 may be processed notwithstanding the moratorium. However, since these applicants have no vested right to develop, the Council may decide to apply the Ordinance No. 1581 to their applications and thereby preclude the processing of their application.

Currently, the only complete application submitted prior to April 25, 2022 for a site within the Northeast Area subject to Ordinance No. 1581 is for 642 Quarry Road. As currently drafted, Ordinance No. 1581 would not apply to their application since the application has been approved as complete prior to the adoption of Ordinance No. 1581. If the City Council desires to include this development application under Ordinance No. 1581, the City Council can direct staff during the meeting to present language to amend the Interim Ordinance accordingly.

Extending and Modifying the Ordinance
After providing notice pursuant to Section 65090 of the Government Code and holding a public hearing, Ordinance No. 1581 may be extended for an additional 22 months and 15 days by a four-fifths vote of the City Council. This amount of time should be sufficient to allow City staff to select and work with a consulting team to prepare the Northeast Area Specific Plan, 2030 General Plan amendments, and appropriate environmental review in accordance with CEQA for the Council’s consideration.

Therefore, in order to protect the public health, safety, and welfare, and prohibit the approval and development of uses that may be in conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of uses contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan, City staff recommends that the Council extend Ordinance No. 1581 imposing a moratorium on approval of applications for:
i. Lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, ii. Design review, use permits, temporary use permits, planned developments, zoning amendments, waivers, variances, general plan amendments, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or
iii. A building permit required for construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code.

Exceptions to the moratorium to include those presented in this staff report (Options 1, 2, or 3).

Staff recommends adoption of Option 2.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:

The extension of Ordinance No. 1581 is not a project subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because the interim ordinance will not result in a direct physical change in the environment nor a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical

9.b
Packet Pg. 1937
8 change in the environment. Further, even assuming the extension of Ordinance No. 1581 is a project as defined in CEQA, the extension of Ordinance No. 1581 is exempt from environmental review pursuant to section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines because it is covered by the common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and where, as in the case of the extension of Ordinance No. 1581, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the extension of Ordinance No. 1581 may have a significant effect on the environment, the extension of Ordinance No. 1581 is not subject to CEQA.

CONCLUSION:

The City is on the cusp of exceeding the approved build-out figures for commercial, retail, and industrial uses identified and analyzed in the 2030 General Plan and General Plan EIR.

Additionally, the City has not developed planning guidance for the Northeast Area since it was annexed in 1997. This extension of Ordinance No. 1581 will provide sufficient time to prepare the Northeast Area Specific Plan, the General Plan amendments, and the appropriate environmental review in accordance with CEQA. The draft Northeast Area Specific Plan, draft General Plan amendments, and CEQA analysis will be brought before the Planning Commission and City Council for consideration in 2024.

Staff recommends that the City Council extend Ordinance No. 1581 and modify Ordinance No. 1581 as reflected in Option 2. As noted, a four-fifths vote of the City Council is required to extend Ordinance No. 1581 for an additional 22 months and 15 days.

ALTERNATIVES:

The options available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt Urgency Ordinance Option 1 - Extending a Moratorium on the Approval of Applications for (i) Lot Line Adjustments and the Subdivision of Land within the Northeast Area in Accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) Design Review, Use Permit, Temporary Use Permit, Planned Development, Zoning Amendment, Waiver, Variance, General Plan Amendment, Development Agreement, or any Other Discretionary Approval from the City of San Carlos Necessary for the Development of a Site within the Northeast Area in Accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a Building Permit Required for Construction and/or Alterations on Property within the Northeast Area in Accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code, Subject to Certain Enumerated Exceptions; or

2. Adopt Urgency Ordinance Option 2 - Extending a Moratorium on the Approval of Applications for (i) Lot Line Adjustments and the Subdivision of Land within the Northeast Area in Accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) Design Review, Use Permit, Temporary Use Permit, Planned Development, Zoning Amendment, Waiver, Variance, General Plan Amendment, Development Agreement, or any Other Discretionary Approval from the City of San Carlos Necessary for the Development of a Site within the Northeast Area in Accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a Building Permit Required for Construction and/or Alterations on Property within the Northeast Area in Accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code, Subject to Certain Enumerated Exceptions; or

9.b
Packet Pg. 1938
9 3. Adopt Urgency Ordinance Option 3 - Extending a Moratorium on the Approval of Applications for (i) Lot Line Adjustments and the Subdivision of Land within the Northeast Area in Accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) Design Review, Use Permit, Temporary Use Permit, Planned Development, Zoning Amendment, Waiver, Variance, General Plan Amendment, Development Agreement, or any Other Discretionary Approval from the City of San Carlos Necessary for the Development of a Site within the Northeast Area in Accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a Building Permit Required for Construction and/or Alterations on Property within the Northeast Area in Accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code, Subject to Certain Enumerated Exceptions; or

4. Do not extend Ordinance No. 1581; or

5. Extend, but do not modify Ordinance No. 1581; or

6. Provide staff with alternative direction; or
Respectfully submitted by:

Al Savay, AICP
Community Development Director
Megan Wooley-Ousdahl, Senior Planner
Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Summary of Ordinance Options

2. Option 1 - Interim Ordinance

3. Option 2 - Interim Ordinance

4. Option 3 - Interim Ordinance

5. Summary of Stakeholder Input

6. Correspondence from Stakeholders

7. List of Permitted Uses in the Northeast Area

8. Proof of Publication for PH Notice

9.b
Packet Pg. 1939
Attachment 1. Summary of Ordinance Options
In response to the Council request for further clarification of moratorium text, staff has developed options for the Council’s consideration. These options are based on stakeholder input and City staff’s and general legal counsel’s expertise.

Option 1: Revisions
List of Revisions
 Extends the moratorium for 22 months and 15 days.
 Removes the text which states that the moratorium prohibits the “submission” or “consideration” of applications. Per the legal case Building Industry Legal Defense Foundation v. Superior Court (1999), the City must continue to process applications even if a moratorium is in place; however, no approval of any applications prohibited by the Ordinance No. 1581 can occur.
 Introduces a new Section Five: Request for Relief which provides an applicant with an avenue to submit an application to the City to obtain relief from Ordinance No. 1581, if the applicant contends the Interim Ordinance is somehow unlawful.  Revises the list of exemptions as outlined in the April 25, 2022 Interim Ordinance, which include:
o Changes the term “tenant improvements” to “interior improvements.” o Exempts applications for sign permits.
o Exempts applications for planning permits for solar photovoltaic systems o Exempts applications for planning permits and/or building permits necessary for the approval and construction of improvements required for the ordinary maintenance and repair of building components, such as roofs and windows, for the preservation of public health and safety, or for building accessibility. o Exempts applications for a tree removal permit necessary for the removal of a protected tree.
o Exempts applications for a conditional use permit necessary for the approval of shared parking or reduction of required parking.
o Exempts applications for minor modification to the conditions of an existing conditional use permit, such as the hours of operation, provided the use is remaining in its existing space, there is no increase in floor area devoted to such use, and the modification does not otherwise result in an intensification or expansion of the use.

Staff Analysis
 Extends the moratorium for 22 months and 15 days.
 Includes revisions that respond to the City Council’s questions and feedback received during the April 25, 2022 City Council meeting.
 Includes revisions that respond to stakeholder input.  Includes revisions that conform with California law.
 These revisions would allow for greater flexibility under the moratorium while still prohibiting new development and large investments that may not align with the vision of the forthcoming Northeast Area Specific Plan.

9.b.1
Packet Pg. 1940 Attachment: Summary of Ordinance Options (Moratorium HIA Extension) Option 2: Revisions and Exemption for PG&E Application (PLN2021-00200) – Staff Recommendation
List of Revisions
 Same revisions as included in Option 1.
 Exempts planning permit sought by Pacific Gas & Electric Company pursuant to planning application number PLN2021-00200, as said planning application exists as of April 25, 2022, and building permit(s) as required to construct the improvements, if approved.

Staff Analysis
 Regarding the exemption of PG&E’s pending application (PLN2021-00200), this allows for the exemption of an application on property controlled by a State regulated public utility.

Option 3: Revisions and Exemptions for PG&E Application (PLN2021-00200) and for Exterior Improvements
List of Revisions
 Same revisions as included in Option 2.
 Exempts applications for design review necessary for the construction or alteration to the exterior of a building that does not involve the addition of floor area to the building and building permit as required to construct the approved design review improvements.

Staff Analysis
 Regarding the exemption of exterior improvements, Option 3 would allow improvements to the façade, landscaping, parking, and other alternations that do not increase the square footage of the building but allow owners to continue to invest in their properties and make improvements.
 City staff has met with property owners who have expressed an interest in being able to submit applications for exterior (façade) improvements to modernize buildings and update the visual appearance. While staff appreciates the investment in both the properties themselves and in San Carlos, staff has reservations about allowing this option as an exemption to the moratorium. Exterior improvements could represent a large financial investment which may be amortized over the course of 10+ years. This investment could disincentivize a property owner from future changes or redevelopment of the property in ways that achieve the vision of the forthcoming Northeast Area Specific Plan.

9.b.1
Packet Pg. 1941 Attachment: Summary of Ordinance Options (Moratorium HIA Extension) [OPTION 1]
ORDINANCE NO. ____

AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

EXTENDING A MORATORIUM ON THE APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS FOR (I) LOT LINE

ADJUSTMENTS AND THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND WITHIN THE NORTHEAST AREA IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND THE

SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, (II) DESIGN REVIEW, USE PERMIT, TEMPORARY USE PERMIT,

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, ZONING AMENDMENT, WAIVER, VARIANCE, GENERAL

PLAN AMENDMENT, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, OR ANY OTHER DISCRETIONARY

APPROVAL FROM THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS NECESSARY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT

OF A SITE WITHIN THE NORTHEAST AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SAN CARLOS

ZONING ORDINANCE, OR (III) A BUILDING PERMIT REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION

AND/OR ALTERATIONS ON PROPERTY WITHIN THE NORTHEAST AREA IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE SAN CARLOS MUNICIPAL CODE,
SUBJECT TO CERTAIN ENUMERATED EXCEPTIONS.

WHEREAS, the Northeast Area of the City of San Carlos, commonly referred to as the Harbor Industrial Area, comprises approximately 120 acres of land and, for purposes of this Interim Ordinance, is more particularly depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (“Northeast Area”); and
WHEREAS, the majority of the Northeast Area was annexed in 1997 after a petition for annexation was received from over 80 percent of the property owners within the Harbor Industrial Area, which area includes large manufacturing businesses, biotechnical and biomedical firms, and light and heavy industrial uses; and WHEREAS, under the 2030 General Plan and existing land use regulations and applicable zoning, residential, commercial, retail and non-industrial uses in the Northeast Area are prohibited; and
WHEREAS, since the annexation of the Northeast Area in 1997, the City has not undertaken a comprehensive review and analysis of the long-term plan for physical development focused on the Northeast Area in accordance with the Planning and Zoning Law of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, since 2015 the City has experienced an unprecedented amount of private sector investment and development in East San Carlos, including business and employment growth in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and thus, in response, in 2021 the City adopted the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan to guide these changes within the area defined by Holly Street, Brittan Avenue, Old County Road, and Highway 101 (the “East Side Innovation District”); and
WHEREAS, since the adoption of the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan, the City continues to receive developer interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors; and WHEREAS, in addition to the aforementioned interest in the East Side Innovation District, the Northeast Area is also experiencing increased development interest as evidenced by recent property sales and acquisitions, and receipt of a complete development application for two new buildings at 642 Quarry Road, proposing 401,072 square feet of research and

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 1942 Attachment: Option 1 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
development space, and a preliminary application to develop 200 Industrial Road with two new buildings totaling 650,000 square feet of research and development space; and WHEREAS, based on the foregoing, and in consideration of the amount of development that has been approved and/or constructed under the 2030 General Plan buildout, allowable development within the City is nearing capacity and on a trajectory to exceed the level of buildout for commercial, office, and industrial uses planned for and analyzed in the adopted 2030 General Plan and General Plan EIR; and
WHEREAS, in the absence of an amendment to the General Plan and appropriate environmental review pursuant to CEQA, future commercial, office, industrial and residential development within the City, including the Northeast Area, will face an impending roadblock; and WHEREAS, in recognition of these factors, the City Council adopted the City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Plan which contains a goal to create and develop a Northeast Area Specific Plan, stated as follows:

The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, stakeholders, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan in response to continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development; and
WHEREAS, on March 28, 2022, consistent with the aforementioned 2022 Strategic Plan goal, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million of public resources to prepare a specific plan for the Northeast Area, hereinafter the “Northeast Area Specific Plan”, and to prepare amendments to the 2030 General Plan, subject to review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”); and
WHEREAS, as has been well documented, the State of California has a housing crisis of not enough housing and not enough housing that is affordable; and WHEREAS, as reflected in the City’s 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report1, the City will likely not meet its current Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goal by 2023, still needing 173 housing units affordable to very low income households, 93 housing units affordable to low income households, and 97 housing units affordable to moderate income households, and factoring these current needs with the City’s upcoming RHNA allocation for 2023-2031 of 2,735 total housing units, of which 1,602 are to be affordable to very-low, low and moderate income households, it is evident the City’s situation is reflective of the overall housing crisis that the California State Legislature has determined constitutes a threat to public health, safety and welfare for at least the past decade - not enough housing and not enough housing that is affordable; and
WHEREAS, while the City has no obligation to develop housing itself, it does shoulder a responsibility to respond to and address the overall housing needs at the local level through adoption of clear and objective development policies, standards and conditions for the

1 http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Default.aspx

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 1943 Attachment: Option 1 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
preservation, improvement and development of housing, specifically including the identification of adequate sites for housing2; and
WHEREAS, for the City of San Carlos, the ability to identify adequate sites for housing rests primarily in identifying sites or areas of the City that can be redeveloped with increased density and, in rare circumstances, those areas where housing can be introduced for the first time; and
WHEREAS, the Northeast Area is one such rare opportunity where there is a potential to introduce housing as an allowable use within this historically industrial area and thereby address the City’s share of the regional housing needs; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Northeast Area Specific Plan will provide a plan for orderly future development and anticipates the introduction of new uses to meet the needs of the San Carlos community today and in the future, such as residential, commercial, retail, and other nonindustrial uses, while also evaluating and addressing the aging storm water and sewer infrastructure, flooding along Belmont Creek and identifying ways for new development within the Northeast Area to address these issues; and
WHEREAS, preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan, and corresponding amendments to the 2030 General Plan, are needed to address these pending development pressures, and it is in the public interest to consider the Northeast Area holistically through study of land uses, specifically including the introduction of housing and affordable housing, as a means to address the City’s share of the regional housing needs; and WHEREAS, as part of the Northeast Area Specific Plan process the presence of hazardous substances and the impact on allowable uses will need to be analyzed and accounted for because it is more likely than not that hazardous substances will be present on sites within the Northeast Area, and depending on the nature of the contaminant involved and the extent of its impact, it can be more difficult and expensive to develop a site with more sensitive uses, such as housing, than commercial/office uses, and accordingly, it is imperative that the City consider the Northeast Area holistically in order to ensure that ad hoc development does not impair the City’s ability to maximize the area within the Northeast Area “suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels;” and
WHEREAS, while the City’s housing related policies, standards and conditions indicates that there exists adequate sites within the City sufficient to meet its 2023-2031 RHNA allocation, as well as a self-imposed goal of an additional 481 affordable units on top of its 1,602 RHNA allocation, it would be contrary to responsible planning to suggest that now is not the time to lay the ground work for future residential development by “[d]esignating and maintaining a supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels … essential to achieving the state’s housing goals and purposes of” state housing element law3; and WHEREAS, adoption of the Interim Ordinance is necessary to evaluate anticipated development within the Northeast Area that likely will exceed the 2030 General Plan build-out

2 Government Code §65583
3 Government Code §65580 (f)

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 1944 Attachment: Option 1 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
figures in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law, but more importantly to prohibit ad hoc development proposals within the Northeast Area that may conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of uses, such as housing, contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan and thereby decrease the “supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing”; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65858 (b) provides that following notice pursuant to Government Code Section 65090 and public hearing, the City Council, to protect public safety, health, and welfare, may adopt an interim ordinance prohibiting any uses that may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal, such as the Northeast Area Specific Plan, that the City is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable time; and
WHEREAS, as previously noted, on March 28, 2022, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million for the preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan and attendant amendments to the 2030 General Plan, and thus the City’s intentions are clear; and WHEREAS, consideration and approval of development projects within the Northeast Area without the guidance provided by the Northeast Area Specific Plan, will only serve to frustrate the City’s ability to advance the City of San Carlos’ Strategic Plan, State housing goals, and the City’s housing goals, thereby potentially resulting in ad hoc development that may conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of uses, such as housing, contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan and thereby decrease the “supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing”; and WHEREAS, given the potential deleterious effect the approval of development projects within the Northeast Area without the guidance provided by the Northeast Area Specific Plan will have on the “supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing”, the City Council desires to adopt an interim ordinance prohibiting the approval and development of uses within the Northeast Area that may be in conflict with the Northeast Area Specific Plan to provide the City sufficient time to consider and evaluate development within the Northeast Area that will likely exceed the 2030 General Plan buildout in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and adopt a comprehensive Northeast Area Specific Plan to ensure the development of a plan that is responsive to “continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development”; and
WHEREAS, on April 25, 2022, following notice and a public hearing in accordance with Government Code Section 65858 (b), the City Council passed and adopted Ordinance No. 1581 establishing a moratorium on development within the Northeast Area for an initial period of fortyfive (45) days (the “Interim Ordinance”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 65858 (b), the City may, after notice and a public hearing, extend the Interim Ordinance for an additional period of up to 22 months and 15 days.

NOW THEREFOR BE IT RESOLVED, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 1945 Attachment: Option 1 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
SECTION ONE. PURPOSE AND INTENT
The purpose and intent of this Interim Ordinance is to protect the public health, safety and welfare, and prohibit the ad hoc approval and development of uses that may be in conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of a mix of uses contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan, specifically including housing and affordable housing, which uses are needed in order to address State and City housing goals. Accordingly, the Interim Ordinance provides the City the opportunity to evaluate development within the Northeast Area that will likely exceed the 2030 General Plan buildout in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and consider the Northeast Area for the purpose of “[d]esignating and maintaining a supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels … essential to achieving the state’s housing goals and purposes of” state housing element law.

SECTION TWO. FINDINGS

1. The City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby incorporates by reference all of the Recitals and footnotes thereto set forth in this Interim Ordinance.

2. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that since its annexation into the City of San Carlos in 1997, a comprehensive, long-term plan, with a focus on the physical development within the Northeast Area, has not been undertaken in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law. Therefore, only light and heavy industrial uses are permitted in the Northeast Area.

Accordingly, the City’s 2030 General Plan and zoning regulations applicable to the Northeast Area currently preclude a greater mix of residential, commercial, retail and other non-industrial uses which are needed to meet the needs of the San Carlos community today and in the future.

3. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that private sector investment and development interest in the City generally, and the East Side Innovation District in particular, remains strong, and development pressures are being felt in the Northeast Area. Based on the amount of approved, proposed and anticipated development, the City is on a trajectory to exceed the level of build out planned for and analyzed in the 2030 General Plan and General Plan EIR. In order to facilitate additional development beyond the 2030 General Plan buildout, either the City will need to undertake a comprehensive planning effort or incrementally analyze ad hoc development applications as they occur.

4. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that on March 28, 2022, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million of public funds toward the preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan, with commensurate amendments to the 2030 General Plan, subject to review in accordance with CEQA, to undertake a comprehensive, long-term plan for the physical development of the Northeast Area.

5. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that the City is but a microcosm of the State of California, as there is an overall shortage of housing, including affordable housing, in the City that is reflective of the statewide shortage, a situation which the State Legislature has declared constitutes a threat to public health, safety and welfare in California. The shortage of housing, including affordable housing, in the City of San Carlos constitutes a threat to the public health, safety and welfare in the City of San Carlos.

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 1946 Attachment: Option 1 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022

6. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that the Northeast Area and its anticipated transformation from exclusively light and heavy industrial uses to a mix of uses represents a unique and rare opportunity for the City to plan in a comprehensive manner the introduction of new uses to this historically industrial area, including residential, commercial, retail and office uses, to meet the needs of the citizens of San Carlos, consider potential constraints on the location of uses (e.g. proximity to freeways and railroads, presence of hazardous substances), while also addressing infrastructure needs of the area.

7. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that it is imperative that the City consider the Northeast Area holistically in order to evaluate development in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and ensure the adoption of a comprehensive Northeast Area Specific Plan that is responsive to “continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development,” and ensure that ad hoc development does not conflict with, constrain or impair the City’s ability to maximize the area within the Northeast Area “suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels.”

8. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that, given the potential deleterious effect the approval of development projects within the Northeast Area without the guidance provided by the Northeast Area Specific Plan will have on the “supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing,” the approval of (i) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permits, temporary use permits, planned developments, zoning amendments, waivers, variances, general plan amendments, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code, will result in a threat to public health, safety and welfare.

9. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that a temporary moratorium prohibiting the approval of (i) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permits, temporary use permits, planned developments, zoning amendments, waivers, variances, general plan amendments, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code, subject to certain enumerated exceptions outlined in Section 4 of this Interim Ordinance, is necessary in order to allow the City sufficient time to consider and evaluate development within the Northeast Area in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and ensure the adoption of a comprehensive Northeast Area Specific Plan that is responsive to “continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development,” and maximizes the area within the Northeast Area “suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels.”

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 1947 Attachment: Option 1 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
SECTION THREE. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this Interim Ordinance, the following terms shall be defined as follows:

1. “Alteration” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

2. “Building” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

3. “Building permit” shall mean all permits governed by Chapter 15.04 of Title 15 of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code.

4. “City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations” shall mean those provisions set forth in Title 17 of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code.

5. “Construction” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

6. “Design review” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter

18.29 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

7. “Development” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

8. “Development agreement” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.37 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

9. “Floor area” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

10. “General plan amendment” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.34 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

11. “Lot line adjustment” shall have the meaning set forth in the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act.

12. “Northeast Area” shall mean that geographic area of the City of San Carlos, comprising approximately 120 acres of land and more particularly depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

13. “Planned development” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.36 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

14. “Planning permit” shall mean a discretionary approval or permit for (i) design review, use permit, temporary use permit, planned development, zoning amendment, waiver, variance, general plan amendment, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (ii) lot line adjustment or subdivision of

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 1948 Attachment: Option 1 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act.

15. “San Carlos Zoning Ordinance” shall mean those provisions set forth in Title 18 of the San Carlos Municipal Code.

16. “Site” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

17. “Subdivision” shall have the meaning set forth in the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act.

18. “Subdivision Map Act” shall mean those provisions set forth in California Government Code Section 66410 et seq.

19. “Temporary use permit” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.31 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

20. “Use permit,” inclusive of a conditional use permit and a minor use permit, shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.30 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

21. “Variance” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.32 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

22. “Waiver” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.33 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

23. “Zoning amendment” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.35 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

SECTION FOUR. APPLICATION; EXCEPTIONS.

This Interim Ordinance shall apply to prohibit the approval of applications for (i) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permits, temporary use permits, planned developments, zoning amendments, waivers, variances, general plan amendments, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code.

This Interim Ordinance shall not apply to prohibit the approval of: (i) an application for planning permit that has been approved as complete or deemed complete prior to April 25, 2022; (ii) an application for sign permit necessary for the approval of a sign in accordance with Chapter

18.22 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance and building permit as required to construct the approved sign; (iii) an application for planning permit necessary for the approval of a solar photovoltaic system in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance and building permit as required to construct the approved solar photovoltaic system; (iv) an application for building

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 1949 Attachment: Option 1 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
permits for the construction of interior improvements to space within an existing building occupied by uses permitted within the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance; (v) an application for planning permits and/or building permits necessary for the approval and construction of improvements required for the ordinary maintenance and repair of building components, such as roofs and windows, for the preservation of public health and safety or for building accessibility; (vi) an application for a change of use within space of an existing building and any associated interior improvements, provided the new use is permitted as of right pursuant to the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance; (vii) an application for a tree removal permit necessary for the removal of a protected tree in accordance with Chapter 18.18 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance and grading permit or encroachment permit as required to remove the protected tree approved for removal; (viii) an application for a conditional use permit necessary for the approval of shared parking or reduction of required parking pursuant to Sections 18.20.050.D and 18.20.050.F of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, respectively; and (ix) an application for minor modification to the conditions of an existing conditional use permit, such as the hours of operation, provided the use is remaining in its existing space, there is no increase in floor area devoted to such use and the modification does not otherwise result in an intensification or expansion of the use.

SECTION FIVE. REQUEST FOR RELIEF
Any person who has applied for approval of an application which would be prohibited by this Interim Ordinance, and who contends that the Interim Ordinance as applied to her or his property would be unlawful under Federal, State, or local law or regulation, shall submit a written application to the Planning Commission requesting relief from the Interim Ordinance, or the contention shall be waived.

The request for relief from the Interim Ordinance shall identify the name and address of the applicant, the address and assessor parcel number(s) of the property affected by the Interim Ordinance, and shall state with particularity how the Interim Ordinance as applied to applicant’s property would be unlawful under Federal, State, or local law or regulation. The applicant shall provide detailed evidence showing the basis for their request for relief from the Interim Ordinance.

If a ground of the request for relief is that the Interim Ordinance constitutes a taking of the applicant’s property or any part thereof in violation of the California or United States Constitution, that ground and all evidence (including specific financial data and analysis, if any) and argument in support thereof shall be clearly stated as a separate ground of the request for relief, or it shall be waived. If the applicant does not present specific evidence as part of the request for relief, the takings claim shall be waived and applicant shall be deemed to have waived any claim to sworn testimony and cross-examination. This requirement shall apply to claims that the Interim Ordinance denies the applicant of any reasonable economic use of the subject property, is not sufficiently related to a legitimate public purpose, is not sufficiently proportional to any impact of applicant’s project, or for any other reason constituting a taking of property for public or private use without just compensation.

The application for a request for relief from the Interim Ordinance shall be addressed to the Community Development Director who shall schedule the matter for a public hearing before the Planning Commission, and shall be accompanied with the payment of the appropriate fee to process such request for relief as adopted by resolution of the City Council in accordance with Section 3.32.010 of the San Carlos Municipal Code. In any such public hearing, the applicant

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 1950 Attachment: Option 1 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
requesting relief from the Interim Ordinance shall have the right to present sworn testimony and to examine and cross-examine witnesses subject to the claim presentation requirements set forth herein. The Community Development Director shall mail to the applicant a written determination of the Planning Commission accepting or rejecting the request for relief from the Interim Ordinance. The decision of the Planning Commission shall be appealable to the City Council pursuant to procedures in Section 18.27.150 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, and any such appeal shall be accompanied by payment of the appropriate fee to process such appeal as adopted by resolution of the City Council in accordance with Section 3.32.010 of the San Carlos Municipal Code.

SECTION SIX. CEQA DETERMINATION
The City Council finds that adoption of this Interim Ordinance is not a project subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because the Interim Ordinance will not result in a direct physical change in the environment nor a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Further, even assuming the Interim Ordinance is a project as defined in CEQA, the Interim Ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines because it is covered by the common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and where, as in the case of the Interim Ordinance, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption of this Interim Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment, the adoption of the Interim Ordinance is not subject to CEQA.

SECTION SEVEN. SEVERABILITY
Every section, paragraph, clause, and phrase of this Interim Ordinance is hereby declared to be severable. If for any reason, any section, paragraph, clause, or phrase is held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining section, paragraphs, clauses or phrases.

SECTION EIGHT. REPORT
In accordance with Government Code Section 65858 (d), ten days prior to the expiration of this Interim Ordinance the City Council shall issue a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of this Interim Ordinance.

SECTION NINE. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Interim Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption in accordance with California Government Code section 65858 and it shall continue in force thereafter for a period of twenty two (22) months and fifteen (15) days from its date of adoption.

SECTION TEN. CODIFICATION
This Interim Ordinance shall NOT be codified in the San Carlos Municipal Code.

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 1951 Attachment: Option 1 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
*****
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the forgoing Urgency Ordinance was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting held on 25th day of April, 2022 by the following vote:
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:

MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibit A: Northeast Area
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 1952 Attachment: Option 1 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
EXHIBIT A.

9.b.2
Packet Pg. 1953 Attachment: Option 1 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) [OPTION 2]
ORDINANCE NO. ____

AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

EXTENDING A MORATORIUM ON THE APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS FOR (I) LOT LINE

ADJUSTMENTS AND THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND WITHIN THE NORTHEAST AREA IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND THE

SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, (II) DESIGN REVIEW, USE PERMIT, TEMPORARY USE PERMIT,

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, ZONING AMENDMENT, WAIVER, VARIANCE, GENERAL

PLAN AMENDMENT, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, OR ANY OTHER DISCRETIONARY

APPROVAL FROM THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS NECESSARY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT

OF A SITE WITHIN THE NORTHEAST AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SAN CARLOS

ZONING ORDINANCE, OR (III) A BUILDING PERMIT REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION

AND/OR ALTERATIONS ON PROPERTY WITHIN THE NORTHEAST AREA IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE SAN CARLOS MUNICIPAL CODE, SUBJECT TO CERTAIN ENUMERATED EXCEPTIONS.
___________________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, the Northeast Area of the City of San Carlos, commonly referred to as the Harbor Industrial Area, comprises approximately 120 acres of land and, for purposes of this Interim Ordinance, is more particularly depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (“Northeast Area”); and
WHEREAS, the majority of the Northeast Area was annexed in 1997 after a petition for annexation was received from over 80 percent of the property owners within the Harbor Industrial Area, which area includes large manufacturing businesses, biotechnical and biomedical firms, and light and heavy industrial uses; and WHEREAS, under the 2030 General Plan and existing land use regulations and applicable zoning, residential, commercial, retail and non-industrial uses in the Northeast Area are prohibited; and
WHEREAS, since the annexation of the Northeast Area in 1997, the City has not undertaken a comprehensive review and analysis of the long-term plan for physical development focused on the Northeast Area in accordance with the Planning and Zoning Law of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, since 2015 the City has experienced an unprecedented amount of private sector investment and development in East San Carlos, including business and employment growth in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and thus, in response, in 2021 the City adopted the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan to guide these changes within the area defined by Holly Street, Brittan Avenue, Old County Road, and Highway 101 (the “East Side Innovation District”); and
WHEREAS, since the adoption of the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan, the City continues to receive developer interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors; and WHEREAS, in addition to the aforementioned interest in the East Side Innovation District, the Northeast Area is also experiencing increased development interest as evidenced by recent property sales and acquisitions, and receipt of a complete development application for

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 1954 Attachment: Option 2 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
two new buildings at 642 Quarry Road, proposing 401,072 square feet of research and development space, and a preliminary application to develop 200 Industrial Road with two new buildings totaling 650,000 square feet of research and development space; and WHEREAS, based on the foregoing, and in consideration of the amount of development that has been approved and/or constructed under the 2030 General Plan buildout, allowable development within the City is nearing capacity and on a trajectory to exceed the level of buildout for commercial, office, and industrial uses planned for and analyzed in the adopted 2030 General Plan and General Plan EIR; and
WHEREAS, in the absence of an amendment to the General Plan and appropriate environmental review pursuant to CEQA, future commercial, office, industrial and residential development within the City, including the Northeast Area, will face an impending roadblock; and WHEREAS, in recognition of these factors, the City Council adopted the City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Plan which contains a goal to create and develop a Northeast Area Specific Plan, stated as follows:

The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, stakeholders, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan in response to continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development; and
WHEREAS, on March 28, 2022, consistent with the aforementioned 2022 Strategic Plan goal, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million of public resources to prepare a specific plan for the Northeast Area, hereinafter the “Northeast Area Specific Plan”, and to prepare amendments to the 2030 General Plan, subject to review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”); and
WHEREAS, as has been well documented, the State of California has a housing crisis of not enough housing and not enough housing that is affordable; and WHEREAS, as reflected in the City’s 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report1, the City will likely not meet its current Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goal by 2023, still needing 173 housing units affordable to very low income households, 93 housing units affordable to low income households, and 97 housing units affordable to moderate income households, and factoring these current needs with the City’s upcoming RHNA allocation for 2023-2031 of 2,735 total housing units, of which 1,602 are to be affordable to very-low, low and moderate income households, it is evident the City’s situation is reflective of the overall housing crisis that the California State Legislature has determined constitutes a threat to public health, safety and welfare for at least the past decade - not enough housing and not enough housing that is affordable; and
WHEREAS, while the City has no obligation to develop housing itself, it does shoulder a responsibility to respond to and address the overall housing needs at the local level through adoption of clear and objective development policies, standards and conditions for the

1 http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Default.aspx

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 1955 Attachment: Option 2 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
preservation, improvement and development of housing, specifically including the identification of adequate sites for housing2; and
WHEREAS, for the City of San Carlos, the ability to identify adequate sites for housing rests primarily in identifying sites or areas of the City that can be redeveloped with increased density and, in rare circumstances, those areas where housing can be introduced for the first time; and
WHEREAS, the Northeast Area is one such rare opportunity where there is a potential to introduce housing as an allowable use within this historically industrial area and thereby address the City’s share of the regional housing needs; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Northeast Area Specific Plan will provide a plan for orderly future development and anticipates the introduction of new uses to meet the needs of the San Carlos community today and in the future, such as residential, commercial, retail, and other nonindustrial uses, while also evaluating and addressing the aging storm water and sewer infrastructure, flooding along Belmont Creek and identifying ways for new development within the Northeast Area to address these issues; and
WHEREAS, preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan, and corresponding amendments to the 2030 General Plan, are needed to address these pending development pressures, and it is in the public interest to consider the Northeast Area holistically through study of land uses, specifically including the introduction of housing and affordable housing, as a means to address the City’s share of the regional housing needs; and WHEREAS, as part of the Northeast Area Specific Plan process the presence of hazardous substances and the impact on allowable uses will need to be analyzed and accounted for because it is more likely than not that hazardous substances will be present on sites within the Northeast Area, and depending on the nature of the contaminant involved and the extent of its impact, it can be more difficult and expensive to develop a site with more sensitive uses, such as housing, than commercial/office uses, and accordingly, it is imperative that the City consider the Northeast Area holistically in order to ensure that ad hoc development does not impair the City’s ability to maximize the area within the Northeast Area “suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels;” and
WHEREAS, while the City’s housing related policies, standards and conditions indicates that there exists adequate sites within the City sufficient to meet its 2023-2031 RHNA allocation, as well as a self-imposed goal of an additional 481 affordable units on top of its 1,602 RHNA allocation, it would be contrary to responsible planning to suggest that now is not the time to lay the ground work for future residential development by “[d]esignating and maintaining a supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels … essential to achieving the state’s housing goals and purposes of” state housing element law3; and WHEREAS, adoption of the Interim Ordinance is necessary to evaluate anticipated development within the Northeast Area that likely will exceed the 2030 General Plan build-out

2 Government Code §65583
3 Government Code §65580 (f)

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 1956 Attachment: Option 2 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
figures in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law, but more importantly to prohibit ad hoc development proposals within the Northeast Area that may conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of uses, such as housing, contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan and thereby decrease the “supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing”; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65858 (b) provides that following notice pursuant to Government Code Section 65090 and public hearing, the City Council, to protect public safety, health, and welfare, may adopt an interim ordinance prohibiting any uses that may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal, such as the Northeast Area Specific Plan, that the City is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable time; and
WHEREAS, as previously noted, on March 28, 2022, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million for the preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan and attendant amendments to the 2030 General Plan, and thus the City’s intentions are clear; and WHEREAS, consideration and approval of development projects within the Northeast Area without the guidance provided by the Northeast Area Specific Plan, will only serve to frustrate the City’s ability to advance the City of San Carlos’ Strategic Plan, State housing goals, and the City’s housing goals, thereby potentially resulting in ad hoc development that may conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of uses, such as housing, contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan and thereby decrease the “supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing”; and WHEREAS, given the potential deleterious effect the approval of development projects within the Northeast Area without the guidance provided by the Northeast Area Specific Plan will have on the “supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing”, the City Council desires to adopt an interim ordinance prohibiting the approval and development of uses within the Northeast Area that may be in conflict with the Northeast Area Specific Plan to provide the City sufficient time to consider and evaluate development within the Northeast Area that will likely exceed the 2030 General Plan buildout in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and adopt a comprehensive Northeast Area Specific Plan to ensure the development of a plan that is responsive to “continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development”; and
WHEREAS, on April 25, 2022, following notice and a public hearing in accordance with Government Code Section 65858 (b), the City Council passed and adopted Ordinance No. 1581 establishing a moratorium on development within the Northeast Area for an initial period of fortyfive (45) days (the “Interim Ordinance”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 65858 (b), the City may, after notice and a public hearing, extend the Interim Ordinance for an additional period of up to 22 months and 15 days.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 1957 Attachment: Option 2 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
SECTION ONE. PURPOSE AND INTENT
The purpose and intent of this Interim Ordinance is to protect the public health, safety and welfare, and prohibit the ad hoc approval and development of uses that may be in conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of a mix of uses contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan, specifically including housing and affordable housing, which uses are needed in order to address State and City housing goals. Accordingly, the Interim Ordinance provides the City the opportunity to evaluate development within the Northeast Area that will likely exceed the 2030 General Plan buildout in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and consider the Northeast Area for the purpose of “[d]esignating and maintaining a supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels … essential to achieving the state’s housing goals and purposes of” state housing element law.

SECTION TWO. FINDINGS

1. The City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby incorporates by reference all of the Recitals and footnotes thereto set forth in this Interim Ordinance.

2. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that since its annexation into the City of San Carlos in 1997, a comprehensive, long-term plan, with a focus on the physical development within the Northeast Area, has not been undertaken in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law. Therefore, only light and heavy industrial uses are permitted in the Northeast Area.

Accordingly, the City’s 2030 General Plan and zoning regulations applicable to the Northeast Area currently preclude a greater mix of residential, commercial, retail and other non-industrial uses which are needed to meet the needs of the San Carlos community today and in the future.

3. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that private sector investment and development interest in the City generally, and the East Side Innovation District in particular, remains strong, and development pressures are being felt in the Northeast Area. Based on the amount of approved, proposed and anticipated development, the City is on a trajectory to exceed the level of build out planned for and analyzed in the 2030 General Plan and General Plan EIR. In order to facilitate additional development beyond the 2030 General Plan buildout, either the City will need to undertake a comprehensive planning effort or incrementally analyze ad hoc development applications as they occur.

4. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that on March 28, 2022, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million of public funds toward the preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan, with commensurate amendments to the 2030 General Plan, subject to review in accordance with CEQA, to undertake a comprehensive, long-term plan for the physical development of the Northeast Area.

5. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that the City is but a microcosm of the State of California, as there is an overall shortage of housing, including affordable housing, in the City that is reflective of the statewide shortage, a situation which the State Legislature has declared constitutes a threat to public health, safety and welfare in California. The shortage of housing, including affordable housing, in the City of San Carlos constitutes a threat to the public health, safety and welfare in the City of San Carlos.

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 1958 Attachment: Option 2 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022

6. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that the Northeast Area and its anticipated transformation from exclusively light and heavy industrial uses to a mix of uses represents a unique and rare opportunity for the City to plan in a comprehensive manner the introduction of new uses to this historically industrial area, including residential, commercial, retail and office uses, to meet the needs of the citizens of San Carlos, consider potential constraints on the location of uses (e.g. proximity to freeways and railroads, presence of hazardous substances), while also addressing infrastructure needs of the area.

7. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that it is imperative that the City consider the Northeast Area holistically in order to evaluate development in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and ensure the adoption of a comprehensive Northeast Area Specific Plan that is responsive to “continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development,” and ensure that ad hoc development does not conflict with, constrain or impair the City’s ability to maximize the area within the Northeast Area “suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels.”

8. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that, given the potential deleterious effect the approval of development projects within the Northeast Area without the guidance provided by the Northeast Area Specific Plan will have on the “supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing,” the approval of (i) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permits, temporary use permits, planned developments, zoning amendments, waivers, variances, general plan amendments, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code, will result in a threat to public health, safety and welfare.

9. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that a temporary moratorium prohibiting the approval of (i) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permits, temporary use permits, planned developments, zoning amendments, waivers, variances, general plan amendments, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code, subject to certain enumerated exceptions outlined in Section 4 of this Interim Ordinance, is necessary in order to allow the City sufficient time to consider and evaluate development within the Northeast Area in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and ensure the adoption of a comprehensive Northeast Area Specific Plan that is responsive to “continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development,” and maximizes the area within the Northeast Area “suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels.”

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 1959 Attachment: Option 2 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
SECTION THREE. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this Interim Ordinance, the following terms shall be defined as follows:

1. “Alteration” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

2. “Building” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

3. “Building permit” shall mean all permits governed by Chapter 15.04 of Title 15 of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code.

4. “City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations” shall mean those provisions set forth in Title 17 of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code.

5. “Construction” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

6. “Design review” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter

18.29 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

7. “Development” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

8. “Development agreement” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.37 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

9. “Floor area” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

10. “General plan amendment” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.34 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

11. “Lot line adjustment” shall have the meaning set forth in the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act.

12. “Northeast Area” shall mean that geographic area of the City of San Carlos, comprising approximately 120 acres of land and more particularly depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

13. “Planned development” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.36 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

14. “Planning permit” shall mean a discretionary approval or permit for (i) design review, use permit, temporary use permit, planned development, zoning amendment, waiver, variance, general plan amendment, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (ii) lot line adjustment or subdivision of

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 1960 Attachment: Option 2 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act.

15. “San Carlos Zoning Ordinance” shall mean those provisions set forth in Title 18 of the San Carlos Municipal Code.

16. “Site” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

17. “Subdivision” shall have the meaning set forth in the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act.

18. “Subdivision Map Act” shall mean those provisions set forth in California Government Code Section 66410 et seq.

19. “Temporary use permit” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.31 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

20. “Use permit,” inclusive of a conditional use permit and a minor use permit, shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.30 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

21. “Variance” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.32 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

22. “Waiver” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.33 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

23. “Zoning amendment” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.35 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

SECTION FOUR. APPLICATION; EXCEPTIONS.

This Interim Ordinance shall apply to prohibit the approval of applications for (i) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permits, temporary use permits, planned developments, zoning amendments, waivers, variances, general plan amendments, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code.

This Interim Ordinance shall not apply to prohibit the approval of: (i) an application for planning permit that has been approved as complete or deemed complete prior to April 25, 2022; (ii) an application for sign permit necessary for the approval of a sign in accordance with Chapter

18.22 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance and building permit as required to construct the approved sign; (iii) an application for planning permit necessary for the approval of a solar photovoltaic system in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance and building permit as required to construct the approved solar photovoltaic system; (iv) an application for building

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 1961 Attachment: Option 2 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
permits for the construction of interior improvements to space within an existing building occupied by uses permitted within the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance; (v) an application for planning permits and/or building permits necessary for the approval and construction of improvements required for the ordinary maintenance and repair of building components, such as roofs and windows, for the preservation of public health and safety or for building accessibility; (vi) an application for a change of use within space of an existing building and any associated interior improvements, provided the new use is permitted as of right pursuant to the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance; (vii) an application for a tree removal permit necessary for the removal of a protected tree in accordance with Chapter 18.18 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance and grading permit or encroachment permit as required to remove the protected tree approved for removal; (viii) an application for a conditional use permit necessary for the approval of shared parking or reduction of required parking pursuant to Sections 18.20.050.D and 18.20.050.F of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, respectively; (ix) an application for minor modification to the conditions of an existing conditional use permit, such as the hours of operation, provided the use is remaining in its existing space, there is no increase in floor area devoted to such use and the modification does not otherwise result in an intensification or expansion of the use; and (x) planning permits sought by Pacific Gas & Electric Company pursuant to planning application number PLN2021-00200, as said planning application exists as of April 25, 2022, and building permit(s) as required to construct the improvements authorized pursuant to the planning permits, if approved.

SECTION FIVE. REQUEST FOR RELIEF
Any person who has applied for approval of an application which would be prohibited by this Interim Ordinance, and who contends that the Interim Ordinance as applied to her or his property would be unlawful under Federal, State, or local law or regulation, shall submit a written application to the Planning Commission requesting relief from the Interim Ordinance, or the contention shall be waived.

The request for relief from the Interim Ordinance shall identify the name and address of the applicant, the address and assessor parcel number(s) of the property affected by the Interim Ordinance, and shall state with particularity how the Interim Ordinance as applied to applicant’s property would be unlawful under Federal, State, or local law or regulation. The applicant shall provide detailed evidence showing the basis for their request for relief from the Interim Ordinance.

If a ground of the request for relief is that the Interim Ordinance constitutes a taking of the applicant’s property or any part thereof in violation of the California or United States Constitution, that ground and all evidence (including specific financial data and analysis, if any) and argument in support thereof shall be clearly stated as a separate ground of the request for relief, or it shall be waived. If the applicant does not present specific evidence as part of the request for relief, the takings claim shall be waived and applicant shall be deemed to have waived any claim to sworn testimony and cross-examination. This requirement shall apply to claims that the Interim Ordinance denies the applicant of any reasonable economic use of the subject property, is not sufficiently related to a legitimate public purpose, is not sufficiently proportional to any impact of applicant’s project, or for any other reason constituting a taking of property for public or private use without just compensation.

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 1962 Attachment: Option 2 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
The application for a request for relief from the Interim Ordinance shall be addressed to the Community Development Director who shall schedule the matter for a public hearing before the Planning Commission, and shall be accompanied with the payment of the appropriate fee to process such request for relief as adopted by resolution of the City Council in accordance with Section 3.32.010 of the San Carlos Municipal Code. In any such public hearing, the applicant requesting relief from the Interim Ordinance shall have the right to present sworn testimony and to examine and cross-examine witnesses subject to the claim presentation requirements set forth herein. The Community Development Director shall mail to the applicant a written determination of the Planning Commission accepting or rejecting the request for relief from the Interim Ordinance. The decision of the Planning Commission shall be appealable to the City Council pursuant to procedures in Section 18.27.150 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, and any such appeal shall be accompanied by payment of the appropriate fee to process such appeal as adopted by resolution of the City Council in accordance with Section 3.32.010 of the San Carlos Municipal Code.

SECTION SIX. CEQA DETERMINATION
The City Council finds that adoption of this Interim Ordinance is not a project subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because the Interim Ordinance will not result in a direct physical change in the environment nor a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Further, even assuming the Interim Ordinance is a project as defined in CEQA, the Interim Ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines because it is covered by the common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and where, as in the case of the Interim Ordinance, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption of this Interim Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment, the adoption of the Interim Ordinance is not subject to CEQA.

SECTION SEVEN. SEVERABILITY
Every section, paragraph, clause, and phrase of this Interim Ordinance is hereby declared to be severable. If for any reason, any section, paragraph, clause, or phrase is held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining section, paragraphs, clauses or phrases.

SECTION EIGHT. REPORT
In accordance with Government Code Section 65858 (d), ten days prior to the expiration of this Interim Ordinance the City Council shall issue a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of this Interim Ordinance.

SECTION NINE. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Interim Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption in accordance with California Government Code section 65858 and it shall continue in force thereafter for a period of twenty two (22) months and fifteen (15) days from its date of adoption.

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 1963 Attachment: Option 2 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
SECTION TEN. CODIFICATION
This Interim Ordinance shall NOT be codified in the San Carlos Municipal Code. *****
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the forgoing Urgency Ordinance was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting held on 23 rd day
of May, 2022 by the following vote:
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:

MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibit A: Northeast Area
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 1964 Attachment: Option 2 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
EXHIBIT A.

9.b.3
Packet Pg. 1965 Attachment: Option 2 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) [OPTION 3]
ORDINANCE NO. ____

AN INTERIM ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

EXTENDING A MORATORIUM ON THE APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS FOR (I) LOT LINE

ADJUSTMENTS AND THE SUBDIVISION OF LAND WITHIN THE NORTHEAST AREA IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS SUBDIVISION REGULATIONS AND THE

SUBDIVISION MAP ACT, (II) DESIGN REVIEW, USE PERMIT, TEMPORARY USE PERMIT,

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, ZONING AMENDMENT, WAIVER, VARIANCE, GENERAL

PLAN AMENDMENT, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, OR ANY OTHER DISCRETIONARY

APPROVAL FROM THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS NECESSARY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT

OF A SITE WITHIN THE NORTHEAST AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SAN CARLOS

ZONING ORDINANCE, OR (III) A BUILDING PERMIT REQUIRED FOR CONSTRUCTION

AND/OR ALTERATIONS ON PROPERTY WITHIN THE NORTHEAST AREA IN

ACCORDANCE WITH THE SAN CARLOS MUNICIPAL CODE, SUBJECT TO CERTAIN ENUMERATED EXCEPTIONS.

WHEREAS, the Northeast Area of the City of San Carlos, commonly referred to as the Harbor Industrial Area, comprises approximately 120 acres of land and, for purposes of this Interim Ordinance, is more particularly depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (“Northeast Area”); and
WHEREAS, the majority of the Northeast Area was annexed in 1997 after a petition for annexation was received from over 80 percent of the property owners within the Harbor Industrial Area, which area includes large manufacturing businesses, biotechnical and biomedical firms, and light and heavy industrial uses; and WHEREAS, under the 2030 General Plan and existing land use regulations and applicable zoning, residential, commercial, retail and non-industrial uses in the Northeast Area are prohibited; and
WHEREAS, since the annexation of the Northeast Area in 1997, the City has not undertaken a comprehensive review and analysis of the long-term plan for physical development focused on the Northeast Area in accordance with the Planning and Zoning Law of the State of California; and
WHEREAS, since 2015 the City has experienced an unprecedented amount of private sector investment and development in East San Carlos, including business and employment growth in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and thus, in response, in 2021 the City adopted the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan to guide these changes within the area defined by Holly Street, Brittan Avenue, Old County Road, and Highway 101 (the “East Side Innovation District”); and
WHEREAS, since the adoption of the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan, the City continues to receive developer interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors; and WHEREAS, in addition to the aforementioned interest in the East Side Innovation District, the Northeast Area is also experiencing increased development interest as evidenced by recent property sales and acquisitions, and receipt of a complete development application for two new buildings at 642 Quarry Road, proposing 401,072 square feet of research and

9.b.4
Packet Pg. 1966 Attachment: Option 3 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
development space, and a preliminary application to develop 200 Industrial Road with two new buildings totaling 650,000 square feet of research and development space; and WHEREAS, based on the foregoing, and in consideration of the amount of development that has been approved and/or constructed under the 2030 General Plan buildout, allowable development within the City is nearing capacity and on a trajectory to exceed the level of buildout for commercial, office, and industrial uses planned for and analyzed in the adopted 2030 General Plan and General Plan EIR; and
WHEREAS, in the absence of an amendment to the General Plan and appropriate environmental review pursuant to CEQA, future commercial, office, industrial and residential development within the City, including the Northeast Area, will face an impending roadblock; and WHEREAS, in recognition of these factors, the City Council adopted the City of San Carlos 2022 Strategic Plan which contains a goal to create and develop a Northeast Area Specific Plan, stated as follows:

The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, stakeholders, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan in response to continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development; and
WHEREAS, on March 28, 2022, consistent with the aforementioned 2022 Strategic Plan goal, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million of public resources to prepare a specific plan for the Northeast Area, hereinafter the “Northeast Area Specific Plan”, and to prepare amendments to the 2030 General Plan, subject to review in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”); and
WHEREAS, as has been well documented, the State of California has a housing crisis of not enough housing and not enough housing that is affordable; and WHEREAS, as reflected in the City’s 2021 Housing Element Annual Progress Report1, the City will likely not meet its current Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goal by 2023, still needing 173 housing units affordable to very low income households, 93 housing units affordable to low income households, and 97 housing units affordable to moderate income households, and factoring these current needs with the City’s upcoming RHNA allocation for 2023-2031 of 2,735 total housing units, of which 1,602 are to be affordable to very-low, low and moderate income households, it is evident the City’s situation is reflective of the overall housing crisis that the California State Legislature has determined constitutes a threat to public health, safety and welfare for at least the past decade - not enough housing and not enough housing that is affordable; and
WHEREAS, while the City has no obligation to develop housing itself, it does shoulder a responsibility to respond to and address the overall housing needs at the local level through adoption of clear and objective development policies, standards and conditions for the

1 http://sancarlosca.iqm2.com/Citizens/Default.aspx

9.b.4
Packet Pg. 1967 Attachment: Option 3 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
preservation, improvement and development of housing, specifically including the identification of adequate sites for housing2; and
WHEREAS, for the City of San Carlos, the ability to identify adequate sites for housing rests primarily in identifying sites or areas of the City that can be redeveloped with increased density and, in rare circumstances, those areas where housing can be introduced for the first time; and
WHEREAS, the Northeast Area is one such rare opportunity where there is a potential to introduce housing as an allowable use within this historically industrial area and thereby address the City’s share of the regional housing needs; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Northeast Area Specific Plan will provide a plan for orderly future development and anticipates the introduction of new uses to meet the needs of the San Carlos community today and in the future, such as residential, commercial, retail, and other nonindustrial uses, while also evaluating and addressing the aging storm water and sewer infrastructure, flooding along Belmont Creek and identifying ways for new development within the Northeast Area to address these issues; and
WHEREAS, preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan, and corresponding amendments to the 2030 General Plan, are needed to address these pending development pressures, and it is in the public interest to consider the Northeast Area holistically through study of land uses, specifically including the introduction of housing and affordable housing, as a means to address the City’s share of the regional housing needs; and WHEREAS, as part of the Northeast Area Specific Plan process the presence of hazardous substances and the impact on allowable uses will need to be analyzed and accounted for because it is more likely than not that hazardous substances will be present on sites within the Northeast Area, and depending on the nature of the contaminant involved and the extent of its impact, it can be more difficult and expensive to develop a site with more sensitive uses, such as housing, than commercial/office uses, and accordingly, it is imperative that the City consider the Northeast Area holistically in order to ensure that ad hoc development does not impair the City’s ability to maximize the area within the Northeast Area “suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels;” and
WHEREAS, while the City’s housing related policies, standards and conditions indicates that there exists adequate sites within the City sufficient to meet its 2023-2031 RHNA allocation, as well as a self-imposed goal of an additional 481 affordable units on top of its 1,602 RHNA allocation, it would be contrary to responsible planning to suggest that now is not the time to lay the ground work for future residential development by “[d]esignating and maintaining a supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels … essential to achieving the state’s housing goals and purposes of” state housing element law3; and WHEREAS, adoption of the Interim Ordinance is necessary to evaluate anticipated development within the Northeast Area that likely will exceed the 2030 General Plan build-out

2 Government Code §65583
3 Government Code §65580 (f)

9.b.4
Packet Pg. 1968 Attachment: Option 3 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
figures in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law, but more importantly to prohibit ad hoc development proposals within the Northeast Area that may conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of uses, such as housing, contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan and thereby decrease the “supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing”; and WHEREAS, Government Code Section 65858 (b) provides that following notice pursuant to Government Code Section 65090 and public hearing, the City Council, to protect public safety, health, and welfare, may adopt an interim ordinance prohibiting any uses that may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal, such as the Northeast Area Specific Plan, that the City is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable time; and
WHEREAS, as previously noted, on March 28, 2022, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million for the preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan and attendant amendments to the 2030 General Plan, and thus the City’s intentions are clear; and WHEREAS, consideration and approval of development projects within the Northeast Area without the guidance provided by the Northeast Area Specific Plan, will only serve to frustrate the City’s ability to advance the City of San Carlos’ Strategic Plan, State housing goals, and the City’s housing goals, thereby potentially resulting in ad hoc development that may conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of uses, such as housing, contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan and thereby decrease the “supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing”; and WHEREAS, given the potential deleterious effect the approval of development projects within the Northeast Area without the guidance provided by the Northeast Area Specific Plan will have on the “supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing”, the City Council desires to adopt an interim ordinance prohibiting the approval and development of uses within the Northeast Area that may be in conflict with the Northeast Area Specific Plan to provide the City sufficient time to consider and evaluate development within the Northeast Area that will likely exceed the 2030 General Plan buildout in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and adopt a comprehensive Northeast Area Specific Plan to ensure the development of a plan that is responsive to “continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development”; and
WHEREAS, on April 25, 2022, following notice and a public hearing in accordance with Government Code Section 65858 (b), the City Council passed and adopted Ordinance No. 1581 establishing a moratorium on development within the Northeast Area for an initial period of fortyfive (45) days (the “Interim Ordinance”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 65858 (b), the City may, after notice and a public hearing, extend the Interim Ordinance for an additional period of up to 22 months and 15 days.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

9.b.4
Packet Pg. 1969 Attachment: Option 3 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
SECTION ONE. PURPOSE AND INTENT
The purpose and intent of this Interim Ordinance is to protect the public health, safety and welfare, and prohibit the ad hoc approval and development of uses that may be in conflict with or otherwise constrain or limit the introduction of a mix of uses contemplated in the Northeast Area Specific Plan, specifically including housing and affordable housing, which uses are needed in order to address State and City housing goals. Accordingly, the Interim Ordinance provides the City the opportunity to evaluate development within the Northeast Area that will likely exceed the 2030 General Plan buildout in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and consider the Northeast Area for the purpose of “[d]esignating and maintaining a supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels … essential to achieving the state’s housing goals and purposes of” state housing element law.

SECTION TWO. FINDINGS

1. The City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby incorporates by reference all of the Recitals and footnotes thereto set forth in this Interim Ordinance.

2. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that since its annexation into the City of San Carlos in 1997, a comprehensive, long-term plan, with a focus on the physical development within the Northeast Area, has not been undertaken in accordance with State Planning and Zoning Law. Therefore, only light and heavy industrial uses are permitted in the Northeast Area.

Accordingly, the City’s 2030 General Plan and zoning regulations applicable to the Northeast Area currently preclude a greater mix of residential, commercial, retail and other non-industrial uses which are needed to meet the needs of the San Carlos community today and in the future.

3. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that private sector investment and development interest in the City generally, and the East Side Innovation District in particular, remains strong, and development pressures are being felt in the Northeast Area. Based on the amount of approved, proposed and anticipated development, the City is on a trajectory to exceed the level of build out planned for and analyzed in the 2030 General Plan and General Plan EIR. In order to facilitate additional development beyond the 2030 General Plan buildout, either the City will need to undertake a comprehensive planning effort or incrementally analyze ad hoc development applications as they occur.

4. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that on March 28, 2022, the City Council appropriated $1.5 million of public funds toward the preparation of the Northeast Area Specific Plan, with commensurate amendments to the 2030 General Plan, subject to review in accordance with CEQA, to undertake a comprehensive, long-term plan for the physical development of the Northeast Area.

5. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that the City is but a microcosm of the State of California, as there is an overall shortage of housing, including affordable housing, in the City that is reflective of the statewide shortage, a situation which the State Legislature has declared constitutes a threat to public health, safety and welfare in California. The shortage of housing, including affordable housing, in the City of San Carlos constitutes a threat to the public health, safety and welfare in the City of San Carlos.

9.b.4
Packet Pg. 1970 Attachment: Option 3 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022

6. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that the Northeast Area and its anticipated transformation from exclusively light and heavy industrial uses to a mix of uses represents a unique and rare opportunity for the City to plan in a comprehensive manner the introduction of new uses to this historically industrial area, including residential, commercial, retail and office uses, to meet the needs of the citizens of San Carlos, consider potential constraints on the location of uses (e.g. proximity to freeways and railroads, presence of hazardous substances), while also addressing infrastructure needs of the area.

7. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that it is imperative that the City consider the Northeast Area holistically in order to evaluate development in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and ensure the adoption of a comprehensive Northeast Area Specific Plan that is responsive to “continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development,” and ensure that ad hoc development does not conflict with, constrain or impair the City’s ability to maximize the area within the Northeast Area “suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels.”

8. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that, given the potential deleterious effect the approval of development projects within the Northeast Area without the guidance provided by the Northeast Area Specific Plan will have on the “supply of land and adequate sites suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing,” the approval of (i) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permits, temporary use permits, planned developments, zoning amendments, waivers, variances, general plan amendments, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code, will result in a threat to public health, safety and welfare.

9. The City Council of the City of San Carlos finds that a temporary moratorium prohibiting the approval of (i) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permits, temporary use permits, planned developments, zoning amendments, waivers, variances, general plan amendments, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code, subject to certain enumerated exceptions outlined in Section 4 of this Interim Ordinance, is necessary in order to allow the City sufficient time to consider and evaluate development within the Northeast Area in a comprehensive manner consistent with State Planning and Zoning Law and ensure the adoption of a comprehensive Northeast Area Specific Plan that is responsive to “continued development interest in the life sciences and biotechnology sectors, and develop policies and strategies to incorporate housing as a part of this new development,” and maximizes the area within the Northeast Area “suitable, feasible, and available for the development of housing sufficient to meet the locality’s housing need for all income levels.”

9.b.4
Packet Pg. 1971 Attachment: Option 3 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
SECTION THREE. DEFINITIONS.

For purposes of this Interim Ordinance, the following terms shall be defined as follows:

1. “Alteration” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

2. “Building” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

3. “Building permit” shall mean all permits governed by Chapter 15.04 of Title 15 of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code.

4. “City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations” shall mean those provisions set forth in Title 17 of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code.

5. “Construction” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

6. “Design review” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter

18.29 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

7. “Development” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

8. “Development agreement” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.37 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

9. “Floor area” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

10. “General plan amendment” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.34 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

11. “Lot line adjustment” shall have the meaning set forth in the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act.

12. “Northeast Area” shall mean that geographic area of the City of San Carlos, comprising approximately 120 acres of land and more particularly depicted in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

13. “Planned development” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.36 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

14. “Planning permit” shall mean a discretionary approval or permit for (i) design review, use permit, temporary use permit, planned development, zoning amendment, waiver, variance, general plan amendment, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (ii) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act.

9.b.4
Packet Pg. 1972 Attachment: Option 3 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022

15. “San Carlos Zoning Ordinance” shall mean those provisions set forth in Title 18 of the San Carlos Municipal Code.

16. “Site” shall have the meaning set forth in Chapter 18.41 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

17. “Subdivision” shall have the meaning set forth in the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act.

18. “Subdivision Map Act” shall mean those provisions set forth in California Government Code Section 66410 et seq.

19. “Temporary use permit” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.31 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

20. “Use permit,” inclusive of a conditional use permit and a minor use permit, shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.30 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

21. “Variance” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.32 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

22. “Waiver” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.33 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

23. “Zoning amendment” shall mean the discretionary approval or permit governed by Chapter 18.35 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

SECTION FOUR. APPLICATION; EXCEPTIONS.

This Interim Ordinance shall apply to prohibit the approval of applications for (i) lot line adjustment or subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permits, temporary use permits, planned developments, zoning amendments, waivers, variances, general plan amendments, development agreement or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code.

This Interim Ordinance shall not apply to prohibit the approval of: (i) an application for planning permit that has been approved as complete or deemed complete prior to April 25, 2022; (ii) an application for sign permit necessary for the approval of a sign in accordance with Chapter

18.22 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance and building permit as required to construct the approved sign; (iii) an application for planning permit necessary for the approval of a solar photovoltaic system in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance and building permit as required to construct the approved solar photovoltaic system; (iv) an application for building permits for the construction of interior improvements to space within an existing building occupied by uses permitted within the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning

9.b.4
Packet Pg. 1973 Attachment: Option 3 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
Ordinance; (v) an application for planning permits and/or building permits necessary for the approval and construction of improvements required for the ordinary maintenance and repair of building components, such as roofs and windows, for the preservation of public health and safety or for building accessibility; (vi) an application for a change of use within space of an existing building and any associated interior improvements, provided the new use is permitted as of right pursuant to the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance; (vii) an application for a tree removal permit necessary for the removal of a protected tree in accordance with Chapter 18.18 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance and grading permit or encroachment permit as required to remove the protected tree approved for removal; (viii) an application for a conditional use permit necessary for the approval of shared parking or reduction of required parking pursuant to Sections 18.20.050.D and 18.20.050.F of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, respectively; (ix) an application for minor modification to the conditions of an existing conditional use permit, such as the hours of operation, provided the use is remaining in its existing space, there is no increase in floor area devoted to such use and the modification does not otherwise result in an intensification or expansion of the use; (x) planning permits sought by Pacific Gas & Electric Company pursuant to planning application number PLN2021-00200, as said planning application exists as of April 25, 2022, and building permit(s) as required to construct the improvements authorized pursuant to the planning permits, if approved; and (xi) an application for design review necessary for the construction or alteration to the exterior of a building that does not involve the addition of floor area to the building and building permit as required to construct the approved design review improvements.

SECTION FIVE. REQUEST FOR RELIEF
Any person who has applied for approval of an application which would be prohibited by this Interim Ordinance, and who contends that the Interim Ordinance as applied to her or his property would be unlawful under Federal, State, or local law or regulation, shall submit a written application to the Planning Commission requesting relief from the Interim Ordinance, or the contention shall be waived.

The request for relief from the Interim Ordinance shall identify the name and address of the applicant, the address and assessor parcel number(s) of the property affected by the Interim Ordinance, and shall state with particularity how the Interim Ordinance as applied to applicant’s property would be unlawful under Federal, State, or local law or regulation. The applicant shall provide detailed evidence showing the basis for their request for relief from the Interim Ordinance.

If a ground of the request for relief is that the Interim Ordinance constitutes a taking of the applicant’s property or any part thereof in violation of the California or United States Constitution, that ground and all evidence (including specific financial data and analysis, if any) and argument in support thereof shall be clearly stated as a separate ground of the request for relief, or it shall be waived. If the applicant does not present specific evidence as part of the request for relief, the takings claim shall be waived and applicant shall be deemed to have waived any claim to sworn testimony and cross-examination. This requirement shall apply to claims that the Interim Ordinance denies the applicant of any reasonable economic use of the subject property, is not sufficiently related to a legitimate public purpose, is not sufficiently proportional to any impact of applicant’s project, or for any other reason constituting a taking of property for public or private use without just compensation.

9.b.4
Packet Pg. 1974 Attachment: Option 3 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
The application for a request for relief from the Interim Ordinance shall be addressed to the Community Development Director who shall schedule the matter for a public hearing before the Planning Commission, and shall be accompanied with the payment of the appropriate fee to process such request for relief as adopted by resolution of the City Council in accordance with Section 3.32.010 of the San Carlos Municipal Code. In any such public hearing, the applicant requesting relief from the Interim Ordinance shall have the right to present sworn testimony and to examine and cross-examine witnesses subject to the claim presentation requirements set forth herein. The Community Development Director shall mail to the applicant a written determination of the Planning Commission accepting or rejecting the request for relief from the Interim Ordinance. The decision of the Planning Commission shall be appealable to the City Council pursuant to procedures in Section 18.27.150 of the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, and any such appeal shall be accompanied by payment of the appropriate fee to process such appeal as adopted by resolution of the City Council in accordance with Section 3.32.010 of the San Carlos Municipal Code.

SECTION SIX. CEQA DETERMINATION
The City Council finds that adoption of this Interim Ordinance is not a project subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because the Interim Ordinance will not result in a direct physical change in the environment nor a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Further, even assuming the Interim Ordinance is a project as defined in CEQA, the Interim Ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines because it is covered by the common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and where, as in the case of the Interim Ordinance, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption of this Interim Ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment, the adoption of the Interim Ordinance is not subject to CEQA.

SECTION SEVEN. SEVERABILITY
Every section, paragraph, clause, and phrase of this Interim Ordinance is hereby declared to be severable. If for any reason, any section, paragraph, clause, or phrase is held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining section, paragraphs, clauses or phrases.

SECTION EIGHT. REPORT
In accordance with Government Code Section 65858 (d), ten days prior to the expiration of this Interim Ordinance the City Council shall issue a written report describing the measures taken to alleviate the condition which led to the adoption of this Interim Ordinance.

SECTION NINE. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Interim Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon adoption in accordance with California Government Code section 65858 and it shall continue in force thereafter for a period of twenty two (22) months and fifteen (15) days from its date of adoption.

SECTION TEN. CODIFICATION

9.b.4
Packet Pg. 1975 Attachment: Option 3 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
This Interim Ordinance shall NOT be codified in the San Carlos Municipal Code. *****
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the forgoing Urgency Ordinance was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting held on 23rd day of May, 2022 by the following vote:
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:

MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibit A: Northeast Area
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

9.b.4
Packet Pg. 1976 Attachment: Option 3 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) City Council Agenda
Interim Ordinance re Northeast Area Moratorium
May 23, 2022
EXHIBIT A.

9.b.4
Packet Pg. 1977 Attachment: Option 3 - Interim Ordinance (Moratorium HIA Extension) Attachment 5. Summary of Stakeholder Input
During the April 25, 2022 City Council Meeting, the City Council requested that staff conduct additional stakeholder outreach to gather feedback and input about the development moratorium. Since that time, staff has:
 Presented at the May 5, 2022 Harbor Industrial Association Luncheon which was attended by property owners, developers, and other interested parties (approximately 35 attendees).
 Met with numerous business and property owners, including CelLink Corp (610 Quarry Road), Greymark Capital (150 Industrial Road), Bay Area Self Storage (151 Industrial Road), San Mateo Dog Training Club (595 Taylor Way, Suite 2), and GW Williams (owner of multiple properties in the Northeast Area).
 Held a public meeting on May 11, 2022 (over 30 attendees).  Responded to phone calls and inquires submitted via email. (See Attachment 6 for Correspondence from stakeholders to City staff.)
Additional Stakeholder Input
In addition to the input listed under “Analysis - Stakeholder Input” in the staff report, City staff also received input that pertained to the specific plan, or other issues, including:
 Business owners are concerned that their businesses may no longer be allowed, per the policies of the forthcoming specific plan.
 Questions about whether the floor area ratio, height limits, and allowable density will be increased.
 Addressing the flooding from Belmont Creek.
 Questions about how the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan impacts planning for this area, and why housing was not included in the Vision Plan.

May 11, 2022 Public Meeting – Questions from Participants The Community Development Department held a virtual public meeting on Wednesday, May 11, 2022 from 7:00-8:30PM to gather stakeholder input and respond to questions about the development moratorium for the Northeast Area. Over 30 people attended the meeting.

Participants were invited to submit questions through the Q&A function in Zoom, or raise their hand to speak verbally. All questions were submitted through the Q&A function and are grouped into themes below.

A recording of the meeting has been posted on the project website and can be found here:
www.cityofsancarlos.org/northeast
Clarification Questions
 What are the actual boundaries of the moratorium? We live in a townhome on Old County Rd which is residential and want to clarify if we are part of this development moratorium and will it affect building permits for our townhomes.  Has there been any new modifications to this moratorium since the meeting last week?

9.b.5
Packet Pg. 1978 Attachment: Summary of Stakeholder Input (Moratorium HIA Extension)  Are there any modifications that your team already expects to propose at the May meeting based on feedback you have already received?
 How many parcels/acres are there in this area, excluding the PG&E property? How many are in the moratorium after the two properties on Quarry and Industrial are excluded, assuming that they are past the process.

Questions about the Moratorium Details
 Can you please explain why the moratorium includes CUPs where no exterior modifications are required? Consistent with some Councilmember comments, will staff propose a change to this aspect of the moratorium?
 What if projects are not of such a [large] size? Can minor projects be excluded?  If the goal is to exclude major redevelopment, why can't there be a size threshold?  What will happen to the industrial buildings that GW Williams owns? Their properties are in the core of the moratorium boundaries? Also, how will the business, Delta Star, be affected?
 What happens if your property is currently under contract or has been sold for development? Is everything on hold for two years?
 Might you also exclude needed building exterior improvements (such as a new roof), if the roof needs replacement or other needed exterior repairs?  Does the moratorium timing match up with state law regarding development moratoriums?
Questions about Why the Moratorium is Being Applied to the Northeast Area  If we are past the allowable development for the 2030 [General] Plan, why are we not putting the moratorium on the entire city?
 Why did you carve out this one small area and none of the other industrial areas?  How is this small boundary holistic by zeroing in one area?  Since part of the reasoning is to not use up all the development allowance for San Carlos, does it make sense to allow smaller developments here? Or perhaps projects that do not change the size/boundaries of current buildings? It seems this moratorium is very unfair to the owners of buildings in this area, possibly in favor of other areas.  What happens if someone wants to develop a parcel outside of this moratorium area? Why would that be allowed?
Questions Pertaining to the Specific Plan Process, or Other Planning Efforts  After the city meets with council on May 23rd, will there be a follow-up discussion with stakeholders on potential implementations for the Specific Plan?  How does the vision of the City conflict with potential owners in the area? For example, once the specific plan is in place, what if what is allowed is not what the ownership intended on developing when purchasing the property?
 How would you keep the current businesses from not moving when the entire area within the boundaries of this development area are industrial/business buildings? There are no residential buildings within the areas of topic.
o Am not wondering about whether or not you are incorporating residential housing in this development area, I am commenting that the entire development area that is being discussed currently is ALL industrial buildings. Some of these buildings

9.b.5
Packet Pg. 1979 Attachment: Summary of Stakeholder Input (Moratorium HIA Extension) would have to be removed and rezoned if residential housing is going to be considered?
 Are you considering adding a new zoning category of high-density housing to reach your California mandated affordable housing goal?
 What are options for property owners who want to continue to operate their light industrial business? Can the new specific plan require them to move?  We have owned property on Taylor Way for 60 years. If the City is committed to smarter planning moving forward, I believe we need greater FAR for commercial and higher density for residential development. Is this what the City Council is currently thinking?  Will you still have the rights offered under the light industrial zoning rules such as a FAR of one?
Questions about the East Side Innovation District Plan
 Why was the East Side Innovation Plan in 2021 only covering the area between Holly Street and Brittan Avenue?
 If housing is so important, then why is it not important for the entire East Side and not just this area? Is this area not the farthest area from any existing schools? Development-Related Questions
 Are the current properties being developed making the City better? Are there requirements for items that make the City better? If so, then why would you not want to develop this area, if the developments make the City better?  So it never occurred to anyone in 25 years that there might be some development in this area?
 The Burlingame City Council was excited about a new development on the East Side of their city. Why is San Carlos unhappy about this and are you not concerned that the developers will go somewhere else? Is that what you are hoping for?  The current properties within the boundary would need to be removed for the new development(s), is it inevitable; if so, is there any projected timeline for said removal of the existing buildings?
 You are crazily developing the rest of the City and I am sure the developers are confused as to what you want. Do you really think you are giving them clarity?  Is it fair to say the City is pro development but in this case prefers a “holistic” approach where the City can dictate a comprehensive plan? Rather than allowing free market development to occur between developers and landowners as with the SE side? Doesn’t this lead to imminent domain so that all the properties can be acquired?

9.b.5
Packet Pg. 1980 Attachment: Summary of Stakeholder Input (Moratorium HIA Extension) May 12, 2022
San Mateo Dog Training Club
595 Taylor Way, Unit #2
San Carlos, CA 94070
(Assessor's Parcel: 046-054-280)
City of San Carlos
Planning Division
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070-3085
Re: Northeast Area Development Moratorium
Dear Council Members and Planning Division,
I am writing to request that you consider some specific changes to the Moratorium.

My name is Cindy levers. I am the Treasurer of San Mateo Dog Training Club ("SMDTC"). SMDTC has been in business serving San Carlos and San Mateo County since 1953. We are a dog training club (NOT a kennel). Our purpose is to encourage the training of dogs for both household obedience and AKC competition. Well-trained dogs make better pets and have a better bond with their owners. We hold classes where dog/owner teams are instructed individually or in groups at our training hall located at 595 Taylor Way, Unit #2. We have a wide range of classes, from Puppy all the way to Competition Utility. We hold 6-week sessions, with a class lx per week. Last session we had more than 100 dogs/owner teams enrolled. At no time during our classes are any dogs not under the direct supervision of their owner.

In order to hold classes, we are required to have a Conditional Use Permit. In fact, there are no areas in San Carlos or {I believe) in San Mateo County where our use would not be considered a Conditional Use.

There is no location where we have the Use by Right.

We are actively looking for a slightly larger space because over the last 2 years we have lost all indoor spaces in the Bay Area where we could hold AKC Obedience trials. Our current space is just a little too narrow to be a competition space. We now hold our indoor trials in Lodi. When we do find a new space, the Tennant Improvements will be limited to putting in new floor mats and installing mirrors on some of the walls.

Barring finding a new location, we would also potentially like to review and amend our current CUP to expand the hours of operation (we are currently only allowed to hold classes at night and on weekends).

My request is to amend the Moratorium to specifically NOT apply to requests for CUPs or amendments to a currently existing CUP. Since, by the very nature of a CUP, it does go through a diligence process by the Building Department, I would hope that this is seen as a reasonable request.

Sincerely,
Cindy levers, resident, 50 Hartford Avenue, San Carlos
Attachment 6. Correspondence from Stakeholders to City Staff

9.b.6
Packet Pg. 1981 Attachment: Correspondence from Stakeholders (Moratorium HIA Extension)

9.b.6
Packet Pg. 1982 Attachment: Correspondence from Stakeholders (Moratorium HIA Extension)

9.b.6
Packet Pg. 1983 Attachment: Correspondence from Stakeholders (Moratorium HIA Extension)

9.b.6
Packet Pg. 1984 Attachment: Correspondence from Stakeholders (Moratorium HIA Extension) From: Kevin Coakley <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, May 9, 2022 3:55 PM
To: Al Savay; Megan Wooley-Ousdahl
Cc: Jason Corneille; Michael Hollis
Subject: Northeast area development moratorium - 610 Quarry Rd / CelLink Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Completed
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of San Carlos -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Al, Megan,
It was very nice to meet you today. Thank you for taking the time to learn about CelLink! We appreciate the insights you shared about the northeast area development moratorium. If it turns out that we will be able to continue to upgrade the interior and exterior of our facility during the moratorium, without expanding the building footprint, it will be easy for us to make the case that we should continue to keep our business in San Carlos.

Here are some photos showing what the exterior of our building at 610 Quarry Rd. looks like today. The building is owned by the Matagrano family and has not meaningfully changed in appearance in over 50 years to our knowledge. If possible, we would like to construct a front facade and remove the front gate and fencing (not shown in the photos below), the intent of which would be to improve the curb appeal of the building significantly. In the interior of the building, we are mainly hoping to refurbish the two-story front office area, which is also very antiquated.

9.b.6
Packet Pg. 1985 Attachment: Correspondence from Stakeholders (Moratorium HIA Extension)

If given a green light from the city, we are ready to invest several million dollars to upgrade 610 Quarry Rd into a "proper" headquarters, while not expanding the building footprint. Our lease runs through 2031 including a 5 year option beginning in 2026.

In case it's helpful to learn more about CelLink, here's a recent article about our business and product. In addition to making a product that is geared towards electrification and a cleaner planet, we currently employ 140 people, 60 of whom are operators with little formal education. We are proud that we are able to offer these employees a path towards better jobs and a better living than many other employers in the bay area can. We operate our business on multiple shifts, and consequently we don't generate a lot of traffic or take up a lot of street parking at any given time. We are excited to call San Carlos home! Please let us know if you would like us to attend the city counsel meeting about this. We would be happy to be a part of the planning process.

Thanks again,

9.b.6
Packet Pg. 1986 Attachment: Correspondence from Stakeholders (Moratorium HIA Extension) Kevin
PS Please feel free to share this with the other Planning Department team members we met today or with the city council directly.

Kevin Coakley
CEO, CelLink Corporation
650.799.3018
www.cellinktechnologies.com

9.b.6
Packet Pg. 1987 Attachment: Correspondence from Stakeholders (Moratorium HIA Extension) Attachment 7. List of Permitted Uses in Zoning Districts in the Northeast Area The Northeast Area encompasses three zoning districts:
 Light Industrial (IL)
 Industrial Professional (IP)
 Planned Development 18 (PD-18)
Below is a list of the uses which are permitted by right in each of the zoning districts. For additional information about what uses and activities are categorized under each classification, visit the San Carlos Municipal Code: Section 18.40 - Use Classifications. 1 Light Industrial (IL) Zoning District: Permitted Uses  Automobile/Vehicle Repair, Major
 Automobile/Vehicle Service and Repair, Minor
 Automobile/Vehicle Washing
 Large Vehicle and Equipment Sales, Service and Rental  Service Station - Specific Limitation: Limited to alternative fueling stations such as for electric or hybrid vehicles, hydrogen-powered vehicles, and similar vehicles using alternative fuels.
 Business Services
 Food Preparation
 Maintenance and Repair Services
 Parking, Public or Private
 Construction and Material Yards
 Custom Manufacturing
 Industry, General
 Industry, Limited
 Reverse Vending Machine
 Research and Development
 Indoor Warehousing and Storage
 Outdoor Storage
 Wholesaling and Distribution
 Cannabis Microbusiness
 Light Fleet-Based Services
 Utilities, Minor
 Waste Transfer Facility

1 https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SanCarlos/#!/SanCarlos18/SanCarlos1840.html

9.b.7
Packet Pg. 1988 Attachment: List of Permitted Uses in the Northeast Area (Moratorium HIA Extension) Industrial Professional (IP) Zoning District: Permitted Uses  Business Services
 Industry, Limited
 Research and Development
 Utilities, Minor
Planned Development 18 (PD-18) Zoning District: Permitted Uses PD-18 refers to Ordinance No. 1312. The permitted uses in PD-18 are in accordance with the M-1 Light Industrial District2 and include:
 Assembly
 Chemical Storage (not constituting a hazardous use as determined by South County Fire Authority)
 Computer Hardware or Component Assembly (not using hazardous materials)  Computer Software Development (incidental)
 Computer Software Manufacturing
 Contract Service
 Equipment or Machinery Storage (operable, indoor)
 Food Processing or Packaging
 Food Repackaging or Warehousing
 Manufacturing (general, not using significant use of hazardous materials as determined by South County Fire Authority)
 Metal or Material - welding
 Offices - incidental to another use
 Parking Lot - Incidental
 Parking Lot - Primary
 Packaging
 Printing, Lithography, Engraving
 Research and Development (including incidental manufacturing of products or provision of services)
 Retail sales (indoor, incidental)
 Restaurants (incidental)
 Storage and warehouse (indoor, primary)
 Storage and warehouse (indoor, incidental)
 Wholesale sales (indoor, primary)
 Wholesale sales (indoor, incidental)
 Other uses which, in the opinion of the Zoning Administrator, are similar to these listed “permitted uses”

2 https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SanCarlos/#!/html0111/SanCarlos18/SanCarlos1866.html

9.b.7
Packet Pg. 1989 Attachment: List of Permitted Uses in the Northeast Area (Moratorium HIA Extension) This space for filing stamp only
OR#:

O R A N G E C O U N T Y R E P O R T E R
~ SINCE 1921 ~
600 W. Santa Ana Blvd., Suite 205, Santa Ana, California 92701-4542 Telephone (714) 543-2027 / Fax (714) 542-6841

PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2015.5 C.C.P.)
State of California )
County of Orange ) ss
Notice Type:

Ad Description:

I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of California; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer and publisher of the ORANGE COUNTY REPORTER, a newspaper published in the English language in the City of Santa Ana, and adjudged a newspaper of general circulation as defined by the laws of the State of California by the Superior Court of the County of Orange, State of California, under date of June 2, 1922, Case No. 13,421. That the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit:

Executed on: 10/10/2004
At Los Angeles, California
I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.

Signature

EXAMINER - ENQUIRER-BULLETIN
303 TWIN DOLPHIN DR #600, REDWOOD CITY, CA 94065
(650) 556-1556
SPEN 3585484

CRYSTAL MUI

CITY OF SAN CARLOS/CITY CLERK
600 ELM ST
SAN CARLOS, CA - 94070

HRG - NOTICE OF HEARING
Northeast Area Moratorium Extension 5.23.22
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of California; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer and publisher of the EXAMINER - ENQUIRER-BULLETIN, a newspaper published in the English language in the city of SAN CARLOS, county of SAN MATEO, and adjudged a newspaper of general circulation as defined by the laws of the State of California by the Superior Court of the County of SAN MATEO, State of California, under date 02/25/1946, Case No. 38966. That the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit:
05/13/2022
05/13/2022

SAN MATEO
!A000006021135!
Email

9.b.8
Packet Pg. 1990 Attachment: Proof of Publication for PH Notice (Moratorium HIA Extension)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the San Carlos City Council will hold a Public Hearing in the Council Chambers, City Hall – 600 Elm Street, San Carlos, on Monday, May 23, 2022 at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter can be heard, pursuant to authority set forth in California Government Code section 65858 (b) and noticed in accordance with California Government Code section 65090, to consider the extension and possible modification to the scope of an interim ordinance which established a moratorium on the submission, consideration, or approval of applications for (i) lot line adjustments or the subdivision of land within the Northeast Area in accordance with the City of San Carlos Subdivision Regulations and the Subdivision Map Act, (ii) design review, use permit, temporary use permit, planned development, zoning amendment, waiver, variance, general plan amendment, development agreement, or any other discretionary approval from the City of San Carlos necessary for the development of a site within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, or (iii) a building permit required for construction and/or alterations on property within the Northeast Area in accordance with the San Carlos Municipal Code.

Current exceptions to the moratorium include (i) development applications that have been approved or deemed complete prior to the adoption of the Interim Ordinance, (ii) building permits for the construction of tenant improvements to space within an existing building occupied by uses permitted within the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, and (iii) a change of use within space of an existing building and any associated tenant improvements, provided the new use is permitted as of right pursuant to the applicable zoning district under the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

For purposes of the interim ordinance, the Northeast Area that is the subject of this public hearing is all land or sites within the area depicted in the map set forth below.

On April 25, 2022, the City Council adopted an Interim Ordinance to establish a development moratorium for the Northeast Area. During the City Council meeting on May 23, 2022, the City Council will consider extending the development moratorium for an additional 22 months and 15 days (for a total of two years), as well as possible modifications to the scope of the Interim Ordinance. For additional information, visit www.cityofsancarlos.org/northeast The extension of this interim ordinance is not a project subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) because the interim ordinance will not result in a direct physical change in the environment nor a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Further, even assuming the interim ordinance is a project as defined in CEQA, the interim ordinance is exempt from environmental review pursuant to section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines because it is covered by the common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and where, as in the case of the interim ordinance, it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption of the interim ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment, the adoption of the interim ordinance is not subject to CEQA.

The agenda and relevant materials for this item will be available for viewing online- www.cityofsancarlos.org/agenda; at the City Clerk’s Department in City Hall – 600 Elm Street; and at the San Carlos Library – 610 Elm Street, beginning May 19, 2022.

The public will have the options to observe the meeting and address the Council in–person in City Hall’s Council Chambers or remotely via Zoom. Details and instructions will be available on the agenda.

Questions regarding the interim ordinance may be directed to Megan Wooley-Ousdahl, Senior Planner, at mwooleyousdahl@ cityofsancarlos.org. Comments may be sent via email to the City Clerk– [email protected] and the City Council– [email protected]; or mailed to the City Clerk at 600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070.

All persons interested in the above matter are hereby invited to participate in this public hearing and be heard. If you challenge this proposal in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk prior to the public hearing.

Crystal Mui,
City Clerk
Publication Date: May 13, 2022
If you require translation for this notice, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 650-802-4222.

CNSB #3585484

9.b.8
Packet Pg. 1991 Attachment: Proof of Publication for PH Notice (Moratorium HIA Extension)

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: May 23, 2022
ITEM TITLE: Discuss and Provide Direction on Updates to the User Fee Schedule.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council discuss and provide direction on proposed amendments to the Cost of Services Schedule (User Fees) for Fiscal Year 2022-23.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The recommended Master Fee Schedule (Attachment 3), if adopted, would result in a net increase to the General Fund of approximately $2.6 million based on current activity levels.

Department/Division
Estimated
Annual
Current Fee
Revenue
Estimated
Total Cost of
Providing
Services
Current
Cost
Recovery
%
Estimated
Annual
Revenue
Recommended
Fees
Recommended
Cost Recovery
%
Administrative Fees $ 325 $ 497 65% $ 325 65%
Planning 695,121 1,479,859 47% 1,369,429 93%
Public Works/Engineering 817,352 863,928 95% 806,678 93% Building 5,344,680 6,899,937 77% 6,764,819 98%
Police 127,545 365,273 35% 127,545 35%
Parks and Recreation * 108,604 161,481 67% 117,892 73%
General Plan Surcharge 86,760 1,317,813 7% 658,906 50%
Technology Surcharge 121,870 35,855 340% 35,855 100%
TOTAL $7,302,257 $11,124,643 66% $9,881,449 89%
*Recreation outcomes reflect permitted activities and processing fees only. Programs and facility rentals are excluded from this table.

The City is currently recovering approximately 66% of costs associated with providing user and regulatory fee related services. At the recommended level, the City will recover approximately 89% of the costs. For those fees that are not set at 100% cost recovery, the General Fund subsidizes the costs. The additional revenue collected through the increase in cost recovery will help offset some of the subsidy from the General Fund.

Once adopted, a minimum 60-day notice is required for implementation of the new fees in accordance with California Government Code Section 66017.

10.a
Packet Pg. 1992
2 BACKGROUND:

On October 13, 2021, an agreement was executed with NBS to provide an overhead cost allocation review and comprehensive fee and rate study (‘Fee Study”). The purpose of the study is to ensure that the City is utilizing comprehensive overhead rates and accurately accounting for the true cost of providing various programs and services within City operations. It is the City’s goal to have a well-documented and defensible cost allocation plan that will incorporate general and administrative cost allocations into the budget, identify overhead rates that can be used in the calculation of billable hourly rates for grants, fees, federal reimbursements, and other billings, and develop charges for user fees that comply with Proposition 218.

Conducting a comprehensive user fee study is not an annual requirement and only becomes valuable during significant shifts in the organization, local practices, legislative values, or when there are changes in legal requirements. The last time a full fee study was completed for the City was in May 2017. Given the significant program enhancements and staffing changes in the Fiscal Year 2022-23 Budget, staff felt that this would be a good time to incorporate these changes into a comprehensive fee study.

The Fee Study was used to provide staff with a baseline for recommended revisions and changes to the current fee schedule. In addition, a comparison of the City’s fees to other agencies was also conducted to gauge the market consistency of the City’s service charges.

ANALYSIS:

There are a number of exceptions to the Fee Schedule that do not lend themselves to strict analysis of cost recovery. These exceptions are fees that are limited or set by statue, fines, and penalties. An example of a fee with a legal limit is the service charge for checks returned for non-sufficient funds. A summary description of each department’s recommended user fees are noted below and in more detail in Appendix A in Attachment 2. A comparison of current fees, recommended fees, and other agencies can be found in Attachment 1.

Recommendations by department follow:

Administrative Fees. Administrative fees include processing fees such as returned checks, copy charges, document certification, and research requests. As technology has evolved, many of the items for which the City previously charged fees are now available for free via the City’s website.

Recommendations include the following:
 No change to returned check fees, which are regulated  Continue to waive fees for document certification
Community Development - Planning Fees. Planning Division services are provided to the general public through administration and update of plans and codes, service at the counter and on the phone, and through the general dissemination of information. The Planning Division is responsible for three key functions: advance planning, current planning, and land use regulations.

The Planning Division currently charges for application processing and entitlement review services via a mixture of “flat” fees and “deposit based” fees. Flat fees charge one finite amount per project. Deposit based fees require an initial deposit of funds to begin processing an

10.a
Packet Pg. 1993
3 application. Time is then tracked and billed to the project by City staff against the deposit amount, and additional funds are either requested from the applicant as needed, or refunds are provided to the applicant upon completion of the project.

The City reviewed each fee item on the Planning Division’s current list of fees to determine whether it should be charged as a flat fee or a deposit based fee. The City also updated naming conventions and reordered a few fees for better display of information, and/or to reflect changes in processes. Fee items removed include the separate design review fee for accessory dwelling units. New fee items added include:
 Cell tower application
 SB-9 application review
 Design review for minor alterations
 Excessive noise compliance permit
 Plan check for building permits pertaining to accessory dwelling units that are not part of a previous Planning approval
 Pre-application development review for general/initial questions  Protected tree notice
 Tree replanting fee for the City’s time and expense to plant a tree on behalf of a development when there is no possibility to plant on site given the project particulars.

Though the City’s arborist is responsible for administering the requirements of the City’s Tree Ordinance, the costs of tree acquisition and planting are evaluated in the Public Works section of the Fee Study.

Staff generally recommends that most fees recover 100% of the costs of providing services, which is consistent with prior fee studies performed by the City and policies set by the City Council. Recommendations for less than full cost recovery fee amounts include the following fee items:
 Appeals to the Planning Commission or the City Council  Protected tree removal permit/pruning permit
 Protected tree notice
 Waivers
 Business registration and home occupation permits
 Minor staff review fees for business registration and home occupations Recommended fee amounts recover approximately 93% of the total costs of providing fee related services.

Public Works/Engineering Fees: Public Works services include activities primarily related to the operation, maintenance, and protection of the City’s infrastructure when impacted by individual uses, such as private development. The Engineering Division charges fees for services such as review of final maps, encroachment permits, civil plan review, and review and implementation of fees for service activities in the City’s Planning Division.

The Engineering Division made few changes to their existing fee schedule with respect to the number of fee names and categories. Two fees were added to its fee schedule:
 Parklet Program fees for permitting, monitoring, and cleaning

10.a
Packet Pg. 1994
4  Tree In-Lieu fee for the City’s time and expense to plant a tree on behalf of a development when there is no possibility to plant on site given the project particulars.

Though the City’s arborist is responsible for administering the requirements of the City’s Tree Ordinance, the costs of tree acquisition and planting are evaluated in the Public Works section of the Fee Study
Recommendations for less than a full cost recovery fee include the following fee items:
 Debris box and storage container permits for durations of up to two weeks  Wide-load processing fees, which are regulated (capped) by the State and currently set at the maximum allowable fee amount
 Semi-annual permit parking in City lots for residents and businesses within the East San Carlos Parking Permit Program
Fees at the recommended amounts would recover approximately 93% of the total costs of providing fee related services.

Community Development - Building Fees: The Building Division promotes and ensures all new development in San Carlos is constructed in accordance with the highest standards of safety, and all existing structures are maintained in a safe manner. The Building Division is also responsible for education, citywide code enforcement, floodplain management, and the Apartment Inspection Program. Building Division services are provided to the general public through permits, plan review, and inspections. All work that requires a building permit, plan review, or inspection is covered under the California Building Code (“CBC”).

Most of San Carlos’ fees for building plan review and inspection services are based on what is known in the industry as a “valuation-based” fee setting approach. For all new construction, tenant improvements, additions, and remodel projects, a project valuation multiplier establishes a construction value estimate for a given building project. The established construction value is assessed a fee amount based on a sliding scale fee table, first established by the Uniform Building Code almost 100 years ago. Mechanical, plumbing and electrical permits are assessed a fee amount based on a given project’s square footage, and/or an itemized list of permits required, such as for a water heater, gas line, or electrical service upgrade.

The Building Division’s fees are charged as one-time flat fee amounts on a per project basis.

The annual cost recovery amount eligible for recovery from fees for service is approximately $4.9 million. However, for large scale development projects, the construction timeline for the project and regulatory effort required of City staff typically spans multiple years. This means that, for large projects, fee revenue collected in one year will typically not be “expended” within a one year timeframe from when the fee is collected. To account for this, the cost of service analysis compares the approximate actual fee revenue collected in one year, to the cost of service required to regulate and approve those projects, estimated to span between one and five years, depending on the size of the project.

Staff generally recommends that most fees recover 100% of the costs of providing services.

Recommendations for less than full cost recovery fee amounts include the following fee items:
 Single trade electrical permits for swimming pools, spas, hot tubs, temporary power poles, electrical main services, and installing or replacing sub-panels and PV solar systems.

10.a
Packet Pg. 1995
5  Single trade plumbing permits for water heater replacements  Single trade mechanical permits for new or replacement FAU or HVAC installations  Annual residential apartment inspections
Fees at recommended amounts would recover approximately 98% of the total costs of providing fee related services.

Police Fees: The majority of services provided by the Sheriff’s Office are not recoverable in user/regulatory fees.

The recommended police fees do not include many significant changes, deletions, or additions from the City’s existing fee schedule. Fees suggested for elimination include Processing First Chance (Starvista) and Good Conduct Letter as we have not been processing invoices for these services.

Fees would continue to recover approximately 35% of the total costs of providing fee related services.

Parks and Recreation Fees: The expenses of administering, operating, and maintaining the City’s parks and recreation facilities are primarily funded by resources from the General Fund.

However, fees collected from various Recreation programs, including classes, contracts, and specific uses of public spaces, can represent a significant source of funding to help cover costs and sustain – if not improve – the level of service provided by the City.

Per Article XIIIC, Section 1 of the California Constitution, recreation fees typically fall under one of the two exceptions:

1. Exception No. 2: Section 1 (e)(2) exception for fees for services and products provided.

This category includes fees imposed for a service, like lessons, transportation, child care, etc. The fee for services exception requires that such fees be limited to “the estimated costs to the local government of providing the service.”

2. Exception No. 4: Section 1 (e)(4) exception for fees for use of government property. This category includes fees imposed for services such as admission to parks, rental of government property (recreational equipment), and for rental/use of fields and meeting rooms.

Unlike other areas of the Fee Study, this Department’s cost of service analysis and cost recovery evaluation for most classes, programs, and recreational services is conducted at the program level (as opposed to the individual fee level) and includes an annual estimated cost recovery evaluation of each recreational program area managed by the Department. This level of analysis assists the City in understanding cost recovery performance and with developing a cost recovery policy, rather than an analysis at the individual fee level. This is appropriate given the requirements of Article XIIIC as pertains to recreation fees and facility rentals, as well as for the seasonal nature of many of the program offerings which change on a regular basis.

Due to the unique nature of this Department’s services, the study performed by NBS segregated fees into three main categories: recreation classes and programs, facility rentals, and miscellaneous service fees.

10.a
Packet Pg. 1996
6 For recreation classes, a provision in the City’s Master Fee Schedule continues to allow the Department to set fees for seasonal programs based on the cost of the individual program, never to exceed the full cost of the program. Recreation fees are typically displayed in a seasonal brochure or catalog of classes and programs. In most municipalities, those fees are not contained in a master fee schedule; however, adopting language referencing them – such as the text proposed here – provides a measure of Council oversight and grants specific authority to the Department to manage the fees for these programs based on changing conditions (e.g., costs, demand, etc.).

For facility rentals and miscellaneous fees, the Fee Study includes a basic survey of comparable jurisdictions for facility rentals and permitting services (Appendix B.6), which may assist in establishing proof of meaningful public market options and pricing for similar services.

A new fee being proposed is a seasonal and one-time snack shack permit fee for vendors to provide and sell snacks and beverages during youth sports seasons and tournaments.

For sports field use fees, NBS assisted the City with a peer review of updated cost of service calculations. The per player field use fee was established in 2010 when the synthetic field project was approved for Highlands Park. The fee was proposed to recover the cost of the synthetic turf replacement approximately 8 to 10 years following installation. The annual fee was determined by the estimated cost of replacement and annual field maintenance of all City fields, spanning 8 years. The annual estimated cost was divided by the estimated annual number of organized play participants. The Fee Study estimates 6,000 organized play participants for FY 2022-23 from youth sports leagues, adult sport teams, contract classes, sports camps, and private field rentals
For FY 2022-23, staff estimated the total replacement and maintenance cost for all City fields is $3,885,178. Broken down annually, this cost is $515,394. As a result, the total per player field use fee is $86. This is an increase of $34 per player for soccer and an increase of $48 per player for baseball and softball from the current fiscal year fee. Therefore, staff recommends tiering the increase over the span of two years and charging one amount for all field users. As such, the per player field use fee would be $66 for FY 2022-23 and $86 for FY 2023-24.

Other recommendations include small increases for most fees, a decrease for the refund processing fee, and continued waiver of fees for block party permits.

Fees would adjust to recover approximately 73% of the total costs of providing fee related services
Fire Department Fees: Fire prevention fees are separate from the Fee Study’s scope of review, since these services are contracted from the City of Redwood City. As done in prior years, staff recommends adopting the user fees based on the Redwood City User Fee Schedule.

General Plan Surcharge. Included in the proposed fee schedule is the continuation of the General Plan surcharge fee. As part of the Fee Study, the assumption and fee structure related to the General Plan surcharge were reviewed. The review shows that the surcharge should be applied to new construction and additions to existing square footage, because these projects have the largest relative impact on the maintenance, update, and use of the City’s General Plan.

The City had some implementation issues with this fee over the past several years, and as a result, collected approximately 7% of the annual costs for providing services. Upon reviewing this information and options for revising the surcharge, City staff recommends a 50% annual cost recovery target for the City Council’s consideration, which is consistent with direction from

10.a
Packet Pg. 1997
7 prior fee studies. The surcharge amount that corresponds to a 50% cost recovery target is a total surcharge of 1.15% applicable to new construction and addition-related building permit projects. 1.0% of the fee is allocated for staff support and 0.15% of the fee is allocated for contract services support.

Technology Surcharge: This fee is intended to recover the costs of implementation and future upgrades of the City’s permitting and cashiering software applications. Routine maintenance and investment in the City’s permitting software and systems are critical for efficient development approval and processing services. The primary users of the permitting system include the Planning and Building Divisions of the Community Development Department, and the Public Works Department. Since technology has advanced, the replacement costs have decreased. Therefore, even though staff recommends 100% cost recovery, the total recovery costs have decreased and the fee has decreased. It is recommended that the fee be reduced from 1.8% to 0.4% which will be applied to each planning, building, and engineering fee.

Future Fee Increases: As done in prior years, staff recommends that the Council adopt guidelines to adjust most fees annually based on the San Francisco-Oakland-San Jose (Bay Area) Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers Consumer Price Index (CPI-W). As noted previously, conducting a comprehensive user fee study is not an annual requirement and only becomes valuable over time, following significant shifts in the organization, local practices, legislative values, or legal requirements. Even if the City chooses to adjust fees automatically on an annual basis, certain fees can still be adjusted above or below the average rate at the City’s discretion. The full cost of service increased by CPI would be the City’s only limit in setting its fees.

Impact Fees: Development impact fees such as park facility development fee, sewer capacity charge, and traffic impact fee were not included in this study. Such adjustments and/or increases are governed by the Municipal Code and will be brought forward separately.

Next Steps
If the Council’s comments and feedback are minor, this item will return to the Council on June 27, 2022 for adoption, with an effective date of August 29, 2022 (60 day notice required). If there are substantial changes, or additional research and time are needed, the proposed fee schedule will return to the City Council for adoption in August, with an effective date in October.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Provide feedback on the proposed Cost of Services Schedule (User Fees); or

2. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Rebecca Mendenhall,
Administrative Services Director

10.a
Packet Pg. 1998
8 Approved for submission by:
_________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS

2. NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report

3. Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023

10.a
Packet Pg. 1999
City of San Carlos
Finance Division ‐ User Fee Study FY 2022‐2023
1 Returned Check [1]
First Item per first check Fees set by statute $ 25 $ 25 % 27 $ $ 30 $ 25Each Additional Item per
subsequent
check
Fees set by
statute $ 35 $ 35 % 31 $ $ 35 $ 25
2 For services requested of City Staff for which no fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the Department
Director shall determine the appropriate fee based on
the following hourly rates for staff time:

Finance Division Staff (Per Hour) Per Hour $ 193 $ 186 $ 193 100% 205 $ $ 205 $ 205 [Notes]
[1]
Fee set by California Civil Code Ch. 522 Section 1719. Additional charges may apply if not paid within 30 days of receipt of written demand for payment letter
Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity High Low
Comparison to Other Agencies
Current Fee /
Deposit
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery % Average
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Finance COS, Page 1 of 1

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2000
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
City Clerk ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023
1 Copy Charges:

Fees set by
statute / Actual
Cost
$0.10/page $.10/page % 0.18 $ $ 0.30 $ 0.10
2 Copy Charges ‐ CD
Fees set by
statute / Actual
Cost
$0.50/CD $0.50/CD % N/A N/A N/A
3 Copies of City Subdivision Ordinances, Zoning Ordinances, CAFR, Municipal Code Book, Standard Bid Specifications, Standard Detail, Work Program
n/a Free/website,
or Copy Charge
Free/website,
or Copy Charge
Free/website,
or Copy Charge % N/A N/A N/A
4 Document Certification base fee $ 10 Fee Waived Fee Waived % 12 $ $ 17 $ 25 Agenda or Minutes Subscription n/a $ ‐ Free/website, or Copy Charge
Free/website,
or Copy Charge % 69 $ $ 142 $ 6
6 Research per hour $ 193 $ 186 $ 193 100% 98 $ $ 98 $ 98 7 For services requested of City Staff for which no fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the Department Director shall determine the appropriate fee based on the following hourly rates for staff time:

City Clerk Department Staff (Per Hour) per hour $ 193 $ 186 $ 193 100% 205 $ $ 205 $ 205 Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity High Low
Comparison to Other Agencies
Current Fee /
Deposit
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery % Average
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Clerk COS, Page 1 of 1

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2001
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Planning Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 1 Appeal, Planning Commission
a Fee Each $ 5,991 $1,808 $ 2,000 33% 663 $ $ 3,151 $ 110 2 Appeal, City Council
a Fee Each $ 5,991 $1,608 $ 2,000 33% 680 $ $ 1,069 $ 500 3 Attorney's Fees
Support to Planning projects that require
Deposit
Actual Cost $412/hr
Actual cost / +
$2,500 minimum
deposit.

N/A N/A N/A
Support to projects on a "fixed"/"flat" fee basis Actual Cost $286/hr Actual Cost ‐ 2 Hr. Minimum N/A N/A N/A 4 Below Market Rate (BMR), Housing Plan Each $ 2,097 $1,475 $ 2,097 100% N/A N/A N/A 5 Below Market Rate (BMR), Builder Alternative Each $ 2,097 $500 Initial Deposit $ 2,097 100% N/A N/A N/A6 Below Market Rate (BMR), Housing Agreement Each $ 2,696 $500 Initial Deposit $ 2,696 100% N/A N/A N/A7 CEQA a Document Filing
Fee Each $ 300 $210 $ 300 100% N/A N/A N/A
b Categorical Exemption
Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommende d Cost Recovery % Average NBS ‐ Local Government SolutionsWeb: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Planning COS, Page 1 of 12

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2002
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Planning Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommende d Cost Recovery % Average City Processing Fee Each $ 599 $422 $ 599 100% 311 $ $ 500 $ 134 Department of Fish and Game / County
Recording Fees
Deposit /
Actual Cost $ ‐
Actual Cost of
DFG / County
Fees
Actual Cost of DFG
/ County Fees % N/A N/A N/A
c
Initial Study/Negative Declaration/Mitigated
Negative/EIR
City Processing Fee Deposit / Actual Cost $ ‐ Actual Cost with $3,000 deposit Actual Cost with $3,000 deposit % N/A N/A N/A Consultant Review Deposit $ ‐ Actual Cost with $5,000 deposit Actual Cost with $5,000 deposit % 7,721 $ $ 16,916 $ 5,000 d Mitigation Monitoring Deposit / Actual Cost $ ‐ Actual Cost with $1,000 deposit Actual Cost with $1,000 deposit % 515 $ $ 515 $ 515 new Cell Tower Application [3]
6409 Application Each $ 1,198 new 1,198 $ 100% N/A N/A N/A Other Applications Actual Actual Cost / T&M Actual Cost / T&M 8 Creek Exception
City Processing Fee Each $ 4,493 $2,529 $ 4,493 100% N/A N/A N/A Consultant Review Actual
Actual Cost of
Consultant
Study
Actual Cost of
Consultant Study
9 Design Review ‐ Single Family
NBS ‐ Local Government SolutionsWeb: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Planning COS, Page 2 of 12

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2003
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Planning Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommende d Cost Recovery % Average a Single Family, New Home (RDRC)
Fee Each $ 10,485 $6,320 $ 10,485 100% N/A N/A N/A
b Single Family, First Floor Addition (RDRC)
Fee Each $ 7,489 $4,214 $ 7,489 100% N/A N/A N/A
c Single Family, Second Floor Addition (RDRC)
Fee Each $ 10,485 $6,320 $ 10,485 100% N/A N/A N/A
d Single Family, First Floor Addition (Staff)
Fee Each $ 2,996 $1,264 $ 2,996 100% N/A N/A N/A
e Single Family, Second Floor Addition (Staff)
Fee Each $ 4,493 $2,107 $ 4,493 100% N/A N/A N/A

10.1 Design Review (MR, M/U, Comm, ND) ‐ Staff Review/Approval a New Building
Fee Each $ 17,974 $8,427 $ 17,974 100% N/A N/A N/A
b Major Alteration
Fee Each $ 12,582 $5,056 $ 12,582 100% N/A N/A N/A
c Minor Alteration
Fee Each $ 9,586 $3,371 $ 9,586 100% N/A N/A N/A

10.2 Design Review (MR, M/U, Comm, ND) ‐ Planning Commission Review/Approval a New Building (Planning Commission)
Fee Each $ 21,269 $8,427 $ 21,269 100% N/A N/A N/A
b Major Alteration (Planning Commission)
Fee Each $ 15,877 $5,056 $ 15,877 100% N/A N/A N/A
c Minor Alteration (Planning Commission)
NBS ‐ Local Government SolutionsWeb: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Planning COS, Page 3 of 12

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2004
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Planning Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommende d Cost Recovery % Average Fee Each $ 12,881 $3,371 $ 12,881 100% N/A N/A N/A
11 Design Review (Other)
a A ‐ Frames
Fee Each $ 150 $105 $ 150 100% 1,064 $ $ 1,127 $ 1,000
b Accessory Structures (Includes large decks)
Fee Each $ 1,797 $1,264 $ 1,797 100% 1,064 $ $ 1,127 $ 1,000 c Architectural Peer Review
Fee Deposit / Actual Cost $ ‐ $3,000 Initial Deposit $3,000 Initial Deposit % N/A N/A N/A d Mills Acts Designated Projects
City Processing Fee Each $ 1,797 $603 $ 1,797 100% N/A N/A N/A Historic Consultant Review Deposit / Actual Cost [4] $5,000 Initial Deposit $5,000 Initial Deposit e
Miscellaneous (awnings, trash, replacement
materials, site plan review, landscape, facade)
Fee Each $ 599 $422 $ 599 100% 1,050 $ $ 1,797 $ 302
f Outdoor Uses Dining & Retail Sales
Fee Each $ 1,797 $948 $ 1,797 100% N/A N/A N/A
g Sign Program
Fee Each $ 5,991 $2,107 $ 5,991 100% 771 $ $ 2,039 $ 40 h Signs ‐ (Planning Commission)
Fee Each $ 4,493 $2,107 $ 4,493 100% 848 $ $ 1,500 $ 40 NBS ‐ Local Government SolutionsWeb: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Planning COS, Page 4 of 12

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2005
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Planning Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommende d Cost Recovery % Average i Signs (Staff)
Fee Each $ 1,198 $422 $ 1,198 100% 538 $ $ 1,546 $ 40
j Temporary Banner
Fee Each $ 300 $210 $ 300 100% 46 $ $ 46 $ 46
new Minor Alterations
Fee Each $ 1,198 new 1,198 $ 100% N/A N/A N/A
12 Document Imaging
Per 1/2
Hour ‐ 1/2
Hour
Minimum
$ 150 $105 $ 150 100% N/A N/A N/A
13 Domestic Fowl and Non‐Household Pets
a Fee Each $ 1,797 $301 $ 1,797 100% 206 $ $ 206 $ 206
new Excessive Noise Compliance Permit $ 599 new 599 $ 100% N/A N/A N/A 15 Final Inspection, Single‐Family
a Fee Each $ 599 $422 $ 599 100% N/A N/A N/A
16 Final Inspection, Other
Fee Each $ 1,198 $842 $ 1,198 100% N/A N/A N/A
17 General Plan Amendment
Fee Each $ 11,983 $8,427 $ 11,983 100% 10,067 $ $ 15,501 $ 1,515 NBS ‐ Local Government SolutionsWeb: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Planning COS, Page 5 of 12

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2006
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Planning Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommende d Cost Recovery % Average 18 Grading and Dirt Haul Certificate
Fee Each $ 2,996 $2,107 $ 2,996 100% N/A N/A N/A
19 Historic Preservation
a City Processing Fee Each $ 599 $210 $ 599 100% N/A N/A N/A b Historic Assessment ‐ Consultant Review Actual Actual Cost with $2,000 deposit Actual Cost with $2,000 deposit N/A N/A N/A c Mills Act Contract
Fee Each $ 4,493 $1,005 $ 4,493 100% 628 $ $ 628 $ 628
20 Interdepartmental Plan Review
a Building
See Building Fee
Schedule for Per
Review Charge
See Building Fee
Schedule for Per
Review Charge

N/A N/A N/A
b Engineering
See Engineering
Fee Schedule
and / or Hourly
Rates Apply
See Engineering
Fee Schedule and /
or Hourly Rates
Apply

N/A N/A N/A
c Fire See Fire Fee Schedule See Fire Fee Schedule N/A N/A N/A NBS ‐ Local Government SolutionsWeb: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Planning COS, Page 6 of 12

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2007
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Planning Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommende d Cost Recovery % Average d Police
See Police Fee
Schedule and/or
Hourly Rates
Apply
See Police Fee
Schedule and/or
Hourly Rates Apply

N/A N/A N/A
e Economic Development ‐ Housing Planning Hourly Rate Applies Planning Hourly Rate Applies N/A N/A N/A 21 Other City Commission Review
Fee Each $ 1,198 $842 $ 1,198 100% N/A N/A N/A
22 Plan Check for Building Permits
a Major (New Multi‐Family, Mixed‐Use, Commercial, Industrial) Each $ 3,595 $2,529 $ 3,595 100% N/A N/A N/A b Moderate (New Single‐Family, Commercial additions/alterations) Each $ 1,498 $1,054 $ 1,498 100% N/A N/A N/A c
Minor (Single‐Family Additions, Accessory
Dwelling Units) Each $ 899 $210 $ 899 100% N/A N/A N/A
new Accessory Dwelling Units (not a part of the
previous approval) $ 899 new 899 $ 100% N/A N/A N/A
23 Pre‐Application Development Review
new General/Initial Questions Per Project $ 599 new No Charge % a Major Per Project [2] $ 8,987 $4,741 $ 8,987 100%
b Minor Per Project [1] $ 5,991 $2,107 $ 5,991 100%
24 Protected Tree Removal Permit/Pruning Permit
a City Processing Fee
$ 5,039 $ 25,000 $ 400
NBS ‐ Local Government SolutionsWeb: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Planning COS, Page 7 of 12

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2008
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Planning Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommende d Cost Recovery % Average Fee Each $ 599 $210 $ 300 50% 94 $ $ 107 $ 81
b Arborist
Fee Actual $ ‐ $250 Initial Deposit $500 Initial Deposit % 270 $ $ 270 $ 270 c Investigative Report
Fee Each $ ‐ $500 Initial Deposit $500 Initial Deposit % N/A N/A N/A d Illegal Tree Removal (additional arborist report fees apply) Civil Penalty Penalty
Double the
Application Fee,
plus assessed
penalties per
Muni Code
Double the
Application Fee,
plus assessed
penalties per Muni
Code
$ 1,282 $ 1,282 $ 1,282
new Protected Tree Notice
Fee Each $ 300 new 150 $ 50% 181 $ $ 317 $ 107
new Tree Replanting Fee per tree new See Public Works fee schedule $ 337 $ 337 $ 337 25 Public Notice Fee
City Processing Fee Per Hearing $ 599 $422 $ 599 100% 398 $ $ 479 $ 317 26 Restrictive Covenants
Fee Each $ 599 $422 $ 599 100% N/A N/A N/A
27 San Mateo County Recording Fees
NBS ‐ Local Government SolutionsWeb: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Planning COS, Page 8 of 12

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2009
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Planning Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommende d Cost Recovery % Average City Processing Fee Each $ 599 $422 $ 599 100% N/A N/A N/A County Fee Each Per County fee schedule Per County fee schedule N/A N/A N/A 28 Subdivisions
a Subdivision, Major (5 or more lots)
Fee Each $ 23,965 $16,854 $ 23,965 100% 6,606 $ $ 15,250 $ 743 b Subdivision, Minor (up to 4 lots) or for Condominium Maps Fee Each $ 3,595 $2,529 $ 3,595 100% 7,524 $ $ 15,250 $ 743 c Lot Line Adjustment, Parcel Mergers
Fee Each $ 1,198 $842 $ 1,198 100% 2,707 $ $ 6,000 $ 743 d Conditional Exceptions
Fee Each $ 5,991 $4,214 $ 5,991 100% N/A N/A N/A
e Lot Verification
Fee Each [5] $ 599 $422 $ 599 100% N/A N/A N/A
f Map Extension
Fee Each $ 1,198 $842 $ 1,198 100% 743 $ $ 743 $ 743
29 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan
a City Staff Review Each $ 4,194 $2,949 $ 4,194 100% N/A N/A N/A b Consultant Review Actual $700 Initial Deposit $700 Initial Deposit N/A N/A N/A 30 Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Review
NBS ‐ Local Government SolutionsWeb: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Planning COS, Page 9 of 12

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2010
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Planning Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommende d Cost Recovery % Average a Annual Each $ 1,498 $500 Initial Deposit $500 Initial Deposit % N/A N/A N/A b 5‐Year Each $ 2,996 $500 Initial Deposit $500 Initial Deposit % N/A N/A N/A c Consultant Review Actual $700 Initial Deposit $700 Initial Deposit N/A N/A N/A 31 Use Permits
a Conditional Use Permit‐ Planning Commission
Fee Each $ 8,987 $5,268 $ 8,987 100% N/A N/A N/A
b Minor Use Permit ‐ Zoning Administrator
Fee Each $ 4,493 $2,529 $ 4,493 100% 6,000 $ $ 6,000 $ 6,000 c Use Permits (Development Standards)
Fee Each $ 3,595 $2,529 $ 3,595 100% 7,500 $ $ 7,500 $ 7,500 d Temporary
Fee Each $ 2,397 $842 $ 2,397 100% 821 $ $ 1,492 $ 150
e Amendment
Fee Each $ 3,595 $2,107 $ 3,595 100% 4,943 $ $ 10,000 $ 3,000 32 Variance
Fee Each $ 11,983 $8,427 $ 11,983 100% 2,795 $ $ 3,386 $ 2,000 33 Waivers
Fee Each $ 2,397 $842 $ 1,198 50% N/A N/A N/A
34 Zoning Administrator Determination
Fee Each $ 2,397 $1,685 $ 2,397 100% N/A N/A N/A
NBS ‐ Local Government SolutionsWeb: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Planning COS, Page 10 of 12

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2011
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Planning Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommende d Cost Recovery % Average 35 Zoning Ordinance Amendment
a Major Rezone/PD/Map and Text
Fee Each $ 23,965 $16,854 $ 23,965 100% 10,394 $ $ 15,501 $ 5,000 b Moderate Rezone/PD/Map and Text
Fee Each $ 11,983 $8,427 $ 11,983 100% 10,394 $ $ 15,501 $ 5,000 c Minor Rezone/PD/Map and Text
Fee Each $ 5,991 $4,214 $ 5,991 100% 10,394 $ $ 15,501 $ 5,000 36 Minor staff review
a ABC/DMV Zoning Affidavit Review
Fee Each $ 599 $210 $ 599 100% N/A N/A N/A
b Business Registration
Fee Each $ 300 $101 $ 101 34% N/A N/A N/A
c Home Occupations
Fee Each $ 300 $101 $ 101 34% 93 $ $ 93 $ 93
d Home Occupation Revocation Hearing
Fee Each $ 2,397 $1,685 $ 2,397 100% 93 $ $ 93 $ 93
e Massage
Fee Each $ 899 $632 $ 899 100% 467 $ $ 631 $ 88
f Other Zoning Affidavit Review
Fee Each $ 1,198 $842 $ 1,198 100% N/A N/A N/A
g Parking Calculation
Fee Each $ 899 $632 $ 899 100% N/A N/A N/A
h Search and Determination
Fee Each [6] $ 599 $422 $ 599 100% N/A N/A N/A
i Code Compliance
NBS ‐ Local Government SolutionsWeb: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Planning COS, Page 11 of 12

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2012
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Planning Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommende d Cost Recovery % Average Fee Each $ 1,198 $842 $ 1,198 100% N/A N/A N/A
37 Credit Card and eCheck Charges Each Transaction Actual Cost N/A N/A N/A new SB‐9 Application
No Lot Split $ 10,485 new $ 10,485 100% N/A N/A N/A
Lot Split $ 10,485 new $ 10,485 100% N/A N/A N/A
39 For services requested of City Staff for which no
fee/deposit is listed in this Master Fee Schedule,
the Department Director shall determine the
appropriate fee/deposit based on the following
hourly rates for staff time involved in the
service.

Planning Division Staff Per Hour $ 300 $210 $ 300 100% $243 $298 $156 [Notes]
[1][2] Other City department fees/deposits may apply.
[3][4][5][6][7]
Not charged for public records requests.

Per the City's Tree Ordinance, the arborist may request a fee in lieu of tree planting if there is no possibility to plant on site
Fees for historical consultants apply.

Public Works fees apply.

Includes up to 2, 1‐hour meetings with multiple departments.

Governed by FCC, section 6409.

NBS ‐ Local Government SolutionsWeb: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Planning COS, Page 12 of 12

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2013
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department ‐ User Fee Study Fiscal 2023
1 Final Map Review
(Includes up to 3 Reviews)
a. Parcel (4 lots or less)
City Processing Fee per project $ 2,387 $ 2,411 $ 2,387 100% 3,947 $ $ 9,425 $ 800 Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual Cost Deposit / Actual Cost b. Subdivision (5 or more lots)
City Processing Fee per project $ 2,769 $ 2,797 $ 2,769 100% 6,265 $ $ 14,726 $ 800 Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual Cost Deposit / Actual Cost c 4th and Subsequent Review
City Processing Fee per submittal $ 286 $ 289 $ 286 100% N/A N/A N/A Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual Cost Deposit / Actual Cost 2 Civil Plan Check [1]
(Includes up to 3 Reviews)
a. Minor Projects
City Processing Fee per project $ 1,910 $ 1,929 $ 1,910 100% N/A N/A N/A Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual Cost Deposit / Actual Cost b. Moderate Projects
City Processing Fee per project $ 3,724 $ 3,761 $ 3,724 100% N/A N/A N/A Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual Cost Deposit / Actual Cost c. Major Projects
City Processing Fee per project $ 5,443 $ 5,497 $ 5,443 100% N/A N/A N/A Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual Cost Deposit / Actual Cost d. 4th and Subsequent Review
City Processing Fee per submittal $ 477 $ 482 $ 477 100% N/A N/A N/A Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual Cost Deposit / Actual Cost Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommended Cost Recovery % Average NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Public Works COS, Page 1 of 6

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2014
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department ‐ User Fee Study Fiscal 2023
Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommended Cost Recovery % Average 3 Utility Companies Plan Check: [2]
a. Minor each $ 191 $ 193 $ 191 100% 545 $ $ 800 $ 165
b. Moderate each $ 382 $ 386 $ 382 100% 482 $ $ 800 $ 165 c. Major deposit $ 668 $ 675 $ 668 100% 592 $ $ 810 $ 165 4 Construction Inspection (Including Utilities) [3]
a. Minor Projects (1‐3 inspections) per project $ 430 $ 434 $ 430 100% N/A N/A N/A b. Moderate Projects (4‐5 inspections) per project $ 716 $ 723 $ 716 100% N/A N/A N/A c. Major Projects (6‐10 inspections) Deposit / Actual Cost Deposit / Actual Cost Deposit / Actual Cost d. Additional Inspection Each $ 143 $ 145 $ 143 100% N/A N/A N/A 5 Post Construction Stormwater Device Monitoring per device, every 5 years $ 382 $ 386 $ 382 100% 395 $ $ 395 $ 395
6 Dirt Hauling [4]
a. per CY per CY $ 2.35 $ 2.10
7 Planning & Building Dept. Plan Check:
a. Planning Referral each
City Processing Fee per project $ 955 $ 964 $ 955 100% N/A N/A N/A Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual Cost Deposit / Actual Cost b. Building Referral, Review of On‐site Civil each $ 382 $ 386 $ 382 100% N/A N/A N/A 8 Debris Box/Storage Container Permit per permit
a. Duration up to two weeks $ 286 $ 96 $ 96 34% 171 $ $ 500 $ 55 b. Monthly $ 286 $ 289 $ 286 100% N/A N/A N/A
9 Encroachment Permit Administrative Fee per permit $ 95 $ 96 $ 95 100% 474 $ $ 714 $ 165 10 Outside Sewer Agreement Fee deposit Deposit $5,000 Deposit $5,000 NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Public Works COS, Page 2 of 6

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2015
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department ‐ User Fee Study Fiscal 2023
Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommended Cost Recovery % Average 11 Community Banner (Hang & Remove):
for‐profit organization Each $ 191 $ 193 $ 191 100% 496 $ $ 913 $ 163 non‐profit organization Each $ 191 No Charge No Charge % 496 $ $ 913 $ 163 12 Wide Load Processing Each [6] $ 95 $ 18 $ 16 17% 16 $ $ 16 $ 16 13 Sidewalk Dining or Outdoor Display Approval
Initial Each Initial
Review $ 286 $ 289 $ 286 100% 385 $ $ 385 $ 385
Annual Each Annual
Review $ 286 $ 289 $ 286 100% 385 $ $ 385 $ 385
14 Temporary NO PARKING Signs per sign $ 1 $ 1 $ 2 $ 3 $ 1 15 six month $ 95 $ 96 $ 95 100% N/A N/A N/A
each $ 31 No Charge No Charge % N/A N/A N/A
six month
permit $ 143 $ 35 $ 35 24% N/A N/A N/A
16 Exception to the Winter Moratorium on Grading per week long request $ 95 $ 96 $ 95 100% N/A N/A N/A
17 "Street Cut" fee per Ordinance Section 12.08.310.C.2 per opening [4] $ 671 $ 600 18 Video Review of Existing Sewer Lateral each $ 143 $ 145 $ 143 100% 896 $ $ 896 $ 896 19 Starting Work Without a Permit per permit [4] Actual Cost Actual Cost 20 Grading Bond Policy (per 12.08.100)
<1,000 CY per city policy per city policy per city policy >1,000 CY per city policy per city policy per city policy 21 C.4 Inspection
per hour ‐
minimum 1.5
hours
$ 191 $ 221 $ 191 100% N/A N/A N/A
Semi‐Annual Permit Parking in City Lots
East San Carlos Parking Permit Program‐Residential
Part of the Program
East San Carlos Parking Permit Program‐Business part
of the Program
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Public Works COS, Page 3 of 6

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2016
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department ‐ User Fee Study Fiscal 2023
Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommended Cost Recovery % Average 22 Credit Card and eCheck Charges Each Transaction Actual Cost Actual Cost new Parklet Program
a. Encroachment Permit Administrative Fee per permit see above see above b. Encroachment Permit ‐ Downtown Area Per Permit/Per
6 mo.

PW Admin/Eng Staff $ 430
Building Staff $ 206Planning Staff $ 300
Subtotal $ 935 New 935 $ 100% 933 $ $ 1,500 $ 750
c. Encroachment Permit ‐ Other Areas (industrial arts, etc) Per Permit/Per 6 mo.

PW Admin/Eng Staff $ 430
Building Staff $ 206Planning Staff $ 300
Subtotal $ 935 New 935 $ 100% 933 $ $ 1,500 $ 750
d. Cleaning Fee per l.f./per 6
mo
PW Maintenance Staff $ 1.32
Contracted Cleaning Cost $ 11.50
Subtotal $ 12.82 New 12.82 $ 100% N/A N/A N/A
new Tree Replanting Fee
PW Maintenance Staff $ 985.60
24" Box Tree [5] 500.00 $
Subtotal $ 1,485.60 New 1,486 $ 100% 337 $ $ 337 $ 337
25 For services requested of City Staff for which no fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the Department
Director shall determine the appropriate fee based onthe following hourly rates for staff time involved in the service.

NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Public Works COS, Page 4 of 6

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2017
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department ‐ User Fee Study Fiscal 2023
Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommended Cost Recovery % Average Maintenance Staff per hr $ 246 $ 184 $ 246 100% 295 $ $ 295 $ 295 Engineering Staff per hr $ 191 $ 193 $ 191 100% N/A N/A N/A NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Public Works COS, Page 5 of 6

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2018
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department ‐ User Fee Study Fiscal 2023
Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity
Comparison to Other Agencies
High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommended Cost Recovery % Average [Notes]
[1] Minor
∙        One (1) single family residence
o < 1000 CY of grading
o >= 1000 CY of grading
Moderate
∙        Abandonment of R/W or Easement
∙        Two or more (2+) single family residences (<1 acre) o C.3 Regulated
o Not C.3 Regulated
∙       multi‐family/mixed‐use/commercial/industrial (< 1 acres) o C.3 regulated
o Not C.3 regulated
Major
∙        Two or more (2+) single family residences (>= 1 acre) ∙        multi‐family/mixed‐use/commercial/industrial (>= 1 acres) [2][3][4][5][6]
Amount of fee for the 24" box tree is subject to change based on actual vendor cost Set by Title 21 of California Code of Regulations Section 1411.3.

Minor project ‐ point repair or maintenance, service line repair or replacement, replacement of overhead utilities, traffic control only,
Moderate project ‐ installation of overhead utilities, installation of equipment at a specific location (not linear),
Major project ‐ installation or replacement of underground utilities, Minor project ‐ sewer lateral repair or installation (outisde of roadway), sidewalk, curb, gutter, driveway, traffic control (only), minor utility point repair, installation or maintenance (above ground), discharge, minor roadway improvement,
Moderate project ‐ sewer lateral repair or installation (within roadway), soil boring, moderate utility point repair, installation or maintenance (underground), Major project ‐ new main line installation or replacement including sewer, storm, water, gas, and electric, major point repair, major development projects including offsite improvements.

Impact fee; not evaluated by NBS Fee Study
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Public Works COS, Page 6 of 6

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2019
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Building Division ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 1 a Valuation Based Fees ‐ Building Permit (Single Family Residential) less than $5,000 base fee under $5,000 $ 309 $ 134 $ 309 100% 407 $ $ 602 $ 145 base fee @ $5,000 $ 309 $ 266 $ 309 100% 620 $ $ 894 $ 316 each add'l $1000 $ 26.78 $ 7.81 $ 26.78 N/A
base fee @
$25,000 $ 927 $ 857 $ 927 100% 1,343 $ $ 1,989 $ 785
each add'l $1000 $ 28.84 $ 34.32 $ 28.84 N/A
base fee @
$50,000 $ 1,648 $ 1,715 $ 1,648 100% 2,215 $ $ 3,174 $ 1,309 each add'l $1000 $ 28.84 $ 17.14 $ 28.84 N/A
base fee @
$100,000 $ 3,090 $ 2,572 $ 3,090 100% 6,077 $ $ 8,702 $ 3,465 each add'l $1000 $ 8.24 $ 6.44 $ 8.24 N/A
base fee @
$500,000 $ 6,592 $ 5,144 $ 6,592 100% 10,432 $ $ 14,471 $ 7,488 each add'l $1000 $ 6.18 $ 3.44 $ 6.18 N/A
base fee @
$1,000,000 $ 9,888 $ 6,859 $ 9,888 100% 12,142 $ $ 15,346 $ 9,630 each add'l $1000 $ 7.42 $ 6.86 $ 7.42 N/A
b Valuation Based Fees ‐ Building Permit (Multi‐Family Residential / Commercial / Industrial) less than $10,000 base fee under $10,000 $ 515 $ 134 $ 515 100% 545 $ $ 1,053 $ 145 base fee @
$10,000 $ 515 $ 266 $ 515 100% 840 $ $ 1,458 $ 316
each add'l $1000 $ 45.32 $ 7.81 $ 45.32 N/A
base fee @
$25,000 $ 1,545 $ 857 $ 1,545 100% 1,667 $ $ 2,950 $ 785 each add'l $1000 $ 37.08 $ 34.32 $ 37.08 N/A
Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity High Low
Building Permits
$ 5,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
Current Fee /
Deposit
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery % Average
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 25,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 50,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 100,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 500,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 1,000,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 10,000
$ 25,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
Comparison to Other Agencies
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Bldg COS, Page 1 of 7

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2020
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Building Division ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommended Cost Recovery % Average Comparison to Other Agencies
base fee @
$50,000 $ 2,472 $ 1,715 $ 2,472 100% 2,882 $ $ 5,183 $ 1,309 each add'l $1000 $ 41.20 $ 17.14 $ 41.20 N/A
base fee @
$100,000 $ 4,532 $ 2,572 $ 4,532 100% 6,193 $ $ 9,394 $ 3,465 each add'l $1000 $ 14.42 $ 6.44 $ 14.42 N/A
base fee @
$500,000 $ 9,888 $ 5,144 $ 9,888 100% 10,368 $ $ 13,350 $ 7,488 each add'l $1000 $ 16.48 $ 3.44 $ 16.48 N/A
base fee @
$1,000,000 $ 17,716 $ 6,859 $ 17,716 100% 34,667 $ $ 47,894 $ 20,686 each add'l $1000 $ 8.24 $ 6.86 $ 8.24 N/A
base fee @
$10,000,000 $ 88,580 $ 68,599 $ 88,580 100% 101,770 $ $ 174,104 $ 52,319 each add'l $1000 $ 8.86 $ 6.86 $ 8.86 N/A
base fee @
$20,000,000 $ 177,160 $ 137,199 $ 177,160 100% 182,921 $ $ 261,126 $ 88,275 each add'l $1000 $ 3.54 $ 6.86 $ 3.54 N/A
base fee @
$50,000,000 $ 283,456 $ 342,999 $ 283,456 100% 237,362 $ $ 306,815 $ 106,475 each add'l $1000 $ 4.25 $ 6.86 $ 4.25 N/A
c Valuation Based Fees ‐ Plan Check (Single Family Residential) less than $5,000 base fee under $5,000 $ 258 $ 102 $ 258 100% 248 $ $ 378 $ 94 base fee @ $5,000 $ 258 $ 200 $ 258 100% 378 $ $ 487 $ 205 each add'l $1000 $ 18.54 $ 5.85 $ 18.54 N/A
base fee @
$25,000 $ 695 $ 644 $ 695 100% 815 $ $ 994 $ 510
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 $ 22.66 $ 25.69 $ 22.66 N/A base fee @
$50,000 $ 1,236 $ 1,286 $ 1,236 100% 1,349 $ $ 1,605 $ 851 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 50,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 100,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 500,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 1,000,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 10,000,000
$ 20,000,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 50,000,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 5,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 25,000
$ 50,000
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Bldg COS, Page 2 of 7

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2021
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Building Division ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommended Cost Recovery % Average Comparison to Other Agencies
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 $ 22.66 $ 12.88 $ 22.66 N/A base fee @
$100,000 $ 2,318 $ 1,930 $ 2,318 100% 3,687 $ $ 4,351 $ 2,252 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 $ 6.18 $ 4.83 $ 6.18 N/A base fee @
$500,000 $ 4,944 $ 3,858 $ 4,944 100% 6,353 $ $ 7,235 $ 4,867 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 $ 4.12 $ 2.58 $ 4.12 N/A base fee @
$500,000 $ 7,416 $ 5,144 $ 7,416 100% 7,472 $ $ 8,270 $ 6,260 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 $ 5.56 $ 5.15 $ 5.56 N/A d Valuation Based Fees ‐ Plan Check (Multi‐Family Residential / Commercial / Industrial) less than $10,000 base fee under $10,000 $ 824 $ 102 $ 824 100% 327 $ $ 526 $ 94 base fee @
$10,000 $ 824 $ 200 $ 824 100% 512 $ $ 729 $ 205
each add'l $1000 $ 18.54 $ 5.85 $ 18.54 N/A
base fee @
$25,000 $ 1,236 $ 644 $ 1,236 100% 1,008 $ $ 1,475 $ 510 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 $ 32.96 $ 25.69 $ 32.96 N/A base fee @
$50,000 $ 2,060 $ 1,286 $ 2,060 100% 1,738 $ $ 2,592 $ 851 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 $ 32.96 $ 12.88 $ 32.96 N/A base fee @
$100,000 $ 3,708 $ 1,930 $ 3,708 100% 3,803 $ $ 4,697 $ 2,252 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 $ 10.30 $ 4.83 $ 10.30 N/A base fee @
$500,000 $ 7,416 $ 3,858 $ 7,416 100% 6,511 $ $ 7,303 $ 4,867 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 $ 14.42 $ 2.58 $ 14.42 N/A base fee @
$500,000 $ 14,832 $ 5,144 $ 14,832 100% 21,346 $ $ 26,855 $ 15,514 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 $ 53.56 $ 5.15 $ 53.56 N/A $ 10,000
$ 100,000
$ 500,000
$ 1,000,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 25,000$ 50,000
$ 100,000
$ 500,000
$ 1,000,000
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Bldg COS, Page 3 of 7

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2022
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Building Division ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommended Cost Recovery % Average Comparison to Other Agencies
base fee @
$1,000,000 $ 41,200 $ 51,494 $ 41,200 100% 60,858 $ $ 87,052 $ 39,239 each add'l $1000 $ 7.42 $ 5.15 $ 7.42 N/A
base fee @
$20,000,000 $ 115,360 $ 102,994 $ 115,360 100% 111,747 $ $ 148,690 $ 66,206 each add'l $1000 $ 3.44 $ 5.15 $ 3.44 N/A
base fee @
$50,000,000 $ 218,360 $ 257,494 $ 218,360 100% 146,475 $ $ 214,770 $ 79,856 each add'l $1000 $ 4.37 $ 5.15 $ 4.37 N/A
2 Permitted Values for Construction:
per sq. ft. $ 232.00 $ 177 $ 200 $ 165
Interior Remodels per sq. ft. $ 117.00 $ 122 $ 150 $ 108 per sq. ft. $ 48.00 $ 77 $ 90 $ 50
Decks per sq. ft. $ 39.00 $ 15 $ 15 $ 15Commercial Shell per sq. ft. $ 57.00 N/A N/A N/A Tenant Improvements per sq. ft. $ 57.00 N/A N/A N/A
3 Electrical Permit
a Residential: New Single Family 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 211 $ $ 273 $ 66 each additional sq. ft. per sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 N/A 0.14 $ $ 0.15 $ 0.12 b Residential: Addition & Remodel 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 211 $ $ 273 $ 66 each additional sq. ft. per sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 N/A 0.14 $ $ 0.15 $ 0.12 c Residential: New Multiple Family 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 211 $ $ 273 $ 66 each additional sq. ft. per sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 N/A 0.14 $ $ 0.15 $ 0.12 d Commercial: New Shell Building 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 851 $ $ 1,175 $ 204 each additional sq. ft. per sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 N/A 0.14 $ $ 0.15 $ 0.12 e 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 851 $ $ 1,175 $ 204 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 N/A 0.14 $ $ 0.15 $ 0.12 f 3,000 sq. ft. min. $ 2,060 $ 312 $ 2,060 100% 580 $ $ 690 $ 360 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.81 $ 0.07 $ 0.46 N/A 0.19 $ $ 0.23 $ 0.12 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 10,000,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 20,000,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 50,000,000
New Residential and Additions
Garages and Accessory Structures
Commercial: Addition, Remodel, Tenant
ImprovementCommercial: Complex Tenant Improvements
(Labs and R&D)
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Bldg COS, Page 4 of 7

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2023
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Building Division ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommended Cost Recovery % Average Comparison to Other Agencies
g Swimming Pool, Spa, or Hot Tub Per Permit $ 412 $ 178 $ 247 60% 254 $ $ 436 $ 55 h Temporary Power Pole Per Permit $ 412 $ 178 $ 247 60% 197 $ $ 356 $ 55 i Main Electrical Service Per Permit $ 412 $ 178 $ 247 60% 252 $ $ 376 $ 108 j Per Permit $ 103 $ 85 $ 103 100% 95 $ $ 150 $ 40
k New or Replacement Sub‐Panel Per Permit $ 412 $ 178 $ 247 60% 116 $ $ 157 $ 27 l Miscellaneous Electrical Permit Per Permit $ 206 $ 116 $ 206 100% N/A N/A N/A m PV Solar Fee Per Permit $ 618 $ 227 $ 309 50% N/A N/A N/A 4 Plumbing Permit
a Residential: New Single Family 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 198 $ $ 273 $ 47 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 N/A 0.14 $ $ 0.14 $ 0.14 b Residential: Addition & Remodel 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 198 $ $ 273 $ 47 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 N/A 0.14 $ $ 0.14 $ 0.14 c Residential: New Multiple Family 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 621 $ $ 908 $ 47 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 N/A 0.14 $ $ 0.14 $ 0.14 d Commercial: New Shell Building 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 621 $ $ 908 $ 47 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 N/A 0.20 $ $ 0.23 $ 0.14 e 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 621 $ $ 908 $ 47 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 N/A 0.20 $ $ 0.23 $ 0.14 f 3,000 Sq. Ft. Minimum $ 2,060 $ 357 $ 2,060 100% 621 $ $ 908 $ 47 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.81 $ 0.08 $ 0.46 N/A 0.20 $ $ 0.23 $ 0.14 g Miscellaneous Plumbing Permit Per Permit $ 206 $ 116 $ 206 100% 50 $ $ 86 $ 23 h Swimming Pool, Spa, or Hot Tub Per Permit $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 147 $ $ 246 $ 38 i Water Heater Replacement Per Permit $ 206 $ 104 $ 104 50% 243 $ $ 479 $ 38 j Gas Piping Extension for New FAU or HVAC Per Permit $ 103 $ 85 $ 103 100% N/A N/A N/A 5 Mechanical Permit
a Residential: New Single Family 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 198 $ $ 273 $ 47 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 N/A 0.14 $ $ 0.14 $ 0.14 b Residential: Kitchen & Bath Remodel Per Permit $ 103 $ 85 $ 103 100% 198 $ $ 273 $ 47 New or Replacement Circuit for HVAC or
Commercial: Addition, Remodel, Tenant
ImprovementCommercial: Complex Tenant Improvements(Labs and R&D) NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Bldg COS, Page 5 of 7

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2024
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Building Division ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommended Cost Recovery % Average Comparison to Other Agencies
c Commercial: New Shell Building 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 621 $ $ 908 $ 47 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 N/A 0.20 $ $ 0.23 $ 0.14 d 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 621 $ $ 908 $ 47 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 N/A 0.20 $ $ 0.23 $ 0.14 e 3000 sq. ft. min. $ 618 $ 357 $ 618 100% 621 $ $ 908 $ 47 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.24 $ 0.08 $ 0.14 N/A 0.20 $ $ 0.23 $ 0.14 f New FAU or HVAC Installations Per Permit $ 412 $ 267 $ 330 80% 132 $ $ 160 $ 104 g Replacement FAU or HVAC Per Permit $ 412 $ 178 $ 206 50% 132 $ $ 160 $ 104 h Miscellaneous Mechanical Per Permit $ 206 $ 116 $ 206 100% 29 $ $ 31 $ 27 6 Miscellaneous Building Fees
a Grading Permit Fee for Swimming Pools
Permit Per Permit $ 103 $ 85 $ 103 100% N/A N/A N/A
b Grading Permit Fee for Other than Swimming Pools
Permit Per Permit $ 103 $ 85 $ 103 100% 1,492 $ $ 3,973 $ 86 c Accessibility Plan Check of Building Permit 1 hour min. $ 206 $ 243 $ 206 100% N/A N/A N/A each additional hour each add'l hr $ 206 $ 243 $ 206 100% N/A N/A N/A d Imaging Fees per page (standard size) Per Page $ 2.06 $ 1.00 $ 2.06 100% N/A N/A N/A e Imaging Fees per page (oversize) Per Page $ 4.12 $ 2.00 $ 4.12 100% N/A N/A N/A7 Planning Application Review Hourly $ 206 $ 190 $ 206 100% 1,218 $ $ 1,218 $ 1,218 8 During Normal Business Hours 1 hour min. $ 206 $ 243 $ 206 100% 225 $ $ 298 $ 132 each additional hour each add'l hr $ 206 $ 243 $ 206 100% 214 $ $ 298 $ 82 Outside Business Hours 2 hour min. $ 444 $ 486 $ 444 100% 242 $ $ 298 $ 156 each additional hour each add'l hr $ 222 $ 243 $ 222 100% 242 $ $ 298 $ 156 Code Enforcement ‐ City Attorney 1 hour min. $ 286 $ 286 $ 286 100% 120 $ $ 120 $ 120 each additional hour each add'l hr $ 286 $ 286 $ 286 100% 120 $ $ 120 $ 120 9 Dirt Haul Permit n/a reference PW fee schedule $ 295 $ 295 $ 295 10 Municipal Code Violation Fees
First Violation Per Violation n/a $ 100 $ 100 N/A N/A N/A Fees for Second and Each Additional
Commercial: Addition, Remodel, Tenant
ImprovementCommercial: Complex Tenant Improvements
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Bldg COS, Page 6 of 7

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2025
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department ‐ Building Division ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023 Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity High Low Current Fee / Deposit Recommended Fee Level / Deposit Recommended Cost Recovery % Average Comparison to Other Agencies
Per Violation n/a $ 200 $ 200 N/A N/A N/APer Violation n/a $ 500 $ 500 N/A N/A N/A 11 GEO Plan Review / Soils Report Review n/a Actual Cost per Geologist N/A N/A N/A 12 Per Instance $ 103 $ 77 $ 103 100% N/A N/A N/A
13 Additional Plan Check Fee Hourly $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 266 $ $ 333 $ 155 14 Re‐Inspection Fee Hourly $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 225 $ $ 298 $ 15615 Demolition Per Instance $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 231 $ $ 341 $ 14916 Address Change Per Instance $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% 449 $ $ 905 $ 12917 Green Building Review Per Review $ 206 $ 171 $ 206 100% N/A N/A N/A 18 Energy Calculation Review Fee Per Review $ 103 $ 85 $ 103 100% N/A N/A N/A 19 Apartment Inspection Annual Fee
Per Residential Building Per Year $ 618 $ 257 $ 257 42% 286 $ $ 298 $ 274 Per Dwelling Unit within each Building Per Year $ 206 $ 13 $ 13 6% N/A N/A N/A 20 Building Division Staff Per Hour $ 206 $ 243 $ 206 100% 233 $ $ 298 $ 200 each additional hour each add'l hr $ 206 $ 243 $ 206 100% 233 $ $ 298 $ 200 Second Violation of the Same Ordinance
Each Additional Violation of the same
GIS Mapping: New Construction, Addition,
For services requested of City Staff for which
no fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Bldg COS, Page 7 of 7

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2026
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Police Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities 1 Accident Report [1]
a property damage only
Sworn per report $ ‐
Non‐sworn per report $ 20
Subtotal $ 20 $ 2.00 $ 2 10% $ 8 $ 23 $ 0.15
b property damage with injuries
Sworn per report $ ‐
Non‐sworn per report $ 20
Subtotal $ 20 $ 2.00 $ 2 10% $ 8 $ 23 $ 0.15
c fatality
Sworn per report $ ‐
Non‐sworn per report $ 20
Subtotal $ 20 $ 2.00 $ 2 10% $ 8 $ 23 $ 0.15
2 County Jail Booking Fee County fee County fee
3 Crime Report
Sworn per report $ ‐Non‐sworn per report $ 30
Subtotal $ 30 $ 2.00 $ 2 7% $ 8 $ 23 $ 0.15
4 False Alarm Responsea First Response
Sworn first call $ 209Non‐sworn first call $ 4
Subtotal $ 213 $                    ‐ ‐ $ 0% $                        ‐ ‐ $                        ‐ $ b Subsequent Calls
Sworn per call $ 209Non‐sworn per call $ 4
Subtotal $ 213 $ 205.00 $ 205 96% $ 159 $ 325 $ 50
Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity High Low
Comparison to Other Agencies
Current Fee /
Deposit
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery % Average
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Police COS, Page 1 of 3

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2027
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Police Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity High Low
Comparison to Other Agencies
Current Fee /
Deposit
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery % Average
5 Impounded Vehicle [2]a towed for criminal offenses
Sworn per instance $ ‐
Non‐sworn per instance $ 121
Subtotal $ 121 $ 101.00 $ 101 83% $ 101 $ 160 $ 65
b towed for all other offenses (abandoned, blocking driveways, etc.) Sworn per instance $ ‐Non‐sworn per instance $ 121
Subtotal $ 121 $ 101.00 $ 101 83% $ 101 $ 160 $ 65
6 Unruly Gatherings
a First Call
Sworn per hour $ 317
Non‐sworn per hour $ ‐
Subtotal $ 317 $                    ‐ ‐ $ 0% $ 90 $ 90 $ 90 b Subsequent Calls
Sworn per hour $ 317
Non‐sworn per hour $ ‐
Subtotal $ 317 $ 306.00 $ 306 96% $ 90 $ 90 $ 90
7 Alarm Permita new
Sworn initial fee $ ‐Non‐sworn initial fee $ 10
Subtotal $ 10 $                    ‐ ‐ $ 0% $ 31 $ 50 $ 18 8 Processing Permit for Excessive Cats & Dogs
Sworn per instance $ ‐Non‐sworn per instance $ 121
Subtotal $ 121 $ 101.00 $ 101 83% N/A N/A N/A
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Police COS, Page 2 of 3

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2028
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Police Department ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
NotesCost of Service Per Activity High Low
Comparison to Other Agencies
Current Fee /
Deposit
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery % Average
9 Processing Police Officer Subpoena per hour [3] $ ‐ $275/day deposit per GC $275/day deposit per GC % $ 275 $ 275 $ 275 10 Tape of Radio/Video Transmission, Digital or Hard‐copy Photographs Per Request $ 20 actual cost of materials actual cost of materials % N/A N/A N/A 11 Credit Card and eCheck Charges Each Transaction Actual Cost Actual Cost 12 For services requested of City staff which have no
fee listed in this fee schedule, the City Manager
or the City Manager's designee shall determine
the appropriate fee based on the established
hourly rates for this department/division.

Additionally, the City will pass‐through to the
applicant any discrete costs incurred from the use
of external service providers if required to
process the specific application.

Non‐Sworn Staff Members of the Police Departm per hour $ 121 $ 101.00 $ 101 83%Sworn Staff Members of the Police Department:
per hour $ 317 $ 306.00 $ 306 96%
TOTAL 956 1,372 673
[Notes]
[1]
CA VC 20012 allows for recovery of the actual cost of
providing accident report copies
[2] Towing charges are separate
[3] As set by GC 68096
$ 75 $ 130 $ 20
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Police COS, Page 3 of 3

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2029
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Parks and Recreation ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023
A. Parks, Facility, Room, and Amenity Rentals [2]

1. Adult Community Center Room Rentals

2. Youth Center Facility Rentals

3. San Carlos Library Community Room Rental

4. Picnic Sites Rentals (March ‐ October)

5. Bocce Ball

6. Rental Application Fee $ 30 $ 25 $ 30 100% N/A N/A N/A

7. Special Event Permit:

New Request
PW Maintenance Staff $ 493
Full‐Time $ 532Part‐Time $ ‐Public Works $ 63Police $ 40Planning $ 50Building $ 34 Subtotal: $ 1,212 $ 386 $ 400 33% $ 411 $ 806 $ 16
Repeat Request
PW Maintenance Staff $ 493
Full‐Time $ 443Part‐Time $ ‐Public Works $ 63Police $ 40Planning $ 50Building $ 34 Subtotal: $ 1,123 $ 274 $ 375 33% $ 411 $ 806 $ 16
City Staff On‐Site Time During Event See Hourly Rates See Hourly Rates Fee
No.

Fee Name
NotesCost of Service Per Activity Current Fee / Deposit Low Comparison to Other Agencies
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery % Average High
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Recreation COS, Page 1 of 4

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2030
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Parks and Recreation ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023
Fee
No.

Fee Name
NotesCost of Service Per Activity Current Fee / Deposit Low Comparison to Other Agencies
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery % Average High
B. Athletics ("Per Season/Per Quarter")

1. Light Use (Fields). Per hour [3] $ 36 $ 31 $ 32

2. Sports League Field Use Fee (per player) [3]
San Carlos Youth Softball (Girls) $ 86 $ 38 $ 66Youth Baseball $ 86 $ 38 $ 66Soccer $ 86 $ 52 $ 66

3. Baseball / Soccer Sports Tournament:

New Request Permit Fee
PW Maintenance Staff $ 493
Full‐Time $ 532Part‐Time $ ‐
Subtotal: $ 1,025 $ 280 $ 350 34% N/A N/A N/A
Repeat Request Permit Fee
PW Maintenance Staff $ 493
Full‐Time $ 443Part‐Time $ ‐
Subtotal: $ 936 $ 168 $ 300 32% N/A N/A N/A
Field Use Fee (per hour) [2]

4. Tennis:

Tennis Club Permitted Use (per hour, per court) [2]Non‐Resident Tennis Club (per hour, per court) [2]

5. Snack Shack Use
Fall Season (August 15 ‐ November 30) [2]
Spring Season (March 1 ‐ May 31) [2]

6. Snack Shack Use (Outside of Primary Youth Sports Seasons) Weekly Rental Fee (Mon ‐ Sun) [2]
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Recreation COS, Page 2 of 4

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2031
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Parks and Recreation ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023
Fee
No.

Fee Name
NotesCost of Service Per Activity Current Fee / Deposit Low Comparison to Other Agencies
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery % Average High
C. Miscellaneous

1. Park Fitness Group Rental [2]2. Administrative fees (apply to class registration only) Registration
PW Maintenance Staff $ ‐
Full‐Time $ 14Part‐Time $ ‐
Subtotal: $ 14 $ 10 $ 10 71% $ 21 $ 30 $ 12
Refund
PW Maintenance Staff $ ‐
Full‐Time $ 14Part‐Time $ ‐
Subtotal: $ 14 $ 16 $ 10 71% $ 17 $ 25 $ 8

3. Neighborhood Block Party Permit
PW Maintenance Staff $ 246Full‐Time $ 177Part‐Time $ ‐
Subtotal: $ 424 Fee Waived Fee Waived % N/A N/A N/A

4. Technology Fee [1]

5. Hourly Rates
PW Maintenance Staff $ 246 $ 184.00 $ 246 100% 30 $ $ 41 $ 18Full‐Time Recreation Staff $ 177 $ 162.00 $ 177 100% 30 $ $ 41 $ 18Part‐Time Recreation Staff $ 30 $ 52.00 $ 30 100% 30 $ $ 41 $ 18 D. Community Events [2]
NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Recreation COS, Page 3 of 4

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2032
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Parks and Recreation ‐ User Fee Study FY 2023
Fee
No.

Fee Name
NotesCost of Service Per Activity Current Fee / Deposit Low Comparison to Other Agencies
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery % Average High
[Notes]
[1] NBS did not evaluate. Fee is $2 per registration
[2]
NBS did not evaluate on an individual fee level basis ‐ see City staff report and master fee schedule for rates
[3] Cost of service per activity as provided by City
Recreational ProgramsFees imposed for recreational programs offered by the City shall be set at the discretion of the Parks and Recreation Director, not to exceed the cost of the individual programs. The City's full cost of implementing an individual program may be calculated as follows: Program Cost of Service = [ (A x B) + C + D + E + F + G ] A = Estimated time for City staff to implement the individual program B = Applicable hourly rates for the staff functions involved in the implementation of the individual program (below).

C = Actual cost incurred by the City for any outside service provider involved in the individual program.

D = Actual cost incurred by the City for any specific materials acquired for use during the individual program.

E = Prevailing facility rental and/or field use fees imposed by the City and reflected in its Master Fee Schedule.

F = Prevailing department / City administrative fee
G = Actual costs incurred by the City to rent and/or use facilities/fields from other entities The calculated cost of service above represents the maximum fee that could be imposed by the City for an individual recreation program. The City may recover between 0% and 100% of the cost of service. Cost recovery targets may vary by individual recreation program, at the discretion of the Parks and Recreation Director as determined during the seasonal development of the City's program offerings. The City may also set differential fee for resident and non‐resident participants as lmg as neither fee exceeds the cost of service. Any person with a home San Carlos mailing address is considered a resident. A San Carlos PO Box or business address will not be taken as proof of residency. A non‐resident is someone who lives in another City. Non‐resident fees will be charged at 20% of the class fee up to a $20 maximum per class.

NBS ‐ Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll‐Free:800.676.7516 5/16/2022 Recreation COS, Page 4 of 4

10.a.1
Packet Pg. 2033
Attachment: SC Fee Comparison - Prepared by NBS (User Fee Schedule) 32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
Toll free: 800.434.8349 Fax: 951.296.1998
City of San Carlos
Citywide User Fee Study
Final Report
May 12, 2022

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2034 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fees Study – City of San Carlos
Prepared by NBS
TOC

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary................................................................................................................. 1 Outcomes..................................................................................................................................................1 Report Format...........................................................................................................................................2 Section 1 – Introduction and Fundamentals .......................................................................... 3 Scope of Study...........................................................................................................................................3 Methods of Analysis..................................................................................................................................3 Cost of Service Analysis.........................................................................................................................4 Fee Establishment.................................................................................................................................5 Cost Recovery Evaluation......................................................................................................................6 Comparative Fee Survey ...........................................................................................................................7 Data Sources .............................................................................................................................................8 Section 2 – Administrative Fees ............................................................................................. 9 Cost of Service Analysis.............................................................................................................................9 Fee Establishment.....................................................................................................................................9 Cost Recovery Evaluation..........................................................................................................................9 Section 3 – Community Development – Planning Division Fees.........................................11 Cost of Service Analysis...........................................................................................................................11 Fee Establishment...................................................................................................................................12 Cost Recovery Evaluation........................................................................................................................13 Section 4 – Public Works Fees...............................................................................................14 Cost of Service Analysis...........................................................................................................................14 Fee Establishment...................................................................................................................................14 Cost Recovery Evaluation........................................................................................................................14 Section 5 – Community Development – Building Division Fees..........................................16 Cost of Service Analysis...........................................................................................................................16 Fee Establishment...................................................................................................................................17 Cost Recovery Evaluation........................................................................................................................17 Section 6 – Police Fees ..........................................................................................................19 Cost of Service Analysis...........................................................................................................................19 Fee Establishment...................................................................................................................................19 Cost Recovery Evaluation........................................................................................................................19 Section 7 – Parks and Recreation Department .....................................................................21 Special Considerations Regarding Recreation Fees................................................................................21

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2035 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fees Study – City of San Carlos
Prepared by NBS
TOC
Cost of Service Analysis...........................................................................................................................22 Fee Establishment...................................................................................................................................22 Cost Recovery Evaluation........................................................................................................................23 Section 8 – General Plan Surcharge......................................................................................24 Cost of Service Analysis...........................................................................................................................24 Fee Establishment...................................................................................................................................24 Cost Recovery Evaluation........................................................................................................................25 Section 9 – Technology Surcharge........................................................................................26 Cost of Service Analysis...........................................................................................................................26 Fee Establishment...................................................................................................................................26 Cost Recovery Evaluation........................................................................................................................27 Section 10 – Conclusion.........................................................................................................28 Appendices
Cost of Service Analysis (Fee Tables)
Administrative Departments Fees Appendix A.1
Planning Division Fees Appendix A.2
Public Works (Engineering) Fees Appendix A.3
Building Division Fees Appendix A.4
Police Department Fees Appendix A.5
Parks and Recreation Fees Appendix A.6
Fee Comparison
Administrative Departments Fees Appendix B.1
Planning Division Fees Appendix B.2
Public Works (Engineering) Fees Appendix B.3
Building Division Fees Appendix B.4
Police Department Fees Appendix B.5
Parks and Recreation Fees Appendix B.6

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2036 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 1
Prepared by NBS
Executive Summary
NBS performed a User Fees and Charges Study (Study) for the City of San Carlos (City). The purpose of this report is to describe the Study’s findings and recommendations, which intend to defensibly update and establish user and regulatory fees for service for the City of San Carlos, California.

California’s local governments charge fees for services they provide through provisions of the State Constitution.

Per the framework defined in Article XIIIC, Section 1, a fee may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service or performing the regulatory activity. The fees considered in this Study fall outside requirements for imposition of taxes, special taxes, or fees imposed as incidences of property ownership.

The primary purposes for conducting this Study are to ensure that fees do not exceed the costs of service, and to provide an opportunity for the City Council to re-align fee amounts with local cost recovery policies.

Outcomes
This Study examined user and regulatory fees managed by the following City departments and programs:

Administrative Services, City Clerk, Planning, Public Works, Building, Police, and Parks and Recreation. Fire Prevention fees are separate from this Study’s scope of review, as these services are contracted to the City of Redwood City. The Study identified approximately $7.3 million currently collected per year from fees for service, versus $11.1 million in costs of providing services. The following table provides a summary of results for each City service area studied:

1. Recreation outcomes reflect permitted activities and processing fees only; programs and facility rentals are excluded from this table As shown, the City is recovering approximately 66% of costs associated with providing user and regulatory fee related services. Should the Council elect to adopt fee levels at 100% of the full cost recovery amounts determined by this Study, an additional $3.8 million in costs could be recovered.

However, as discussed in Section 1 of this report, there may be valid reasons for adopting a fee at less than the calculated full cost recovery amount. As such, City staff provided initial recommended fee amounts for consideration. If Council elects to adopt fee levels at staff’s initial recommendations, an additional $2.6 million costs could be recovered, yielding an 89% total cost recovery outcome for services provided.

Department / Division
Estimated
Annual Current
Fee Revenue
Estimated Annual
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Revenue
Annual Cost
Recovery Surplus /
(Deficit)
Current Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Annual
Recommended
Fee Revenue
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Administrative Fees $ 325 $ 497 $ (172) 65% $ 325 65%
Planning $ 695,121 $ 1,479,859 $ (784,738) 47% $ 1,369,429 93% Public Works Engineering $ 817,352 $ 863,928 $ (46,576) 95% $ 806,678 93% Building $ 5,344,680 $ 6,899,937 $ (1,555,257) 77% $ 6,764,819 98% Police $ 127,545 $ 365,273 $ (237,728) 35% $ 127,545 35% Recreation (permits/processing) $ 108,604 $ 161,481 $ (52,877) 67% $ 117,892 73% GP Maintenance Surcharge $ 86,760 $ 1,317,813 $ (1,231,053) 7% $ 658,906 50% Technology Surcharge $ 121,870 $ 35,855 $ 86,015 340% $ 35,855 100% Total $ 7,302,257 $ 11,124,643 $ (3,822,386) 66% $ 9,881,449 89%

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2037 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 2
Prepared by NBS
Report Format
This report documents analytical methods and data sources used throughout the Study, presents findings regarding current levels of cost recovery achieved from user and regulatory fees, discusses recommended fee amounts, and provides a comparative survey of fees imposed by neighboring agencies for similar services. • Section 1 of the report outlines the foundation of the Study and general approach. • Sections 2 through 9 discuss the results of the cost of service analysis performed, segmented by category of fee and/or department.
• Section 10 provides the grand scope conclusions of the analysis provided in the preceding sections. • Appendices to this report include additional analytical details for each department or division studied, and a comparison of fees imposed by neighboring agencies for similar services.

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2038 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 3
Prepared by NBS
Section 1 – Introduction and Fundamentals
Scope of Study
The following is a summarized list of fees for each City department or program studied:
• Administrative fees, including:
o Returned check processing fees
o Copy charges, document certification, and research requests • Community Development Department fees, including:
o Planning Division services for zoning, permitted uses, and other processing requests o Building Division services for plan check and permitting of construction • Public Works engineering related fees, including:
o Final map review and approval
o Civil plan check and inspection for improvements within the right-of-way o Encroachment permits
o Parking permits
o Planning application and building plan submittal review • Police Department fees for processing of records requests, vehicle impounds, etc. • Fire Prevention fees were excluded from this Study. Services are contracted through the City of Redwood City.
• Parks and Recreation fees limited to rental application fees, special event permit applications, class registrations and refunds, field use fees, and sports tournament permits.

The fees examined in this Study specifically excluded utility rates, development impact fees, and special assessments, all of which fall under distinct analytical and procedural requirements different from the body of user/regulatory fees analyzed in this effort. Additionally, this Study and the resultant master fee schedule excluded facility and equipment rental rates, as well as most of the fines and penalties that may be imposed by the City for violations to its requirements or code.

Methods of Analysis
There are three phases of analysis completed for each City department or program studied:
1) Cost of service analysis
2) Fee establishment
3) Cost recovery evaluation

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2039 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 4
Prepared by NBS
Cost of Service Analysis
The cost of service analysis establishes the full cost of providing governmental services and activities. There are two primary types of costs considered: direct and indirect costs. Direct costs are those that specifically relate to the activity in question, including the real-time provision of the service. Indirect costs are those that support provision of services in general but cannot be directly assigned to the fee for service in question.

Cost components applicable to establishing the full cost of any service include direct labor costs, indirect labor costs, specific direct non-labor costs where applicable, allocated non-labor costs, and allocated City-wide overhead.

Definitions of these cost components are as follows:
• Labor costs – Salary, wages and benefits expenses for City personnel specifically involved in the provision of services and activities to the public.
• Indirect labor costs – Personnel expenses supporting the provision of services and activities. This can include line supervision and departmental management, administrative support within a department, and staff involved in technical activities related to the direct services provided to the public. • Specific direct non-labor costs – Discrete expenses incurred by the City due to a specific service or activity performed, such as contractor costs, third-party charges, and very specific materials used in the service or activity. (In most fee types, this component is not used, as it is very difficult to directly assign most non-labor costs at the activity level.)
• Allocated indirect non-labor costs – Expenses other than labor for the departments involved in the provision of services. In most cases, these costs are allocated across all services provided by a department, rather than directly assigned to fee categories.
• Allocated indirect organization-wide overhead – These are expenses, both labor and non-labor, related to agency-wide support services. Support services include general administrative services such as City Council, City Manager, City Clerk, City Attorney, Human Resources, Administrative Services, Building Maintenance, etc. An agency’s support services departments assist the direct providers of public service. The amount of costs attributable to each department or program included in this Study were sourced from a separate Cost Allocation Plan, prepared by NBS for the City’s Administrative Services Department.

All cost components in this Study use annual (or annualized) figures, representing a twelve-month cycle of expenses incurred by the City in the provision of all services and activities agency-wide.

Nearly all of the fees under review in this Study require specific actions on the part of City staff to provide a service or conduct an activity. Because labor is the primary underlying factor in these activities, the Study expresses the full cost of service as a fully burdened cost per labor hour. A composite, fully burdened, hourly rate is calculated for each department, division, program, or activity, as applicable to the specific organization and needs of each area studied. The rate serves as the basis for further quantifying the average full cost of providing individual services and activities.

Deriving the fully burdened labor rate for each department, and various functional divisions within a department, requires two figures: the full costs of service and the number of hours available to perform those services. The full costs of service are quantified as described above. Hours available is derived from a complete listing of all personnel employed by the City.

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2040 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 5
Prepared by NBS
A full-time employee equates to 2,080 hours per year of regular time. Using this as an initial benchmark of labor time, the Study removes the average employee’s eligible annual leave from the total number of regular paid hours to generate the total number of available labor hours for each City department or program. These available hours represent the amount of time available for providing both fee-recoverable and non-fee recoverable services and activities. The available labor hours divided into the annual full costs of fee-recoverable services equals the composite fully burdened labor rate. Some agencies also use the resulting rates for other purposes than setting fees, such as when the need arises to calculate the full cost of general services orstructure a cost recovery agreement with another agency or third party.

Fully burdened labor rates applied at the individual fee level estimate the average full cost of providing each service or activity. This step requires development of staff time estimates for the services and activities listed in the City’s fee schedule. In some fee programs, time tracking records were useful in identifying time spent providing general categories of service (e.g. plan review, inspection, public assistance, etc.). However, the City does not systematically track activity service time for all departments or all fee services provided. Consequently, interviews and questionnaires were used to develop the necessary data sets describing estimated labor time. In most cases, City staff estimated the average amount of time (in minutes and hours) it would take to complete a typical occurrence of each service or activity considered. Every attempt was made to ensure that each department having a direct role in the provision of each service or activity provided a time estimate.

It should be noted that the development of these time estimates was not a one-step process: estimates received were carefully reviewed by both consultant and departmental management to assess the reasonableness of such estimates. Based on this review, the City reconsidered its time estimates until both parties were comfortable that the fee models reasonably reflected the average service level provided by the City. Then, staff’s time estimates were applied to the appropriate fully burdened labor rate to yield an average full cost of the service or activity.

The average full cost of service is just that: an average cost at the individual fee level. The City does not currently have the systems in place to impose fees for every service or activity based on the actual amount of time it takes to serve each individual. Moreover, such an approach is almost universally infeasible without significant – if not unreasonable – investments in costly technology. Much of the City’s fee schedule is composed of flat fees, which by definition, are linked to an average cost of service; thus, use of this average cost method is the predominant approach in proceeding toward a schedule of revised fees. Flat fee structures based on average costs of service are widely applied among other California municipalities, and it is a generally accepted approach. (Refer to the subsection below regarding “Fee Establishment” for further discussion.) Subsequent chapters and the appendices of this report discuss the completed cost of service analysis developed for each department or division.

Fee Establishment
Because most of the City’s fees are flat fees, they correspond directly to the average full cost of service result. For the few activities where estimating an average was impossible – due to the highly variable nature of the service – use of fully burdened hourly rates coupled with time tracking is the preferred fee structure. (In other words, the City would impose a fee per hour of staff time, requiring some degree of time estimation or outright time-tracking at the case level.)

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2041 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 6
Prepared by NBS
Establishing fees also includes a range of considerations, as described below:
• Addition to and deletion of fees – The Study’s process provided each department the opportunity to propose additions and deletions to their fee schedules, as well as rename, reorganize, and clarify fees imposed. Many such revisions better conform fees to current practices, as well as improve the calculation of fees owed by an individual, the application of fees, and the collection of revenues. In other words, as staff is more knowledgeable and comfortable working with the fee schedule, the accuracy achieved in both imposing fees on users and collecting revenues for the City is greater. Beyond this, some additions to the fee schedule were simply identification of existing services or activities performed by City staff for which no fee is currently charged.
• Revision to the structure of fees – In most cases, the current structure of fees did not change; the focus is to recalibrate the fee amount to match the costs of service. In several cases, however, fee categories and fee names were simplified or re-structured to increase the likelihood of full cost recovery, or to enhance the fairness of how the fee applies to various types of fee payers. • Documentation of tools to calculate special cost recovery – The City’s fee schedule should include the list of fully burdened rates developed by the Study. Documenting these rates in the fee schedule provides an opportunity for the City Council to approve rates for cost recovery under a “time and materials” approach. It also provides clear publication of those rates, so fee payers of any uniquely determined fee can reference the amounts. The fee schedule should provide language that supports special forms of cost recovery for activities and services not contemplated by the adopted master fee schedule. These rare instances use the published rates to estimate a flat fee, or bill on an hourly basis, at the discretion of the director of each department.

Cost Recovery Evaluation
The fee model compares the existing fee for each service or activity to the average full cost of service quantified through this analysis. A cost recovery rate of 0% identifies no current recovery of costs from fee revenues (or insufficient information available for evaluation). A rate of 100% means that the fee currently recovers the full cost of service. A rate between 0% and 100% indicates partial recovery of the full cost of service through fees. A rate greater than 100% means that the fee exceeded the full cost of service.

User fees and regulatory fees examined in this Study should not exceed the full cost of service. In other words, the cost recovery rate achieved by a fee should not be greater than 100%. In most cases, continuing to charge a fee above this threshold would not require with Article XIIC, Section 1 of the California Constitution, which stipulates that a fee may not exceed the cost of providing the service.

The fee model also considers initially “recommended” or “targeted” levels of cost recovery for each fee, always established at 100%, or less, than the calculated full cost of service. Targets and recommendations always reflect agency-specific judgments linked to a variety of factors, such as existing City policies, agency-wide or departmental revenue objectives, economic goals, community values, market conditions, level of demand, and others.

A general means of selecting an appropriate cost recovery target is to consider the public and private benefits of the service or activity in question.

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2042 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 7
Prepared by NBS
• To what degree does the public at large benefit from the service? • To what degree does the individual or entity requesting, requiring, or causing the service benefit? When a service or activity completely benefits the public at large, there is generally little to no recommended fee amount (i.e., 0% cost recovery), reflecting that a truly public-benefit service is best funded by the general resources of the City, such as General Fund revenues (e.g., taxes). Conversely, when a service or activity completely benefits an individual or entity, there is generally closer to or equal to 100% of cost recovery from fees, collected from the individual or entity. An example of a completely private benefit service may be a request for exemption from a City regulation or process.

In some cases, a strict public-versus-private benefit judgment may not be sufficient to finalize a cost recovery target.

Any of the following other factors and considerations may influence or supplement the public/private benefit perception of a service or activity:
• If optimizing revenue potential is an overriding goal, is it feasible to recover the full cost of service? • Will increasing fees result in non-compliance or public safety problems? • Are there desired behaviors or modifications to behaviors of the service population helped or hindered through the degree of pricing for the activities?
• Does current demand for services support a fee increase without adverse impact to the citizenry served or current revenue levels? (In other words, would fee increases have the unintended consequence of driving away the population served?)
• Is there a good policy basis for differentiating between type of users (e.g., residents and non-residents, residential and commercial, non-profit entities and business entities)? • Are there broader City objectives that inform a less than full cost recovery target from fees, such as economic development goals and local social values?
Because this element of the Study is subjective, NBS provides the full cost of service calculation information and the framework for considering fees, while those closest to the fee-paying population – the City departments and programs – have considered appropriate cost recovery levels at or below that full cost for the Council’s review.

Comparative Fee Survey
Often policy makers request a comparison of their jurisdiction’s fees to surrounding or similar communities. The purpose of a comparison is to provide a sense of the local market pricing for services, and to use that information to gauge the impact of recommendations for fee adjustments.

Appendix B presents the results of the Comparative Fee Survey for the City of San Carlos. NBS worked with the City to choose five comparative agencies: Cities of Belmont, Burlingame, Foster City, Menlo Park, Redwood City, and San Mateo.

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2043 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 8
Prepared by NBS
NBS notes the following about the approach to, and use of, comparative survey data:
• Comparative surveys do not provide information about the cost recovery policies or procedures inherent in each comparison agency.
• A “market based” decision to price services above or below the full cost of service calculation, is the same as making a decision to over-charge, and/or subsidize that service. • Comparative agencies may or may not base their fee amounts on the estimated and reasonable cost of providing services. NBS did not perform the same level of analysis provided for this Study on the comparative agencies’ fees.
• Comparative fee survey efforts are often non-conclusive for many fee categories. Comparison agencies typically use varied terminology for provision of similar services.

In general, the comparison attempts to source each agency’s fee schedule from the Internet, and compile a comparison of fee categories and amounts for the most readily comparable fee items that match the client’s existing fee structure.

Data Sources
The following City-published data sources were used to support the cost of service analysis and fee establishment phases of this Study:
• The City of San Carlos’s Adopted Budget for Fiscal Year 2022-23. • A complete listing of all City personnel, salary/wage rates, regular hours, paid benefits, and paid leave amounts – provided by the Finance Division.
• Various correspondences with the City staff supporting the adopted budgets and current fees, including budget notes and expenditure detail not shown in the published document. • Prevailing fee schedules provided by each involved department. • Annual workload data from the prior fiscal year provided by each involved department.

The City’s adopted budget is the most significant source of information affecting cost of service results. NBS did not audit or validate the City’s financial management and budget practices, nor was cost information adjusted to reflect different levels of service or any specific, targeted performance benchmarks. This Study has accepted the City’s budget as a legislatively adopted directive describing the most appropriate and reasonable level of City spending.

Original data sets also support the work of this Study: primarily, estimated staff time at various levels of detail. To develop these data sets, consultants prepared questionnaires and conducted interviews with individual departments. In the fee establishment phase of the analysis, departmental staff provided estimates of average time spent providing a service or activity corresponding with an existing or new fee. Consultants and departmental management reviewed and questioned responses to ensure the best possible set of estimates.

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2044 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 9
Prepared by NBS
Section 2 – Administrative Fees
The City’s Administrative Services and City Clerk departments provide a few fee-related services included in the Fee Study. The scope review focused solely on various administrative processing fees such as returned checks, copy charges, document certification, and research requests.

Cost of Service Analysis
The following is the fully-burdened hourly rate calculated for the Administrative Services Division:

Section 1, Cost of Service Analysis, of this report describes the types of expenditures and allocated costs considered in the development of the rate. All subsequent cost of service calculations for each administrative fee will assume an hourly rate of $193.

Fee Establishment
The list of fees shown as Appendix A.1 to this report includes various administrative fees charged by the Finance Division of the Administrative Services Department, and the City Clerk Department. In general, this Study recommended removal of fees for copies of documents that are available free on the City’s website, or for services no longer provided by these City departments. The City’s Administrative Services Director also requested removal of fees pertaining to the City’s business license program, including fees for copies of active business license registrations, and reprinting of business registration certificates and applications. The reason for removal of the business license program fees is due to the function being outsourced.

Cost Recovery Evaluation
Appendix A.1 presents the results of the detailed cost recovery analysis for the City’s administrative fees. The “Cost of Service per Activity” column establishes the maximum fee amount for the corresponding service identified in the “Fee Name” list. The table on the following page provides a summary of these results:

Cost Element
Direct Services
and Activities
Labor $ 774,093
Recurring Non-Labor 36,487
Citywide Overhead 300,246
Division Administration 297,056
Department Total $ 1,407,881
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate $ 193
Reference: Direct Hours Only 7,282

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2045 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 10
Prepared by NBS
The City’s administrative fees currently recover approximately 65% of the cost of providing services. The City collects approximately $325 per year in revenues at current fee amounts, and incurs a slightly higher amount of costs when providing these services for which fees are charged.

NBS provided the full cost of service information and the framework for considering fees, while those closest to the fee-paying population, the City departments, considered appropriate cost recovery levels at or below that full cost.

The “Recommended Fee Level / Deposit” column in Appendix A.1 displays the City staff’s initially recommended fee amounts. Recommendations include:
• Make no change to returned check fees, which are regulated (capped) by the State. Existing fees are already at the State’s maximum allowed amount.
• Continue to waive fees for document certification services.

These initial recommendations would continue to recover approximately 65% of the total costs of providing services.

Department / Division
Estimated
Annual Current
Fee Revenue
Estimated Annual
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Revenue
Annual Cost
Recovery Surplus /
(Deficit)
Current Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Annual
Recommended
Fee Revenue
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Administrative Fees $ 325 $ 497 $ (172) 65% $ 325 65%

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2046 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 11
Prepared by NBS
Section 3 – Community Development – Planning Division Fees The Planning Division of the Community Development Department is responsible for three key functions: Advance Planning, Current Planning, and Land Use Regulation.

The Current Planning Division provides a comprehensive planning review and evaluation of all current development projects in accordance with State Planning Law, California Environmental Quality Act, the City's General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and other land use standards.

Cost of Service Analysis
The following categorizes the Current Planning Division’s costs across both fee related and non-fee related services, as well as the resulting fully-burdened hourly rate applicable toward establishing the full cost of providing fee related services.

All subsequent cost of service calculations at the individual fee level assume a fully burdened hourly rate of $300, with a maximum annual cost recovery amount of approximately $1.5 million in costs from fees for service.

The cost category columns shown in the table above were adapted and summarized from Division staff interviews.

To assist the reader in understanding the underlying costs and assumptions used to calculate the fully burdened hourly rate, the following provides summary descriptions of each cost category:
• Public Counter / General Information Services – City staff respond to phone calls, walk-in customers, and informational requests that support both active permits and the overall development review process in general.

Some portion of costs for provision of general public information and assistance reasonably apply toward recovery from fees. Planning staff estimated that approximately 60% of these costs support land use application review activities, while the remaining costs should not be considered in the calculation of fees for services. The remaining 40% of the costs of providing public information services requires funding from sources other than fees.
• Long Range Planning – Current Planning staff are tasked with completing updates to ordinances, standards, policies, procedures that reflect changes in local and state-level policies and laws that change over time. These services provided by Current Planning support decision making regarding land use entitlements and development approvals. These costs are not directly recovered through individual planning and zoning review Cost Element
Public Counter /
General
Information
Services
Long Range
Planning
Key
Development
Project Support
Development
and Permitting
Services -
Planning
Total
Labor $ 174,906 $ 121,808 $ 38,410 $ 369,977 $ 705,100
Recurring Non-Labor 115,046 5,394 32,296 216,686 369,422 Citywide Overhead 147,647 102,824 32,424 312,317 595,212 Division Administration 146,198 76,849 34,455 300,340 557,842 Department Total $ 583,797 $ 306,876 $ 137,584 $ 1,199,320 $ 2,227,577 Cost Recovery Targeted from Fees 60% 0% 0% 100% 70%
Amount Targeted for Consideration in Billings/Fees $ 350,278 $ - $ - $ 1,199,320 $ 1,549,598 Amount Requiring Another Funding Source 233,519 306,876 137,584 - 677,979 Fully Burdened Hourly Rate $ 68 $ - $ - $ 232 $ 300
Reference: Direct Hours Only 5,173

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2047 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 12
Prepared by NBS
fees and are considered within the context of the General Plan Maintenance Surcharge, discussed in Section 8, Surcharges.
• Key Development Project Support – The goal of the Key Development Project program is to ensure that large and influential development projects are high quality, appropriate, feasible and of fiscal and economic benefit for the community. Costs associated with Planning staff’s efforts on these projects are recovered on an hourly and/or actual cost basis.
• Development and Permitting Services – Planning – Development review and approval comprises the majority of this Division’s work efforts. 100% of these costs are recoverable from the Division’s routine types of fees for service.

Significant analytical and policy decisions revolve around inclusion of categorized activity costs in the fully burdened hourly rate. The decision of whether to apply or exclude certain costs toward recovery in fees for service stems from the basic fee setting parameters offered by the California State Constitution and Statutes, which requires that any new fee levied, or existing fee increased should not exceed the estimated amount required to provide the service for which the charge is levied.

Fee Establishment
San Carlos’ Planning Division currently charges for application processing and entitlement review services via a mixture of “flat” fees and “deposit based” fees. Flat fees charge one finite amount per project. Deposit based fees require an initial deposit of funds to begin processing of an application, time is tracked and billed to the project by City staff against the deposit amount, and additional funds are either requested from the applicant as needed, or refunds are provided to the applicant upon completion of the project.

The City reviewed each fee item on the Planning Division’s current list of fees as to whether it should be charged as a flat fee or a deposit based fee. The City also updated naming conventions and ordering of a few fees for better display of information, and/or to reflect changes in processes. Fee items removed include the separate Design Review fee for Accessory Dwelling Units. New fee items added include:
• Cell Tower Application
• SB-9 Application review
• Design Review for Minor Alterations
• Excessive Noise Compliance Permit
• Plan Check for Building Permits pertaining to Accessory Dwelling Units that are not part of a previous Planning approval
• Pre-Application Development Review for General/Initial Questions • Protected Tree Notice
• Tree Replanting fee for the City’s time and expense to plant a tree on behalf of a development when there is no possibility to plant on site given the project particulars. Though the City’s arborist is responsible for administering the requirements of the City’s Tree Ordinance, the costs of tree acquisition and planting are evaluated in the Public Works section of the Fee Study.

While this section of the User Fee Study Report focuses on the Planning Division’s costs and fees, the Public Works Department and Building Division also participate in the review of Planning’s applications. As such, the Engineering

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2048 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 13
Prepared by NBS
and Building fee analyses establish additional fees for these reviews, as required. Please consult Section 4 and Section 5 for more information.

Cost Recovery Evaluation
Appendix A.2 presents the results of the detailed cost recovery analysis for the City’s Planning fees. The “Cost of Service per Activity” column establishes the maximum adoptable fee amount for the corresponding service identified in the “Fee Name” list.

The City’s Planning fees currently recover approximately 47% of the Planning Division’s cost of providing services. As shown in the following table, the City collects approximately $695,000 per year in revenues at current fee amounts.

At full cost recovery, the same demand for these services would generate approximately $1.5 million.

NBS provided the full cost of service information and the framework for considering fees, while those closest to the fee-paying population, the City departments, considered appropriate cost recovery levels at or below that full cost.

The “Recommended Fee / Deposit Level” column in Appendix A.2 displays the City staff’s initially recommended flat fee or deposit amounts. Staff generally recommends most fees to recover 100% of the costs of providing services, which is consistent with prior fee studies performed by the City. Recommendations for less than full cost recovery fee amounts include the following fee items:
• Appeals to the Planning Commission or City Council
• Protected Tree Removal Permit/Pruning Permit
• Protected Tree Notice
• Waivers
• Business Registration and Home Occupation permits
• Minor Staff Review fees for Business Registration and Home Occupations These initial recommendations for adjusted fee amounts would increase the Planning Division’s costs recovered by approximately $674,000. Recommended fee amounts recover approximately 93% of the total costs of providing fee related services.

Department / Division
Estimated
Annual Current
Fee Revenue
Estimated Annual
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Revenue
Annual Cost
Recovery Surplus /
(Deficit)
Current Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Annual
Recommended
Fee Revenue
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Planning $ 695,121 $ 1,479,859 $ (784,738) 47% $ 1,369,429 93%

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2049 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 14
Prepared by NBS
Section 4 – Public Works Fees
The Public Works Department is comprised of Engineering and Maintenance Divisions, and is responsible for the design, construction, contract administration, permitting and overall maintenance and operation of the City's infrastructures.

Cost of Service Analysis
The Engineering Division charges fees for services such as review of final maps, encroachment permits, civil plan review, and review and implementation of fee for service activities in the City’s Planning Division. The Maintenance Division provides support to a select few of the Engineering Division’s and Recreation Department’s fees. The following table shows calculation of the fully burdened hourly rate for each division.

Section 1, Cost of Service Analysis, of this report describes the types of expenditures and allocated costs considered in the development of these rates. All subsequent fee calculations will incorporate the fully burdened hourly rates $191 for Engineering services, and $246 for Maintenance services.

Fee Establishment
The Engineering Division made few changes to their existing fee schedule in terms of the number of fee names and categories. Two fees were added to their fee schedule:
• Parklet Program fees for permitting, monitoring, and cleaning • Tree In-Lieu fee for the City’s time and expense to plant a tree on behalf of a development when there is no possibility to plant on site given the project particulars. Though the City’s arborist is responsible for administering the requirements of the City’s Tree Ordinance, the costs of tree acquisition and planting are evaluated in the Public Works section of the Fee Study.

Cost Recovery Evaluation
Appendix A.3 presents the results of the detailed cost recovery analysis for the City’s Public Works fees. The “Total Cost of Service per Activity” column establishes the maximum adoptable fee amount for the corresponding service identified in the “Fee Name” list.

Cost Element Engineering Maintenance
Labor $ 644,040 $ 908,620
Recurring Non-Labor 68,217 91,861
Citywide Overhead 325,620 912,284
Division Administration 8,814 450,297
Department Total $ 1,046,692 $ 2,363,063
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate $ 191 $ 246
Reference: Direct Hours Only 5,481 9,590

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2050 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 15
Prepared by NBS
The City’s Public Works fees currently recover approximately 95% of the Department’s cost of providing services. As shown in the following table, the City collects approximately $817,000 per year in revenues at current fee amounts.

At full cost recovery, the same demand for these services would generate approximately $864,000.

NBS provided the full cost of service information and the framework for considering fees, while those closest to the fee-paying population, the City departments, considered appropriate cost recovery levels at or below that full cost.

The “Recommended Fee / Deposit Level” column in Appendix A.3 displays the City staff’s initially recommended fee amounts. Staff recommends most fees to recover 100% of the costs of providing services. Recommendations for less than full cost recovery fee amounts include the following fee items:
• Debris Box and Storage Container Permits for durations of up to two weeks • Wide-load Processing fees, which are regulated (capped) by the State and currently set at the maximum allowable fee amount
• Semi-Annual Permit Parking in City Lots for residents and businesses within the East San Carlos Parking Permit Program
These initial recommendations for adjusted fee amounts would decrease cost recovery for this Department by approximately $11,000 annually. Fees at recommended amounts would recover approximately 93% of the total costs of providing fee related services.

Department / Division
Estimated
Annual Current
Fee Revenue
Estimated Annual
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Revenue
Annual Cost
Recovery Surplus /
(Deficit)
Current Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Annual
Recommended
Fee Revenue
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Public Works Engineering $ 817,352 $ 863,928 $ (46,576) 95% $ 806,678 93%

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2051 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 16
Prepared by NBS
Section 5 – Community Development – Building Division Fees The Building Division promotes and ensures all new development in San Carlos be constructed in accordance with the highest standards of safety, and all existing structures maintained in a safe manner. The Building Division is also responsible for education, citywide code enforcement, floodplain management, and the Apartment Inspection Program.

Cost of Service Analysis
The following table categorizes the Building Division’s costs across both fee related and non-fee related services, as well as the resulting fully-burdened hourly rate applicable toward establishing the full cost of providing fee related services.

All subsequent cost of service calculations at the individual fee level would assume a fully burdened hourly rate of $206, and an annual cost recovery amount of approximately $4.9 million in costs from fees for service.

The cost category columns shown in the table above were adapted and summarized from Division staff interviews.

To assist the reader in understanding the underlying costs and assumptions used to calculate the fully burdened hourly rate, the following provides summary descriptions of each cost category:
• Public Counter / General Information Services - City staff respond to phone calls, walk-in customers, and informational requests that support both active permits and the overall development review process in general. Some portion of costs for provision of general public information and assistance reasonably apply toward recovery from fees. Building staff estimated that approximately 95% of these costs support approval of plans and permits, while the remaining costs should not be considered in the calculation of fees for services. The remaining 5% of the costs of providing public information services requires funding from sources other than fees.
• Development and Permitting Services – Work activities associated with an active building permit application. 100% of these costs are recoverable in Building user and regulatory fees for service. • Code Enforcement – Work activities in response to a complaint received by the Building Division related to violation of a prior condition of approval, City Ordinance or State law. Includes complaint investigation, follow up, and any associated abatement or enforcement actions. These costs are not recoverable in routine Cost Element
Public Counter /
General
Information
Services
Development and
Permitting
Services
Code
Enforcement
Total
Labor $ 132,000 $ 1,209,329 $ 11,816 $ 1,353,145
Recurring Non-Labor 4,351 2,039,866 209,590 2,253,806
Citywide Overhead 111,635 1,022,749 9,993 1,144,376
Division Administration 37,581 344,302 3,364 385,247
Department Total $ 285,567 $ 4,616,245 $ 234,762 $ 5,136,574 Cost Recovery Targeted from Fees 95% 100% 0% 95%
Amount Targeted for Consideration in Billings/Fees $ 271,289 $ 4,616,245 $ - $ 4,887,534 Amount Requiring Another Funding Source 14,278 - 234,762 249,040 Fully Burdened Hourly Rate $ 11 $ 195 $ - $ 206
Reference: Direct Hours Only 23,726

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2052 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 17
Prepared by NBS
plan check and permitting fees for service. The remaining costs identified require an alternate funding source such as the collection of fine and penalty revenue.

Significant analytical and policy decisions revolve around inclusion of categorized activity costs in the fully burdened hourly rate. The decision of whether to apply or exclude certain costs toward recovery in fees for service stems from the basic fee setting parameters offered by the California State Constitution and Statutes, which requires that any new fee levied or existing fee increased should not exceed the estimated amount required to provide the service for which the charge is levied.

Fee Establishment
Most of San Carlos’ fees for building plan review and inspection services are based on what is known in the industry as a “valuation-based” fee setting approach. For all new construction, tenant improvement, addition, and remodel projects, a project valuation multiplier establishes a construction value estimate for a given building project. The established construction value is assessed a fee amount based on a sliding scale fee table, first established by the Uniform Building Code almost 100 years ago. Mechanical, Plumbing and Electrical permits are assessed a fee amount based on a given project’s square footage, and/or an itemized list of permits required, such as for a water heater, gas line, or electrical service upgrade.

It should be noted that NBS did not evaluate the basis for establishing “project value” for any given project. This information is maintained and facilitated by the City. This cost of service analysis focuses on calibrating the fee table to reflect the estimated and reasonable cost of providing services as relates to the level of effort required for various “tiers” of project value sizes. The sliding scale fee table generally charges a higher fee for higher construction values, which reflects that projects with higher construction value are more complex and require higher degrees of regulatory efforts by City staff.

The primary focus of the Building Division’s analysis was to ensure calibration of fee amounts to appropriate cost recovery levels, as discussed in the Cost Recovery Evaluation section, below. Over the past several years, and for the next several years going into the future, the City is experiencing large scale developments. The City’s current fee table’s highest tier for any construction permit is $1 million, with a fee per $1,000 in construction valuation above $1 million. NBS recommended that the City modify its fee tables to segregate basic single-family residential construction permits from multi-family and non-residential construction permits, as these projects require a different type of regulatory effort. Additionally, NBS recommended the fee table for multi-family and non-residential construction permits add tiers for large scale developments, up to and beyond $50 million in construction valuation.

Cost Recovery Evaluation
The Building Division’s fees are charged as one-time flat fee amounts on a per project basis. As described in the Cost of Service Analysis section above, the annual cost recovery amount eligible for recovery from fees for service is approximately $4.9 million. However, for large scale development projects, the construction timeline for the project and regulatory effort required of City staff typically spans multiple years. This means that, for large projects, fee revenue collected in one year will typically not be “expended” within a one year timeframe from when the fee is collected. To account for this, the cost of service analysis compares the approximate actual fee revenue collected in one year, to the cost of service required to regulate and approve those projects, estimated to span between one and five years, depending on the size of the project.

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2053 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 18
Prepared by NBS
As shown in the following table, the City collects approximately $5.3 million in annual revenues at current fee amounts. At full cost recovery, the same demand for these services would require approximately $6.9 million to recover costs of providing services over a time of up to five years, depending on the size of the project. On average, the City’s Building fees currently recover approximately 77% of the cost of providing services.

NBS provided the full cost of service information and the framework for considering fees, while those closest to the fee-paying population, the City departments, considered appropriate cost recovery levels at or below that full cost.

The “Recommended Fee / Deposit Level” column in Appendix A.4 displays the City staff’s initially recommended flat fee or deposit amounts. Staff generally recommends most fees to recover 100% of the costs of providing services.

Recommendations for less than full cost recovery fee amounts include the following fee items:
• Single trade electrical permits for swimming pools, spas, hot tubs, temporary power poles, electrical main services, and installing or replacing of sub-panels and PV solar systems. • Single trade plumbing permits for water heater replacements • Single trade mechanical permits for new or replacement FAU or HVAC install • Annual residential apartment inspections
These initial recommendations for fee amounts would increase cost recovery for the Building Division by approximately $1.4 million. Fees at recommended amounts would recover approximately 98% of the total costs of providing fee related services.

Department / Division
Estimated
Annual Current
Fee Revenue
Estimated Annual
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Revenue
Annual Cost
Recovery Surplus /
(Deficit)
Current Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Annual
Recommended
Fee Revenue
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Building $ 5,344,680 $ 6,899,937 $ (1,555,257) 77% $ 6,764,819 98%

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2054 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 19
Prepared by NBS
Section 6 – Police Fees
The San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office provides all-inclusive enforcement services under contract for the City of San Carlos. The scope of this user and regulatory fee analysis for Police focused solely on fees for various administrative records and processing requests provided by this Department.

Cost of Service Analysis
The majority of services provided by the Police Department are not recoverable in user/regulatory fees for service.

To support the unique operational aspects of public safety, the NBS fee model derived fully burdened labor rates for sworn and non-sworn personnel.

Section 1, Cost of Service Analysis, of this report describes the types of expenditures and allocated costs considered in the development of these rates. All subsequent fee calculations for the Police Department will incorporate the fully burdened hourly rates of $317, and $121, respectively.

Fee Establishment
The list of fees shown in Appendix A.5 to this report did not incur many significant changes, deletions, or additions from the City’s existing fee schedule. Fees suggested for elimination include Processing First Chance (Starvista) and Good Conduct Letter.

Cost Recovery Evaluation
Appendix A.5 presents the results of the cost recovery analysis for the City’s Police Department. The “Cost of Service per Activity” column establishes the maximum adoptable fee amount for the corresponding service identified in the “Fee Name” list. Police Department fees currently recover approximately 35% of the cost of providing services. As shown in the following table, the City collects approximately $128,000 per year in revenues at current fee amounts.

At full cost recovery, the same demand for these services would generate approximately $365,000.

Cost Element Sworn Services
Non-Sworn
Services
Labor / Non-Labor 6,168,280 783,287
Citywide Overhead 686,047 87,210
Department Administration 3,977,656 505,641
Department Total $ 10,831,983 $ 1,376,138
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate $ 317 $ 121
Reference: Direct Hours Only 34,137 11,362
Department / Division
Estimated
Annual Current
Fee Revenue
Estimated Annual
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Revenue
Annual Cost
Recovery Surplus /
(Deficit)
Current Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Annual
Recommended
Fee Revenue
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Police $ 127,545 $ 365,273 $ (237,728) 35% $ 127,545 35%

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2055 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 20
Prepared by NBS
NBS provided the full cost of service information and the framework for considering fees, while those closest to the fee-paying population, the City departments, considered appropriate cost recovery levels at or below that full cost.

The “Recommended Fee” column in Appendix A.5 displays the City staff’s initially recommended fee amounts, which include no changes from existing fee levels. Fees would continue to recover approximately 35% of the total costs of providing fee related services.

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2056 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 21
Prepared by NBS
Section 7 – Parks and Recreation Department
The Parks and Recreation Department provides leadership and administrative support for delivery of recreational experiences, including:
• Athletics – The goal of Athletics is to offer athletic facilities and sports programs for City residents that foster sportsmanship, and encourage and promote health and wellness. • Adult Services – The goal of Adult Services is to provide City residents aged 50 and older a variety of programs and activities that promote health and wellness, social interaction and foster a sense of belonging.
• Youth Development - The goal of the Youth Development program is to provide a variety of activities and events that offer City youth ages 10 to 17 opportunities for social and leadership skill development within a safe and inclusive environment.
• Personal and Family Development - The goal of the Personal and Family Development is to provide a variety of programs and activities for City residents that offer a positive recreational and social experience. • Facility Rentals: Department staff facilitate reservation and rental of various City-owned recreation facilities and amenities such as the Adult Community Center, Youth Center, Library Community Room, Picnic Sites, Bocce Ball Courts, Sports Fields (and lights), Tennis Courts, etc. • Special Community Events - The goal of the Special Community Events program is to provide special events for residents and visitors that reflect the community’s unique character, encourage community-wide involvement, and support local businesses.

The expenses of administering, operating, and maintaining the City’s parks and recreation facilities are primarily funded by resources from the General Fund. However, fees collected from various Recreation programs, including classes, contracts, and specific uses of public spaces can represent a significant source of funding to help cover costs and sustain – if not improve – the level of service provided by the City.

Special Considerations Regarding Recreation Fees
Per Article XIIIC, Section 1, of the California Constitution, recreation fees typically fall under one of these two exceptions the definition of “tax”:

Exception No. 2: Section 1 (e)(2) Exception for Fees for Services and Products Provided – this category includes fees imposed for a service, like lessons, transportation, child care, etc. The fee for services exception requires that such fees be limited to “the estimated costs to the local government of providing the service.” Exception No. 4: Section 1 (e)(4) exception for fees for use of government property – this category includes fees imposed for services such as admission to parks, rental of government property (recreational equipment) and for rental/use of fields and meeting rooms. The language of this exception does not include the “reasonable costs” limitation. However, a general law city is subject to the constraint on the amount of a fee charged under either category imposed by Government Code section 50402.

Unlike other areas of the Study, this Department’s cost of service analysis and cost recovery evaluation for most classes, programs, and recreational services is conducted at the program level (as opposed to the individual fee level) and includes an annual estimated cost recovery evaluation of each recreational program area managed by

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2057 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 22
Prepared by NBS
the Department. This level of analysis assists the City in understanding cost recovery performance and in a developing cost recovery policy, rather than an analysis at the individual fee level. This is appropriate given the requirements of Article XIIIC as pertains to recreation fees and facility rentals, as well as for the seasonal nature of many of the program offerings which change on a regular basis.

Cost of Service Analysis
While the general goal of the Study was to provide program level analysis of total estimated costs and revenues for each major Parks and Recreation program, individual fee amounts are also calculated for various types of permitting and processing requests, such as, special event permits, sports tournaments, class registration and cancellation fees.

The calculated fully burdened hourly rate for this Department is $86 per hour, or $177 per hour for full-time staff, and $30 for part-time staff. All subsequent individual fee calculations will incorporate the hourly rates as shown.

Fee Establishment
Due to the unique nature of this Department’s services, the study performed by NBS segregated fees into three main categories: Recreation Classes and Programs, Facility Rentals, and Miscellaneous Service Fees.

For Recreation Classes, a provision in the City’s Master Fee Schedule continues to allow the Department to set fees for seasonal programs based on the cost of the individual program, never to exceed the full cost of the program. Please refer to the recommended Master Fee Schedule document for the proposed language.

Recreation fees are typically displayed in a seasonal brochure or catalog of classes and programs. In most municipalities, those fees are not contained in a master fee schedule; however, adopting language referencing them – such as the text proposed here – provides a measure of Council oversight and grants specific authority to the Department to manage the fees for these programs based on changing conditions (e.g., costs, demand, etc.).

For Facility Rentals and Miscellaneous Fees, this Study includes a basic survey of comparable jurisdictions for facility rentals and permitting services (Appendix B.5), which may assist the agency in establishing proof of meaningful public market options and pricing for similar services. We also recommend that the City continue to document the private or public-private facility rental and recreational programming options available to consumers.

For Sports Field Use fees, NBS assisted the City with a peer review of updated cost of service calculations. The City’s staff report can be referenced for a full explanation of outcomes and recommended fee amounts for consideration.

Cost Element Full-Time Part-Time TOTAL
Labor $ 1,560,900 $ 431,500 $ 1,992,400
Recurring Non-Labor 36,978 10,222 47,200
Citywide Overhead 1,495,946 413,544 1,909,490
Department Total $ 3,093,824 $ 855,266 $ 3,949,090
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate $ 177 $ 30 $ 86
Reference: Direct Hours Only 17,456 28,628 46,084

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2058 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 23
Prepared by NBS
Cost Recovery Evaluation
The table shown below indicates that at current fee levels, Recreation classes, programs, and facility rentals do not recover their total Citywide costs of providing services. This is a typical outcome of most Recreation cost of services studies and is useful information in establishing future class and program fees for the Department.

The total estimated cost of the Parks and Recreation Department is approximately $6 million per year. Section 1, Methods of Analysis, provides further definition and discussion of each cost component shown above. The Department recovers approximately 27% of the costs of providing services, on average. Due to the unique nature of Recreation services, the Study performed by NBS provides an annual cost and revenue analysis at the program level. This provides City staff and City Council with current cost recovery data and allows the City to establish and/or update their cost recovery policy for recreation programs, and generate revised fee amounts.

Appendix A.6 presents the results of the detailed cost recovery analysis for the Department’s permitting and processing requests. The “Cost of Service per Activity Column” establishes the maximum at which a fee could be charged for the corresponding service identified in the “Fee Name” list.

As shown, the City collects approximately $109,000 per year in revenues at current fee amounts. At full cost recovery, the same demand for these services would generate approximately $162,000. The “Recommended Fee” column in Appendix A.6 displays the City staff’s initially recommended fee amounts. Recommendations include small increases for most fees, a decrease for the refund processing fee, and continued waiver of fees for Block Party Permits.

These initial recommendations for adjusted fee amounts increase cost recovery for these services by approximately $9,000 annually. Fees would adjust to recover approximately 73% of the total costs of providing fee related services.

Cost Element Athletics Adult Services
Youth
Development
Personal and
Family
Development
Facility Rentals
(ACC, Youth,
Picnic, Tennis,
Park Fitness,
etc.)
Special
Community
Events
Total
Labor $ 206,759 $ 622,344 $ 380,257 $ 220,051 $ 106,869 $ 456,120 $ 1,992,400 Recurring Non-Labor 305,000 259,600 187,500 455,800 - 507,000 1,714,900 Citywide Overhead 234,093 515,760 416,518 325,223 350,395 417,897 2,259,885 Department Total $ 745,852 $ 1,397,704 $ 984,275 $ 1,001,074 $ 457,264 $ 1,381,017 $ 5,967,185 Revenue FY 18-19 $ 419,886 $ 248,086 $ 239,001 $ 629,198 $ 24,620 $ 23,952 $ 1,584,743 Program Cost Recovery % 56% 18% 24% 63% 5% 2% 27%
Cost Allocation to Each Function / Activity
Department / Division
Estimated
Annual Current
Fee Revenue
Estimated Annual
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Revenue
Annual Cost
Recovery Surplus /
(Deficit)
Current Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Annual
Recommended
Fee Revenue
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Recreation (permits/processing) $ 108,604 $ 161,481 $ (52,877) 67% $ 117,892 73%

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2059 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 24
Prepared by NBS
Section 8 – General Plan Surcharge
The City of San Carlos updates its General Plan on a routine basis, and staff in the Advance and Current Planning Divisions facilitate the necessary changes to policies and local ordinances stemming from the General Plan’s guidance. The General Plan helps to guide the growth of the community in a consistent manner. Government Code 66014 (b) allows local agencies to, “…include the costs reasonably necessary to prepare and revise the plans and policies that a local agency is required to adopt before it can make any necessary findings and determinations”.

This section of the Government Code supports inclusion of general plan update and implementation costs in fees for service.

Cost of Service Analysis
As shown in the table below, the City would need to collect approximately $1.3 million per year in costs for the purpose of updating and implementing the General Plan.

This is based on the City’s estimate of $1.8 million in contract costs required to update the General Plan and the average annual staff support costs for implementation.

Fee Establishment
The City currently collects a General Plan Surcharge equal to 0.14% of a project’s construction value. 0.3% of the fee is allocated for staff support and 0.11% of the fee is allocated for contract services support. This Surcharge applies only to projects including new construction and additions to existing square footage. Revenue from the contract services support portion of the fee is allocated to a separate account and tracked for application of funds toward projects that update the General Plan on a periodic basis.

When considering revisions to the surcharge amount for recovery of General Plan costs, the Department and Council should agree upon a desired cost recovery target for this program, to be captured on top of Building permit fees as a percentage of project valuation. The following tables provide options for surcharge amounts based on varied cost recovery targets. The table on the left considers the staff support component of the surcharge, and the table on the right considers the contract services component of the surcharge.

Cost Total Cost
Amortization
Period (Yrs) Annual Cost
Advance Planning Staff Support $ 835,700 1 $ 835,700
Current Planning Staff Support 306,876 1 306,876
Housing Element Update 500,000 8 62,500
General Plan Comprehensive Update 1,300,000 10 130,000
Adjustment - Fund Balance (172,626) 10 (17,263)
Total $ 2,769,950 $ 1,317,813
Staff Support Cost
Recovery Target
Annual Costs Recovered
@ Target
Surcharge Based on
Applicable Building
Project Valuation
Contract Services Cost
Recovery Target
Annual Costs Recovered
@ Target
Surcharge Based on
Applicable Building
Project Valuation
100% $ 1,142,576 2.00% 100% $ 175,237 0.31%
75% $ 856,932 1.50% 75% $ 131,428 0.23%
50% $ 571,288 1.00% 50% $ 87,619 0.15%
25% $ 285,644 0.50% 25% $ 43,809 0.08%

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2060 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 25
Prepared by NBS
Each jurisdiction’s policy makers must decide to what degree new development impacts the revision and maintenance efforts to their Plan. For jurisdictions with large amounts of undeveloped land available, the impact is typically considered higher than for jurisdictions that are closer to “build-out” of available land resources. This surcharge should apply to projects with the largest relative impact on the maintenance, update, and use of the City’s General Plan, namely new construction and additions to existing square footage. The recent four-year average of building valuations for new construction and additions for San Carlos is $57.1 million.

Cost Recovery Evaluation
The City had some implementation issues with this fee over the past several years and as a result collected approximately $87,000, on average, for General Plan maintenance and update purposes. As shown, current revenues recover approximately 7% of the annual costs of providing services.

Upon reviewing this information and options for revising the surcharge, City staff recommends a 50% annual cost recovery target for City Council’s consideration, which is consistent with direction from prior fee studies. The surcharge amount that corresponds to a 50% cost recovery target is a total surcharge of 1.15% applicable to new construction and addition related building permit projects. 1.0% of the fee is allocated for staff support and 0.15% of the fee is allocated for contract services support. If adopted, the revised fee would generate approximately $659,000 per year. The remaining unfunded amount would be subsidized by other City revenue sources such as the general fund for the general community benefit received from the Plan, as well as for the use of the Plan by other departments such as public safety and utilities.

Department / Division
Estimated
Annual Current
Fee Revenue
Estimated Annual
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Revenue
Annual Cost
Recovery Surplus /
(Deficit)
Current Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Annual
Recommended
Fee Revenue
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
GP Maintenance Surcharge $ 86,760 $ 1,317,813 $ (1,231,053) 7% $ 658,906 50%

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2061 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 26
Prepared by NBS
Section 9 – Technology Surcharge
Routine maintenance and investment into the City’s permitting software and systems are key in supporting efficient development approval and processing services. The basic premise behind implementation of a Technology Surcharge is that a separate fund is created and self-sustaining in meeting the maintenance and capital replacement needs of development permitting software.

Cost of Service Analysis
As shown in the table below, the City’s cost estimate for the permitting system’s replacement is approximately $635,000 every seven years, and there is currently $384,000 available in a fund for technology replacement projects. The current average annual funding requirements for the system’s replacement is approximately $36,000 per year.

Fee Establishment
The City currently collects a Technology Surcharge equal to 1.8% of each Planning and Building division fee charged, as well as selected Public Works Department fees for improvement and grading projects. Revenue from this fee is allocated to a separate account and tracked for application of funds toward update and maintenance the City’s permitting software. The main users of the permitting system include the Planning and Building divisions of Community Development Department, and the Public Works Department. The total annual projected revenue from the City’s recommended fee amounts for Planning, Building and Public Works totals approximately $8.9 million.

The following table calculates a Technology Surcharge based on the ratio of annual funding needs for the permitting system, and annual projected recommended fee revenue:

To recover 100% of the costs of replacing the City’s permitting system, a 0.4% surcharge would be added to each Planning, Public Works (Engineering), and Building fee.

Cost Total Cost
Amortization
Period (Yrs) Annual Cost
Replacement cost permit software $ 500,000 7 $ 71,429
Trakit One Time Upgrade 60,000 7 8,571
Cashier System 75,000 7 10,714
Subtotal 635,000 90,714
Adjustment - Fund Balance (384,014) 7 (54,859)
Total $ 250,986 $ 35,855
Cost Recovery
Target
Annual Costs
Recovered @
Target
Surcharge
Amount
100% $ 35,855 0.4%

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2062 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 27
Prepared by NBS
Cost Recovery Evaluation
The City currently collects approximately $122,000 per year from their existing Technology Surcharge fee. At full cost recovery, the Surcharge would generate approximately $36,000.

Staff recommends charging the Technology Surcharge at 100% cost recovery, which would reduce revenue by approximately $86,000 per year. Due to decreases in expected technology costs, City staff recommends reducing this fee accordingly.

Department / Division
Estimated
Annual Current
Fee Revenue
Estimated Annual
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Revenue
Annual Cost
Recovery Surplus /
(Deficit)
Current Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Annual
Recommended
Fee Revenue
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Technology Surcharge $ 121,870 $ 35,855 $ 86,015 340% $ 35,855 100%

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2063 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) User Fee Study – City of San Carlos 28
Prepared by NBS
Section 10 – Conclusion
Based on the results of this Study, the proposed Master Fee Schedule isformatted for Council’s review and adoption in the City’s Staff Report. As discussed throughout this report, the proposed fee schedule includes fee increases intended to greatly improve the City’s recovery of costs incurred to provide individual services, as well as to adjust fees downward where fees charge exceed the average costs incurred.

Predicting the amount to which any adopted fee increases will affect Department revenues is difficult to quantify.

For the near-term, the City should not count on increased revenues to meet any specific expenditure plan.

Experience with these fee increases should be gained first before revenue projections are revised. However, unless there is some significant, long-term change in activity levels at the City, proposed fee amendments should – over time – enhance the City’s revenue capabilities, providing it the ability to stretch other resources further for the benefit of the public at large.

The City’s Master Fee Schedule should become a living document and be handled with care. A fundamental purpose of the fee schedule is to provide clarity and transparency to the public and to staff regarding fees imposed by the City. Once adopted by the Council, the fee schedule is the final word on the amount and manner in which fees should be imposed by the departments. Old fee schedules should be superseded by the new master document. If the master document is found to be missing fees, those fees need eventually to be added to the master schedule and should not continue to exist outside the consolidated, master framework.

The City should consider adjusting these user fees and regulatory fees on an annual basis to keep pace at least with cost inflation. For all fees and charges, a Consumer Price Index adjustment could be applied to the new fee schedule. Conducting a comprehensive user fee Study is not an annual requirement; it becomes worthwhile only over time as significant shifts in organization, local practices, legislative values, or legal requirements change. In NBS’ experience, a comprehensive analysis such as this should be performed every five years. It should be noted that when an automatic adjustment is applied annually, the City is free to use its discretion in applying the adjustment; not all fees need to be adjusted, especially when there are good policy reasons for an alternate course.

The full cost of service is the City’s only limit in setting its fees.

As a final note in this Study, it is worth acknowledging the path that fees in general have taken in California. The public demands ever more precise and equitable accounting of the basis for governmental fees and a greater say in when and how they are imposed. It is inevitable in the not too distant future that user fees and regulatory fees will demand an even greater level of analysis and supporting data to meet the public’s evolving expectations.

Technology systems will play an increased and significant role in an agency’s ability to accomplish this. Continuous improvement and refinement of time tracking abilities will greatly enhance the City’s ability to set fees for service and identify unfunded activities in years to come.

Disclaimer: In preparing this report and the opinions and recommendations included herein, NBS has relied on a number of principal assumptions and considerations with regard to financial matters, conditions and events that may occur in the future. This information and assumptions, including the City’s budgets, time estimate data, and workload information from City staff, were provided by sources we believe to be reliable; however, NBS has not independently verified such information and assumptions. While we believe NBS’ use of such information and assumptions is reasonable for the purpose of this report, some assumptions will invariably not materialize as stated herein and may vary significantly due to unanticipated events and circumstances. Therefore, the actual results can be expected to vary from those projected to the extent that actual future conditions differ from those assumed by us or provided to us by others.

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2064 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) Prepared by NBS for the City of San Carlos
APPENDIX A.1
Cost of Service Analysis – Administrative Departments

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2065 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Finance Division - User Fee Study FY 2022-2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.1 1 Returned Check [1]
First Item per first check Fees set by
statute
$ 25 % $ 25 % 13 $ 325 $ 400 $ 325
Each Additional Item
per
subsequent
check
Fees set by
statute
$ 35 % $ 35 % - $ - $ - $ -
2 For services requested of City Staff for which no fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the Department
Director shall determine the appropriate fee based on
the following hourly rates for staff time:

Finance Division Staff (Per Hour) Per Hour 1.00 $ 193 $ 193 $ 186 96% $ 193 100% - $ - $ - $ - TOTAL 325 400 325
[Notes]
[1]
Fee set by California Civil Code Ch. 522 Section 1719. Additional charges may apply if not paid within 30 days of receipt of written demand for payment letter
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee No. Fee Name
Notes
Estimated
Average
Labor Time
Per Activity
(hours)
FBHR
Cost of
Service Per
Activity
Current Fee /
Deposit
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommende
d Fee
Fee Unit /
Type
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Finance COS, Page 1 of 2

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2066 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
City Clerk - User Fee Study FY 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.1 1 Copy Charges: n/a $ - $ - $0.10/page % $.10/page % - $ - $ - $ - 2 Copy Charges - CD n/a $ - $ - $0.50/CD % $0.50/CD % - $ - $ - $ - 3 Copies of City Subdivision Ordinances, Zoning Ordinances, CAFR, Municipal Code Book, Standard Bid Specifications, Standard Detail, Work Program
n/a n/a $ - $ -
Free/website, or
Copy Charge %
Free/website, or
Copy Charge % - $ - $ - $ -
4 Document Certification base fee 0.05 $ 193 $ 10 Fee Waived % Fee Waived % 10 $ - $ 97 $ - 5 Agenda or Minutes Subscription n/a n/a $ - $ -
Free/website, or
Copy Charge %
Free/website, or
Copy Charge % - $ - $ - $ -
6 Research per hour 1.00 $ 193 $ 193 $ 186 96% $ 193 100% $ - $ - $ - 7 For services requested of City Staff for which no fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the Department Director shall determine the appropriate fee based on the following hourly rates for staff time:

City Clerk Department Staff (Per Hour) per hour 1.00 $ 193 $ 193 $ 186 96% $ 193 100% $ - $ - $ - TOTAL - 97 -
Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Recovery
Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended
Fee
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Clerk COS, Page 2 of 2

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2067 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) Prepared by NBS for the City of San Carlos
APPENDIX A.2
Cost of Service Analysis – Community Development – Planning Division

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2068 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Planning Department - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.2 1 Appeal, Planning Commission
a Fee Each 20.00 $ 300 $ 5,991 $1,808 30% $ 2,000 33% 3 $ 5,424 $ 17,974 $ 6,000 2 Appeal, City Council
a Fee Each 20.00 $ 300 $ 5,991 $1,608 27% $ 2,000 33% 2 $ 3,216 $ 11,983 $ 4,000 3 Attorney's Fees
Support to Planning projects that require
Deposit
Actual Cost 1.00 $412/hr
Actual cost / +
$2,500 minimum
deposit.

Support to projects on a "fixed"/"flat" fee basis Actual Cost 1.00 $286/hr Actual Cost - 2 Hr.

Minimum
4 Below Market Rate (BMR), Housing Plan Each 7.00 $ 300 $ 2,097 $1,475 70% $ 2,097 100% $ - $ - $ - 5 Below Market Rate (BMR), Builder Alternative Each 7.00 $ 300 $ 2,097 $500 Initial Deposit % $ 2,097 100% $ - $ - $ -
6 Below Market Rate (BMR), Housing Agreement Each 9.00 $ 300 $ 2,696 $500 Initial Deposit % $ 2,696 100% $ - $ - $ -
7 CEQA
a Document Filing
Fee Each 1.00 $ 300 $ 300 $210 70% $ 300 100% $ - $ - $ - b Categorical Exemption
City Processing Fee Each 2.00 $ 300 $ 599 $422 70% $ 599 100% $ - $ - $ - Department of Fish and Game / County
Recording Fees
Deposit /
Actual Cost n/a n/a $ -
Actual Cost of
DFG / County
Fees
%
Actual Cost of DFG
/ County Fees % $ - $ - $ -
c
Initial Study/Negative Declaration/Mitigated
Negative/EIR
City Processing Fee
Deposit /
Actual Cost n/a $ 300 $ -
Actual Cost with
$3,000 deposit %
Actual Cost with
$3,000 deposit % $ - $ - $ -
Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommende
d Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Fee No.

Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity
(hours)
Fee Name FBHR
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommende
d Fee
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Planning COS, Page 1 of 9

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2069 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Planning Department - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.2 Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommende
d Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Fee No.

Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity
(hours)
Fee Name FBHR
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommende
d Fee
Consultant Review Deposit n/a n/a $ -
Actual Cost with
$5,000 deposit %
Actual Cost with
$5,000 deposit % $ - $ - $ -
d Mitigation Monitoring
Deposit /
Actual Cost n/a $ 300 $ -
Actual Cost with
$1,000 deposit %
Actual Cost with
$1,000 deposit % $ - $ - $ -
new Cell Tower Application [3]
6409 Application Each 4.00 $ 300 $ 1,198 new % $ 1,198 100% $ - $ - $ - Other Applications Actual Actual Cost /
T&M Actual Cost / T&M
8 Creek Exception
City Processing Fee Each 15.00 $ 300 $ 4,493 $2,529 56% $ 4,493 100% $ - $ - $ - Consultant Review Actual
Actual Cost of
Consultant
Study
Actual Cost of
Consultant Study
9 Design Review - Single Family
a Single Family, New Home (RDRC)
Fee Each 35.00 $ 300 $ 10,485 $6,320 60% $ 10,485 100% 16 $ 101,120 $ 167,757 $ 167,757 b Single Family, First Floor Addition (RDRC)
Fee Each 25.00 $ 300 $ 7,489 $4,214 56% $ 7,489 100% 4 $ 16,856 $ 29,957 $ 29,957 c Single Family, Second Floor Addition (RDRC)
Fee Each 35.00 $ 300 $ 10,485 $6,320 60% $ 10,485 100% 9 $ 56,880 $ 94,363 $ 94,363 d Single Family, First Floor Addition (Staff)
Fee Each 10.00 $ 300 $ 2,996 $1,264 42% $ 2,996 100% 43 $ 54,352 $ 128,814 $ 128,814 e Single Family, Second Floor Addition (Staff)
Fee Each 15.00 $ 300 $ 4,493 $2,107 47% $ 4,493 100% $ - $ - $ -

10.1 Design Review (MR, M/U, Comm, ND) - Staff
Review/Approval
a New Building
Fee Each 60.00 $ 300 $ 17,974 $8,427 47% $ 17,974 100% 7 $ 58,989 $ 125,818 $ 125,818 NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Planning COS, Page 2 of 9

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2070 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Planning Department - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.2 Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommende
d Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Fee No.

Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity
(hours)
Fee Name FBHR
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommende
d Fee
b Major Alteration
Fee Each 42.00 $ 300 $ 12,582 $5,056 40% $ 12,582 100% $ - $ - $ - c Minor Alteration
Fee Each 32.00 $ 300 $ 9,586 $3,371 35% $ 9,586 100% $ - $ - $ -

10.2 Design Review (MR, M/U, Comm, ND) - Planning
Commission Review/Approval
a New Building (Planning Commission)
Fee Each 71.00 $ 300 $ 21,269 $8,427 40% $ 21,269 100% $ - $ - $ - b Major Alteration (Planning Commission)
Fee Each 53.00 $ 300 $ 15,877 $5,056 32% $ 15,877 100% $ - $ - $ - c Minor Alteration (Planning Commission)
Fee Each 43.00 $ 300 $ 12,881 $3,371 26% $ 12,881 100% 2 $ 6,742 $ 25,763 $ 25,763 11 Design Review (Other)
a A - Frames
Fee Each 0.50 $ 300 $ 150 $105 70% $ 150 100% $ - $ - $ - b Accessory Structures (Includes large decks)
Fee Each 6.00 $ 300 $ 1,797 $1,264 70% $ 1,797 100% $ - $ - $ - c Architectural Peer Review
Fee
Deposit /
Actual Cost
n/a $ 300 $ -
$3,000 Initial
Deposit %
$3,000 Initial
Deposit % $ - $ - $ -
d Mills Acts Designated Projects
City Processing Fee Each 6.00 $ 300 $ 1,797 $603 34% $ 1,797 100% 5 $ 3,015 $ 8,987 $ 8,987 Historic Consultant Review Deposit /
Actual Cost
[4] $5,000 Initial
Deposit
$5,000 Initial
Deposit
e
Miscellaneous (awnings, trash, replacement
materials, site plan review, landscape, facade)
Fee Each 2.00 $ 300 $ 599 $422 70% $ 599 100% $ - $ - $ - f Outdoor Uses Dining & Retail Sales
Fee Each 6.00 $ 300 $ 1,797 $948 53% $ 1,797 100% 8 $ 7,584 $ 14,379 $ 14,379 g Sign Program
Fee Each 20.00 $ 300 $ 5,991 $2,107 35% $ 5,991 100% 37 $ 77,959 $ 221,679 $ 221,679 NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Planning COS, Page 3 of 9

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2071 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Planning Department - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.2 Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommende
d Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Fee No.

Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity
(hours)
Fee Name FBHR
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommende
d Fee
h Signs - (Planning Commission)
Fee Each 15.00 $ 300 $ 4,493 $2,107 47% $ 4,493 100% 44 $ 92,708 $ 197,714 $ 197,714 i Signs (Staff)
Fee Each 4.00 $ 300 $ 1,198 $422 35% $ 1,198 100% - $ - $ - $ - j Temporary Banner
Fee Each 1.00 $ 300 $ 300 $210 70% $ 300 100% - $ - $ - $ - new Minor Alterations
Fee Each 4.00 $ 300 $ 1,198 new % $ 1,198 100% 2 $ - $ 2,397 $ 2,397 12 Document Imaging
Per 1/2 Hour
- 1/2 Hour
Minimum

0.50 $ 300 $ 150 $105 70% $ 150 100% $ - $ - $ -
13 Domestic Fowl and Non-Household Pets
a Fee Each 6.00 $ 300 $ 1,797 $301 17% $ 1,797 100% $ - $ - $ - new Excessive Noise Compliance Permit 2.00 $ 300 $ 599 new % $ 599 100% $ - $ - $ - 15 Final Inspection, Single-Family
a Fee Each 2.00 $ 300 $ 599 $422 70% $ 599 100% $ - $ - $ - 16 Final Inspection, Other
Fee Each 4.00 $ 300 $ 1,198 $842 70% $ 1,198 100% $ - $ - $ - 17 General Plan Amendment
Fee Each 40.00 $ 300 $ 11,983 $8,427 70% $ 11,983 100% $ - $ - $ - 18 Grading and Dirt Haul Certificate
Fee Each 10.00 $ 300 $ 2,996 $2,107 70% $ 2,996 100% - $ - $ - $ - NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Planning COS, Page 4 of 9

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2072 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Planning Department - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.2 Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommende
d Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Fee No.

Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity
(hours)
Fee Name FBHR
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommende
d Fee
19 Historic Preservation
a City Processing Fee Each 2.00 $ 300 $ 599 $210 35% $ 599 100% $ - $ - $ - b Historic Assessment - Consultant Review Actual n/a Actual Cost with $2,000 deposit
Actual Cost with
$2,000 deposit $ - $ - $ -
c Mills Act Contract
Fee Each 15.00 $ 300 $ 4,493 $1,005 22% $ 4,493 100% $ - $ - $ - 20 Interdepartmental Plan Review
a Building
See Building Fee
Schedule for Per
Review Charge
See Building Fee
Schedule for Per
Review Charge
b Engineering
See Engineering
Fee Schedule
and / or Hourly
Rates Apply
See Engineering
Fee Schedule and /
or Hourly Rates
Apply
c Fire See Fire Fee
Schedule
See Fire Fee
Schedule
d Police
See Police Fee
Schedule and/or
Hourly Rates
Apply
See Police Fee
Schedule and/or
Hourly Rates
Apply
e Economic Development - Housing Planning Hourly
Rate Applies
Planning Hourly
Rate Applies
21 Other City Commission Review
Fee Each 4.00 $ 300 $ 1,198 $842 70% $ 1,198 100% $ - $ - $ - 22 Plan Check for Building Permits
a
Major (New Multi-Family, Mixed-Use,
Commercial, Industrial) Each 12.00 $ 300 $ 3,595 $2,529 70% $ 3,595 100% $ - $ - $ - b
Moderate (New Single-Family, Commercial
additions/alterations) Each 5.00 $ 300 $ 1,498 $1,054 70% $ 1,498 100% $ - $ - $ - NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Planning COS, Page 5 of 9

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2073 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Planning Department - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.2 Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommende
d Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Fee No.

Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity
(hours)
Fee Name FBHR
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommende
d Fee
c
Minor (Single-Family Additions, Accessory
Dwelling Units) Each 3.00 $ 300 $ 899 $210 23% $ 899 100% 43 $ 9,030 $ 38,644 $ 38,644 new
Accessory Dwelling Units (not a part of the
previous approval) 3.00 $ 300 $ 899 new % $ 899 100% $ - $ - $ - 23 Pre-Application Development Review
new General/Initial Questions Per Project 2.00 $ 300 $ 599 new % No Charge % - $ - $ - $ - a Major Per Project [2] 30.00 $ 300 $ 8,987 $4,741 53% $ 8,987 100% - $ - $ - $ - b Minor Per Project [1] 20.00 $ 300 $ 5,991 $2,107 35% $ 5,991 100% 4 $ 8,428 $ 23,965 $ 23,965 24 Protected Tree Removal Permit/Pruning Permit
a City Processing Fee
Fee Each 2.00 $ 300 $ 599 $210 35% $ 300 50% 131 $ 27,510 $ 78,486 $ 39,243 b Arborist
Fee Actual n/a $ 300 $ -
$250 Initial
Deposit %
$500 Initial
Deposit % $ - $ - $ -
c Investigative Report
Fee Each n/a $ 300 $ -
$500 Initial
Deposit %
$500 Initial
Deposit % $ - $ - $ -
d
Illegal Tree Removal (additional arborist report
fees apply)
Civil Penalty Penalty n/a
Double the
Application Fee,
plus assessed
penalties per
Muni Code
Double the
Application Fee,
plus assessed
penalties per Muni
Code
new Protected Tree Notice
Fee Each 1.00 $ 300 $ 300 new % $ 150 50% $ - $ - $ -
new Tree Replanting Fee per tree new
See Public Works
fee schedule
25 Public Notice Fee
City Processing Fee Per Hearing 2.00 $ 300 $ 599 $422 70% $ 599 100% $ - $ - $ - 26 Restrictive Covenants
Fee Each 2.00 $ 300 $ 599 $422 70% $ 599 100% $ - $ - $ - NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Planning COS, Page 6 of 9

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2074 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Planning Department - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.2 Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommende
d Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Fee No.

Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity
(hours)
Fee Name FBHR
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommende
d Fee
27 San Mateo County Recording Fees
City Processing Fee Each 2.00 $ 300 $ 599 $422 70% $ 599 100% $ - $ - $ - County Fee Each n/a Per County fee
schedule
Per County fee
schedule $ - $ - $ -
28 Subdivisions
a Subdivision, Major (5 or more lots)
Fee Each 80.00 $ 300 $ 23,965 $16,854 70% $ 23,965 100% 4 $ 67,416 $ 95,861 $ 95,861 b
Subdivision, Minor (up to 4 lots) or for
Condominium Maps
Fee Each 12.00 $ 300 $ 3,595 $2,529 70% $ 3,595 100% $ - $ - $ - c Lot Line Adjustment, Parcel Mergers
Fee Each 4.00 $ 300 $ 1,198 $842 70% $ 1,198 100% 2 $ 1,684 $ 2,397 $ 2,397 d Conditional Exceptions
Fee Each 20.00 $ 300 $ 5,991 $4,214 70% $ 5,991 100% $ - $ - $ - e Lot Verification
Fee Each [5] 2.00 $ 300 $ 599 $422 70% $ 599 100% $ - $ - $ - f Map Extension
Fee Each 4.00 $ 300 $ 1,198 $842 70% $ 1,198 100% $ - $ - $ - 29 Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
Plan
a City Staff Review Each 14.00 $ 300 $ 4,194 $2,949 70% $ 4,194 100% $ - $ - $ - b Consultant Review Actual n/a $700 Initial
Deposit
$700 Initial
Deposit
30 Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
Review
a Annual Each 5.00 $ 300 $ 1,498 $500 Initial
Deposit %
$500 Initial
Deposit % $ - $ - $ -
b 5-Year Each 10.00 $ 300 $ 2,996 $500 Initial
Deposit %
$500 Initial
Deposit % $ - $ - $ -
c Consultant Review Actual n/a $700 Initial
Deposit
$700 Initial
Deposit
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Planning COS, Page 7 of 9

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2075 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Planning Department - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.2 Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommende
d Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Fee No.

Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity
(hours)
Fee Name FBHR
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommende
d Fee
31 Use Permits
a Conditional Use Permit- Planning Commission
Fee Each 30.00 $ 300 $ 8,987 $5,268 59% $ 8,987 100% 5 $ 26,340 $ 44,935 $ 44,935 b Minor Use Permit - Zoning Administrator
Fee Each 15.00 $ 300 $ 4,493 $2,529 56% $ 4,493 100% - $ - $ - $ - c Use Permits (Development Standards)
Fee Each 12.00 $ 300 $ 3,595 $2,529 70% $ 3,595 100% $ - $ - $ - d Temporary
Fee Each 8.00 $ 300 $ 2,397 $842 35% $ 2,397 100% 4 $ 3,368 $ 9,586 $ 9,586 e Amendment
Fee Each 12.00 $ 300 $ 3,595 $2,107 59% $ 3,595 100% $ - $ - $ - 32 Variance
Fee Each 40.00 $ 300 $ 11,983 $8,427 70% $ 11,983 100% - $ - $ - $ - 33 Waivers
Fee Each 8.00 $ 300 $ 2,397 $842 35% $ 1,198 50% $ - $ - $ - 34 Zoning Administrator Determination
Fee Each 8.00 $ 300 $ 2,397 $1,685 70% $ 2,397 100% $ - $ - $ - 35 Zoning Ordinance Amendment
a Major Rezone/PD/Map and Text
Fee Each 80.00 $ 300 $ 23,965 $16,854 70% $ 23,965 100% 2 $ 33,708 $ 47,931 $ 47,931 b Moderate Rezone/PD/Map and Text
Fee Each 40.00 $ 300 $ 11,983 $8,427 70% $ 11,983 100% $ - $ - $ - c Minor Rezone/PD/Map and Text
Fee Each 20.00 $ 300 $ 5,991 $4,214 70% $ 5,991 100% 1 $ 4,214 $ 5,991 $ 5,991 36 Minor staff review
a ABC/DMV Zoning Affidavit Review
Fee Each 2.00 $ 300 $ 599 $210 35% $ 599 100% 12 $ 2,520 $ 7,190 $ 7,190 b Business Registration
Fee Each 1.00 $ 300 $ 300 $101 34% $ 101 34% 258 $ 26,058 $ 77,288 $ 26,058 c Home Occupations
Fee Each 1.00 $ 300 $ 300 $101 34% $ 101 34% $ - $ - $ - NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Planning COS, Page 8 of 9

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2076 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Planning Department - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.2 Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommende
d Cost
Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Fee No.

Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity
(hours)
Fee Name FBHR
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Recovery Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommende
d Fee
d Home Occupation Revocation Hearing
Fee Each 8.00 $ 300 $ 2,397 $1,685 70% $ 2,397 100% $ - $ - $ - e Massage
Fee Each 3.00 $ 300 $ 899 $632 70% $ 899 100% $ - $ - $ - f Other Zoning Affidavit Review
Fee Each 4.00 $ 300 $ 1,198 $842 70% $ 1,198 100% $ - $ - $ - g Parking Calculation
Fee Each 3.00 $ 300 $ 899 $632 70% $ 899 100% $ - $ - $ - h Search and Determination
Fee Each [6] 2.00 $ 300 $ 599 $422 70% $ 599 100% $ - $ - $ - i Code Compliance
Fee Each 4.00 $ 300 $ 1,198 $842 70% $ 1,198 100% $ - $ - $ - 37 Credit Card and eCheck Charges Each
Transaction
n/a Actual Cost
new SB-9 Application
No Lot Split 35.00 $ 300 $ 10,485 new % $ 10,485 100% $ - $ - $ - Lot Split 35.00 $ 300 $ 10,485 new % $ 10,485 100% $ - $ - $ - 39 For services requested of City Staff for which no
fee/deposit is listed in this Master Fee Schedule,
the Department Director shall determine the
appropriate fee/deposit based on the following
hourly rates for staff time involved in the service.

Planning Division Staff Per Hour 1.00 $ 300 $ 300 $210 70% $ 300 100% $ - $ - $ - TOTAL 695,121 1,479,859 1,369,429
[Notes]
[1]
[2] Other City department fees/deposits may apply.
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7] Per the City's Tree Ordinance, the arborist may request a fee in lieu of tree planting if there is no possibility to plant on site Includes up to 2, 1-hour meetings with multiple departments.

Governed by FCC, section 6409.

Fees for historical consultants apply.

Public Works fees apply.

Not charged for public records requests.

NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Planning COS, Page 9 of 9

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2077 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) Prepared by NBS for the City of San Carlos
APPENDIX A.3
Cost of Service Analysis – Public Works - Engineering

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2078 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department - User Fee Study Fiscal 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.3 1 Final Map Review
(Includes up to 3 Reviews)
a. Parcel (4 lots or less)
City Processing Fee per project 12.50 $ 191 $ 2,387 $ 2,411 101% $ 2,387 100% 1 $ 2,411 $ 2,387 $ 2,387 Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
Deposit / Actual
Cost
b. Subdivision (5 or more lots)
City Processing Fee per project 14.50 $ 191 $ 2,769 $ 2,797 101% $ 2,769 100% - $ - $ - $ - Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
Deposit / Actual
Cost
c 4th and Subsequent Review
City Processing Fee per submittal 1.50 $ 191 $ 286 $ 289 101% $ 286 100% - $ - $ - $ - Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
Deposit / Actual
Cost
2 Civil Plan Check [1]
(Includes up to 3 Reviews)
a. Minor Projects
City Processing Fee per project 10.00 $ 191 $ 1,910 $ 1,929 101% $ 1,910 100% 14 $ 27,006 $ 26,737 $ 26,737 Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
Deposit / Actual
Cost
b. Moderate Projects
City Processing Fee per project 19.50 $ 191 $ 3,724 $ 3,761 101% $ 3,724 100% 7 $ 26,327 $ 26,068 $ 26,068 Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
Deposit / Actual
Cost
c. Major Projects
City Processing Fee per project 28.50 $ 191 $ 5,443 $ 5,497 101% $ 5,443 100% - $ - $ - $ - Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
Deposit / Actual
Cost
d. 4th and Subsequent Review
City Processing Fee per submittal 2.50 $ 191 $ 477 $ 482 101% $ 477 100% - $ - $ - $ - Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
Deposit / Actual
Cost
3 Utility Companies Plan Check: [2]
a. Minor each 1.00 $ 191 $ 191 $ 193 101% $ 191 100% 315 $ 60,795 $ 60,158 $ 60,158 b. Moderate each 2.00 $ 191 $ 382 $ 386 101% $ 382 100% 187 $ 72,182 $ 71,425 $ 71,425 c. Major deposit 3.50 $ 191 $ 668 $ 675 101% $ 668 100% 5 $ 3,375 $ 3,342 $ 3,342 4 Construction Inspection (Including Utilities) [3]
a. Minor Projects (1-3 inspections) per project 2.25 $ 191 $ 430 $ 434 101% $ 430 100% 534 $ 231,756 $ 229,458 $ 229,458 b. Moderate Projects (4-5 inspections) per project 3.75 $ 191 $ 716 $ 723 101% $ 716 100% 294 $ 212,562 $ 210,552 $ 210,552 c. Major Projects (6-10 inspections) Deposit /
Actual Cost
Deposit / Actual
Cost
Deposit / Actual
Cost
d. Additional Inspection Each 0.75 $ 191 $ 143 $ 145 101% $ 143 100% - $ - $ - $ - Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per Activity
(hours)
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Recovery
Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended
Fee
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Public Works COS, Page 1 of 4

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2079 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department - User Fee Study Fiscal 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.3 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per Activity
(hours)
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Recovery
Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended
Fee
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
5 Post Construction Stormwater Device Monitoring per device, every 5 years

2.00 $ 191 $ 382 $ 386 101% $ 382 100% - $ - $ - $ -
6 Dirt Hauling [4]
a. per CY per CY $ 2.35 $ 2.10
7 Planning & Building Dept. Plan Check:
a. Planning Referral each
City Processing Fee per project 5.00 $ 191 $ 955 $ 964 101% $ 955 100% 44 $ 42,416 $ 42,015 $ 42,015 Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
Deposit / Actual
Cost
b. Building Referral, Review of On-site Civil each 2.00 $ 191 $ 382 $ 386 101% $ 382 100% 2 $ 772 $ 764 $ 764 8 Debris Box/Storage Container Permit per permit
a. Duration up to two weeks 1.50 $ 191 $ 286 $ 96 34% $ 96 34% 94 $ 9,024 $ 26,928 $ 9,024 b. Monthly 1.50 $ 191 $ 286 $ 289 101% $ 286 100% 34 $ 9,826 $ 9,740 $ 9,740 9 Encroachment Permit Administrative Fee per permit 0.50 $ 191 $ 95 $ 96 101% $ 95 100% 181 $ 17,376 $ 17,283 $ 17,283 10 Outside Sewer Agreement Fee deposit Deposit $5,000 Deposit $5,000 11 Community Banner (Hang & Remove):
for-profit organization Each 1.00 $ 191 $ 191 $ 193 101% $ 191 100% - $ - $ - $ - non-profit organization Each 1.00 $ 191 $ 191 No Charge % No Charge % - $ - $ - $ - 12 Wide Load Processing Each [6] 0.50 $ 191 $ 95 $ 18 19% $ 16 17% 73 $ 1,314 $ 6,971 $ 1,168 13 Sidewalk Dining or Outdoor Display Approval
Initial Each Initial
Review

1.50 $ 191 $ 286 $ 289 101% $ 286 100% - $ - $ - $ -
Annual Each Annual
Review

1.50 $ 191 $ 286 $ 289 101% $ 286 100% - $ - $ - $ -
14 Temporary NO PARKING Signs per sign n/a $ 1 $ 1 370 $ 370 $ - $ 370 15 six month 0.50 $ 191 $ 95 $ 96 101% $ 95 100% 352 $ 33,792 $ 33,612 $ 33,612 each 0.16 $ 191 $ 31 No Charge % No Charge % 614 $ - $ 18,762 $ - six month
permit

0.75 $ 191 $ 143 $ 35 24% $ 35 24% 140 $ 4,900 $ 20,053 $ 4,900 East San Carlos Parking Permit Program-Residential
Part of the Program
East San Carlos Parking Permit Program-Business part
of the Program
Semi-Annual Permit Parking in City Lots
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Public Works COS, Page 2 of 4

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2080 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department - User Fee Study Fiscal 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.3 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per Activity
(hours)
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Recovery
Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended
Fee
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
16 Exception to the Winter Moratorium on Grading per week long request

0.50 $ 191 $ 95 $ 96 101% $ 95 100% 8 $ 768 $ 764 $ 764 17 "Street Cut" fee per Ordinance Section 12.08.310.C.2 per opening [4] $ 671 $ 600 18 Video Review of Existing Sewer Lateral each 0.75 $ 191 $ 143 $ 145 101% $ 143 100% 264 $ 38,280 $ 37,813 $ 37,813 19 Starting Work Without a Permit per permit [4] Actual Cost Actual Cost 20 Grading Bond Policy (per 12.08.100)
<1,000 CY per city policy per city policy per city policy >1,000 CY per city policy per city policy per city policy 21 C.4 Inspection
per hour -
minimum 1.5
hours

1.00 $ 191 $ 191 $ 221 116% $ 191 100% 100 $ 22,100 $ 19,098 $ 19,098 22 Credit Card and eCheck Charges Each
Transaction
Actual Cost Actual Cost
new Parklet Program
a. Encroachment Permit Administrative Fee per permit see above see above b. Encroachment Permit - Downtown Area Per Permit/Per
6 mo.

PW Admin/Eng Staff 2.25 $ 191 $ 430
Building Staff 1.00 $ 206 $ 206
Planning Staff 1.00 $ 300 $ 300
Subtotal 4.25 $ 935 New % $ 935 100% $ - $ - $ -
c. Encroachment Permit - Other Areas (industrial arts, etc) Per Permit/Per 6 mo.

PW Admin/Eng Staff 2.25 $ 191 $ 430
Building Staff 1.00 $ 206 $ 206
Planning Staff 1.00 $ 300 $ 300
Subtotal 4.25 $ 935 New % $ 935 100% $ - $ - $ -
d. Cleaning Fee per l.f./per 6
mo
PW Maintenance Staff 0.01 $ 246 $ 1.32
Contracted Cleaning Cost n/a $ - $ 11.50
Subtotal 0.01 $ 12.82 New % $ 12.82 100% $ - $ - $ -
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Public Works COS, Page 3 of 4

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2081 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department - User Fee Study Fiscal 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.3 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per Activity
(hours)
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Recovery
Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended
Fee
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
new Tree Replanting Fee
PW Maintenance Staff 4.00 $ 246 $ 985.60
24" Box Tree [5] n/a $ - $ 500.00
Subtotal 4.00 $ 1,485.60 New % $ 1,486 100% $ - $ - $ - 25 Maintenance Staff per hr 1.00 $ 246 $ 246 $ 184 75% $ 246 100% - $ - $ - $ - Engineering Staff per hr 1.00 $ 191 $ 191 $ 193 101% $ 191 100% - $ - $ - $ - TOTAL 817,352 863,928 806,678
[Notes]
[1] Minor
· One (1) single family residence
o < 1000 CY of grading
o >= 1000 CY of grading
Moderate
· Abandonment of R/W or Easement
· Two or more (2+) single family residences (<1 acre)
o C.3 Regulated
o Not C.3 Regulated
· multi-family/mixed-use/commercial/industrial (< 1 acres) o C.3 regulated
o Not C.3 regulated
Major
· Two or more (2+) single family residences (>= 1 acre) · multi-family/mixed-use/commercial/industrial (>= 1 acres) [2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6] Set by Title 21 of California Code of Regulations Section 1411.3.

Amount of fee for the 24" box tree is subject to change based on actual vendor cost Major project - new main line installation or replacement including sewer, storm, water, gas, and electric, major point repair, major development projects including offsite improvements.

Impact fee; not evaluated by NBS Fee Study
Moderate project - sewer lateral repair or installation (within roadway), soil boring, moderate utility point repair, installation or maintenance (underground),
For services requested of City Staff for which no fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the Department
Director shall determine the appropriate fee based on
the following hourly rates for staff time involved in the service.

Minor project - point repair or maintenance, service line repair or replacement, replacement of overhead utilities, traffic control only, Moderate project - installation of overhead utilities, installation of equipment at a specific location (not linear), Major project - installation or replacement of underground utilities, Minor project - sewer lateral repair or installation (outisde of roadway), sidewalk, curb, gutter, driveway, traffic control (only), minor utility point repair, installation or maintenance (above ground), discharge, minor roadway improvement, NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Public Works COS, Page 4 of 4

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2082 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) Prepared by NBS for the City of San Carlos
APPENDIX A.4
Cost of Service Analysis – Community Development – Building Division

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2083 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Building Division - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.4 1 a Valuation Based Fees - Building Permit (Single Family Residential) less than $5,000 base fee under
$5,000 1.50 $ 206 $ 309 $ 134 43% $ 309 100% 28 $ 3,752 $ 8,652 $ 8,652 base fee @ $5,000 1.50 $ 206 $ 309 $ 266 86% $ 309 100% 123 $ 32,718 $ 38,007 $ 38,007 each add'l $1000 0.1300 $ 206 $ 26.78 $ 7.81 N/A $ 26.78 N/A 967 $ 7,552 $ 25,896 $ 25,896 base fee @
$25,000 4.50 $ 206 $ 927 $ 857 92% $ 927 100% 43 $ 36,851 $ 39,861 $ 39,861 each add'l $1000 0.1400 $ 206 $ 28.84 $ 34.32 N/A $ 28.84 N/A 465 $ 15,959 $ 13,411 $ 13,411 base fee @
$50,000 8.00 $ 206 $ 1,648 $ 1,715 104% $ 1,648 100% 50 $ 85,750 $ 82,400 $ 82,400 each add'l $1000 0.1400 $ 206 $ 28.84 $ 17.14 N/A $ 28.84 N/A 1,053 $ 18,048 $ 30,369 $ 30,369 base fee @
$100,000 15.00 $ 206 $ 3,090 $ 2,572 83% $ 3,090 100% 95 $ 244,340 $ 293,550 $ 293,550 each add'l $1000 0.0400 $ 206 $ 8.24 $ 6.44 N/A $ 8.24 N/A 11,775 $ 75,831 $ 97,026 $ 97,026 base fee @
$500,000 32.00 $ 206 $ 6,592 $ 5,144 78% $ 6,592 100% 20 $ 102,880 $ 131,840 $ 131,840 each add'l $1000 0.0300 $ 206 $ 6.18 $ 3.44 N/A $ 6.18 N/A 4,707 $ 16,192 $ 29,089 $ 29,089 base fee @
$1,000,000 48.00 $ 206 $ 9,888 $ 6,859 69% $ 9,888 100% 7 $ 48,013 $ 69,216 $ 69,216 each add'l $1000 0.0360 $ 206 $ 7.42 $ 6.86 N/A $ 7.42 N/A 1,016 $ 6,970 $ 7,535 $ 7,535 $ 1,000,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 5,000
FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Building Permits
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 25,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 50,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 100,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 500,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis
Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended Fee
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Bldg COS, Page 1 of 7

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2084 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Building Division - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.4 FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended Fee
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
b Valuation Based Fees - Building Permit (Multi-Family Residential / Commercial / Industrial) less than $10,000 base fee under
$10,000 2.50 $ 206 $ 515 $ 134 26% $ 515 100% 9 $ 1,206 $ 4,635 $ 4,635 base fee @
$10,000 2.50 $ 206 $ 515 $ 266 52% $ 515 100% 7 $ 1,862 $ 3,605 $ 3,605 each add'l $1000 0.2200 $ 206 $ 45.32 $ 7.81 N/A $ 45.32 N/A 52 $ 406 $ 2,357 $ 2,357 base fee @
$25,000 7.50 $ 206 $ 1,545 $ 857 55% $ 1,545 100% 6 $ 5,142 $ 9,270 $ 9,270 each add'l $1000 0.1800 $ 206 $ 37.08 $ 34.32 N/A $ 37.08 N/A 41 $ 1,407 $ 1,520 $ 1,520 base fee @
$50,000 12.00 $ 206 $ 2,472 $ 1,715 69% $ 2,472 100% 4 $ 6,860 $ 9,888 $ 9,888 each add'l $1000 0.2000 $ 206 $ 41.20 $ 17.14 N/A $ 41.20 N/A 105 $ 1,800 $ 4,326 $ 4,326 base fee @
$100,000 22.00 $ 206 $ 4,532 $ 2,572 57% $ 4,532 100% 12 $ 30,864 $ 54,384 $ 54,384 each add'l $1000 0.0700 $ 206 $ 14.42 $ 6.44 N/A $ 14.42 N/A 893 $ 5,751 $ 12,877 $ 12,877 base fee @
$500,000 48.00 $ 206 $ 9,888 $ 5,144 52% $ 9,888 100% 2 $ 10,288 $ 19,776 $ 19,776 each add'l $1000 0.0800 $ 206 $ 16.48 $ 3.44 N/A $ 16.48 N/A 450 $ 1,548 $ 7,416 $ 7,416 base fee @
$1,000,000 86.00 $ 206 $ 17,716 $ 6,859 39% $ 17,716 100% 6 $ 41,154 $ 106,296 $ 106,296 each add'l $1000 0.0400 $ 206 $ 8.24 $ 6.86 N/A $ 8.24 N/A 13,327 $ 91,423 $ 109,814 $ 109,814 base fee @
$10,000,000 430.00 $ 206 $ 88,580 $ 68,599 77% $ 88,580 100% 2 $ 137,198 $ 177,160 $ 177,160 each add'l $1000 0.0430 $ 206 $ 8.86 $ 6.86 N/A $ 8.86 N/A 9,003 $ 61,761 $ 79,749 $ 79,749 base fee @
$20,000,000 860.00 $ 206 $ 177,160 $ 137,199 77% $ 177,160 100% 2 $ 274,398 $ 354,320 $ 354,320 each add'l $1000 0.0172 $ 206 $ 3.54 $ 6.86 N/A $ 3.54 N/A 4,559 $ 31,275 $ 16,153 $ 16,153 base fee @
$50,000,000 1,376.00 $ 206 $ 283,456 $ 342,999 121% $ 283,456 100% 2 $ 685,998 $ 566,912 $ 566,912 each add'l $1000 0.0206 $ 206 $ 4.25 $ 6.86 N/A $ 4.25 N/A 30,000 $ 205,800 $ 127,555 $ 127,555 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 50,000,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 10,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 25,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 1,000,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 10,000,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 50,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 100,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 500,000
$ 20,000,000
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Bldg COS, Page 2 of 7

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2085 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Building Division - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.4 FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended Fee
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
c Valuation Based Fees - Plan Check (Single Family Residential) less than $5,000 base fee under
$5,000 1.25 $ 206 $ 258 $ 102 40% $ 258 100% 15 $ 1,530 $ 3,863 $ 3,863 base fee @ $5,000 1.25 $ 206 $ 258 $ 200 78% $ 258 100% 64 $ 12,800 $ 16,480 $ 16,480 each add'l $1000 0.0900 $ 206 $ 18.54 $ 5.85 N/A $ 18.54 N/A 457 $ 2,673 $ 8,473 $ 8,473 base fee @
$25,000 3.38 $ 206 $ 695 $ 644 93% $ 695 100% 32 $ 20,608 $ 22,248 $ 22,248 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 0.1100 $ 206 $ 22.66 $ 25.69 N/A $ 22.66 N/A 400 $ 10,276 $ 9,064 $ 9,064 base fee @
$50,000 6.00 $ 206 $ 1,236 $ 1,286 104% $ 1,236 100% 40 $ 51,440 $ 49,440 $ 49,440 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 0.1100 $ 206 $ 22.66 $ 12.88 N/A $ 22.66 N/A 806 $ 10,381 $ 18,264 $ 18,264 base fee @
$100,000 11.25 $ 206 $ 2,318 $ 1,930 83% $ 2,318 100% 82 $ 158,260 $ 190,035 $ 190,035 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 0.0300 $ 206 $ 6.18 $ 4.83 N/A $ 6.18 N/A 10,020 $ 48,397 $ 61,924 $ 61,924 base fee @
$500,000 24.00 $ 206 $ 4,944 $ 3,858 78% $ 4,944 100% 13 $ 50,154 $ 64,272 $ 64,272 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 0.0200 $ 206 $ 4.12 $ 2.58 N/A $ 4.12 N/A 2,760 $ 7,121 $ 11,371 $ 11,371 base fee @
$500,000 36.00 $ 206 $ 7,416 $ 5,144 69% $ 7,416 100% 4 $ 20,576 $ 29,664 $ 29,664 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 0.0270 $ 206 $ 5.56 $ 5.15 N/A $ 5.56 N/A 445 $ 2,292 $ 2,475 $ 2,475 $ 1,000,000
$ 100,000
$ 500,000
$ 5,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 25,000
$ 50,000
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Bldg COS, Page 3 of 7

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2086 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Building Division - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.4 FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended Fee
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
d Valuation Based Fees - Plan Check (Multi-Family Residential / Commercial / Industrial) less than $10,000 base fee under
$10,000 4.00 $ 206 $ 824 $ 102 12% $ 824 100% - $ - $ - $ - base fee @
$10,000 4.00 $ 206 $ 824 $ 200 24% $ 824 100% 5 $ 1,000 $ 4,120 $ 4,120 each add'l $1000 0.0900 $ 206 $ 18.54 $ 5.85 N/A $ 18.54 N/A 32 $ 187 $ 593 $ 593 base fee @
$25,000 6.00 $ 206 $ 1,236 $ 644 52% $ 1,236 100% 6 $ 3,864 $ 7,416 $ 7,416 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 0.1600 $ 206 $ 32.96 $ 25.69 N/A $ 32.96 N/A 41 $ 1,053 $ 1,351 $ 1,351 base fee @
$50,000 10.00 $ 206 $ 2,060 $ 1,286 62% $ 2,060 100% 5 $ 6,430 $ 10,300 $ 10,300 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 0.1600 $ 206 $ 32.96 $ 12.88 N/A $ 32.96 N/A 119 $ 1,533 $ 3,922 $ 3,922 base fee @
$100,000 18.00 $ 206 $ 3,708 $ 1,930 52% $ 3,708 100% 10 $ 19,300 $ 37,080 $ 37,080 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 0.0500 $ 206 $ 10.30 $ 4.83 N/A $ 10.30 N/A 976 $ 4,714 $ 10,053 $ 10,053 base fee @
$500,000 36.00 $ 206 $ 7,416 $ 3,858 52% $ 7,416 100% 3 $ 11,574 $ 22,248 $ 22,248 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 0.0700 $ 206 $ 14.42 $ 2.58 N/A $ 14.42 N/A 700 $ 1,806 $ 10,094 $ 10,094 base fee @
$500,000 72.00 $ 206 $ 14,832 $ 5,144 35% $ 14,832 100% 4 $ 20,576 $ 59,328 $ 59,328 each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof each add'l $1000 0.2600 $ 206 $ 53.56 $ 5.15 N/A $ 53.56 N/A 15,805 $ 81,396 $ 846,516 $ 846,516 base fee @
$1,000,000 200.00 $ 206 $ 41,200 $ 51,494 125% $ 41,200 100% 3 $ 154,482 $ 123,600 $ 123,600 each add'l $1000 0.0360 $ 206 $ 7.42 $ 5.15 N/A $ 7.42 N/A 11,808 $ 60,811 $ 87,568 $ 87,568 base fee @
$20,000,000 560.00 $ 206 $ 115,360 $ 102,994 89% $ 115,360 100% 8 $ 823,952 $ 922,880 $ 922,880 each add'l $1000 0.0167 $ 206 $ 3.44 $ 5.15 N/A $ 3.44 N/A 4,544 $ 23,402 $ 15,632 $ 15,632 base fee @
$50,000,000 1,060.00 $ 206 $ 218,360 $ 257,494 118% $ 218,360 100% 1 $ 257,494 $ 218,360 $ 218,360 each add'l $1000 0.0212 $ 206 $ 4.37 $ 5.15 N/A $ 4.37 N/A 30,000 $ 154,500 $ 131,016 $ 131,016 2 Permitted Values for Construction:
per sq. ft. $ 232.00
Interior Remodels per sq. ft. $ 117.00
per sq. ft. $ 48.00
Decks per sq. ft. $ 39.00
Commercial Shell per sq. ft. $ 57.00
Tenant Improvements per sq. ft. $ 57.00
$ 10,000
New Residential and Additions
Garages and Accessory Structures
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 25,000
$ 50,000
$ 100,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 50,000,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 500,000
$ 1,000,000
$ 10,000,000
each additional 1,000 or fraction thereof
$ 20,000,000
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Bldg COS, Page 4 of 7

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2087 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Building Division - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.4 FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended Fee
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
3 Electrical Permit
a Residential: New Single Family 1,700 sq. ft. min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 19 $ 3,249 $ 3,914 $ 3,914 each additional sq. ft. per sq. ft. 0.0004 $ 206 $ 0.08 $ 0.07 87% $ 0.08 N/A 32,813 $ 2,297 $ 2,651 $ 2,651 b Residential: Addition & Remodel 1,700 sq. ft. min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 331 $ 56,601 $ 68,186 $ 68,186 each additional sq. ft. per sq. ft. 0.0004 $ 206 $ 0.08 $ 0.07 87% $ 0.08 N/A - $ - $ - $ - c Residential: New Multiple Family 1,700 sq. ft. min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 1 $ 171 $ 206 $ 206 each additional sq. ft. per sq. ft. 0.0004 $ 206 $ 0.08 $ 0.07 87% $ 0.08 N/A 6,879 $ 482 $ 556 $ 556 d Commercial: New Shell Building 1,700 sq. ft. min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 2 $ 342 $ 412 $ 412 each additional sq. ft. per sq. ft. 0.0004 $ 206 $ 0.08 $ 0.07 87% $ 0.08 N/A 1,689,898 $ 118,293 $ 136,517 $ 136,517 e 1,700 sq. ft. min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 41 $ 7,011 $ 8,446 $ 8,446 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. 0.0004 $ 206 $ 0.08 $ 0.07 87% $ 0.08 N/A 1,426,604 $ 99,862 $ 115,247 $ 115,247 f 3,000 sq. ft. min. 10.00 $ 206 $ 2,060 $ 312 15% $ 2,060 100% - $ - $ - $ - each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. 0.0039 $ 206 $ 0.81 $ 0.07 9% $ 0.46 N/A - $ - $ - $ - g Swimming Pool, Spa, or Hot Tub Per Permit 2.00 $ 206 $ 412 $ 178 43% $ 247 60% 39 $ 6,942 $ 16,068 $ 9,641 h Temporary Power Pole Per Permit 2.00 $ 206 $ 412 $ 178 43% $ 247 60% 2 $ 356 $ 824 $ 494 i Main Electrical Service Per Permit 2.00 $ 206 $ 412 $ 178 43% $ 247 60% 63 $ 11,214 $ 25,956 $ 15,574 j Per Permit 0.50 $ 206 $ 103 $ 85 83% $ 103 100% 14 $ 1,190 $ 1,442 $ 1,442 k New or Replacement Sub-Panel Per Permit 2.00 $ 206 $ 412 $ 178 43% $ 247 60% 18 $ 3,204 $ 7,416 $ 4,450 l Miscellaneous Electrical Permit Per Permit 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 116 56% $ 206 100% 15 $ 1,740 $ 3,090 $ 3,090 m PV Solar Fee Per Permit 3.00 $ 206 $ 618 $ 227 37% $ 309 50% 258 $ 58,566 $ 159,444 $ 79,722 4 Plumbing Permit
a Residential: New Single Family 1,700 sq. ft. min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 19 $ 3,249 $ 3,914 $ 3,914 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. 0.0004 $ 206 $ 0.08 $ 0.07 87% $ 0.08 N/A 32,813 $ 2,297 $ 2,651 $ 2,651 b Residential: Addition & Remodel 1,700 sq. ft. min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 90 $ 15,390 $ 18,540 $ 18,540 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. 0.0004 $ 206 $ 0.08 $ 0.07 87% $ 0.08 N/A - $ - $ - $ - c Residential: New Multiple Family 1,700 sq. ft. min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 1 $ 171 $ 206 $ 206 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. 0.0004 $ 206 $ 0.08 $ 0.07 87% $ 0.08 N/A 6,879 $ 482 $ 556 $ 556 d Commercial: New Shell Building 1,700 sq. ft. min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 2 $ 342 $ 412 $ 412 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. 0.0004 $ 206 $ 0.08 $ 0.07 87% $ 0.08 N/A 1,689,898 $ 118,293 $ 136,517 $ 136,517 e 1,700 sq. ft. min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 41 $ 7,011 $ 8,446 $ 8,446 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. 0.0004 $ 206 $ 0.08 $ 0.07 87% $ 0.08 N/A 1,426,604 $ 99,862 $ 115,247 $ 115,247 f
3,000 Sq. Ft.

Minimum 10.00 $ 206 $ 2,060 $ 357 17% $ 2,060 100% - $ - $ - $ - each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. 0.0039 $ 206 $ 0.81 $ 0.08 10% $ 0.46 N/A - $ - $ - $ - g Miscellaneous Plumbing Permit Per Permit 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 116 56% $ 206 100% 46 $ 5,336 $ 9,476 $ 9,476 h Swimming Pool, Spa, or Hot Tub Per Permit 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 1 $ 171 $ 206 $ 206 i Water Heater Replacement Per Permit 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 104 50% $ 104 50% 48 $ 4,992 $ 9,888 $ 4,992 j Gas Piping Extension for New FAU or HVAC Per Permit 0.50 $ 206 $ 103 $ 85 83% $ 103 100% 15 $ 1,275 $ 1,545 $ 1,545 Commercial: Complex Tenant
Improvements (Labs and R&D)
Commercial: Addition, Remodel, Tenant
Improvement
Commercial: Addition, Remodel, Tenant
Improvement
Commercial: Complex Tenant
Improvements (Labs and R&D)
New or Replacement Circuit for HVAC or
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Bldg COS, Page 5 of 7

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2088 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Building Division - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.4 FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended Fee
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
5 Mechanical Permit
a Residential: New Single Family 1,700 sq. ft. min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 19 $ 3,249 $ 3,914 $ 3,914 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. 0.0004 $ 206 $ 0.08 $ 0.07 87% $ 0.08 N/A 32,813 $ 2,297 $ 2,651 $ 2,651 b Residential: Kitchen & Bath Remodel Per Permit 0.50 $ 206 $ 103 $ 85 83% $ 103 100% 174 $ 14,790 $ 17,922 $ 17,922 c Commercial: New Shell Building 1,700 sq. ft. min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 2 $ 342 $ 412 $ 412 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. 0.0004 $ 206 $ 0.08 $ 0.07 87% $ 0.08 N/A 1,689,898 $ 118,293 $ 136,517 $ 136,517 d 1,700 sq. ft. min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 41 $ 7,011 $ 8,446 $ 8,446 each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. 0.0004 $ 206 $ 0.08 $ 0.07 87% $ 0.08 N/A 1,426,604 $ 99,862 $ 115,247 $ 115,247 e 3000 sq. ft. min. 3.00 $ 206 $ 618 $ 357 58% $ 618 100% - $ - $ - $ - each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. 0.0012 $ 206 $ 0.24 $ 0.08 33% $ 0.14 N/A - $ - $ - $ - f New FAU or HVAC Installations Per Permit 2.00 $ 206 $ 412 $ 267 65% $ 330 80% 94 $ 25,098 $ 38,728 $ 30,982 g Replacement FAU or HVAC Per Permit 2.00 $ 206 $ 412 $ 178 43% $ 206 50% 91 $ 16,198 $ 37,492 $ 18,746 h Miscellaneous Mechanical Per Permit 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 116 56% $ 206 100% 6 $ 696 $ 1,236 $ 1,236 6 Miscellaneous Building Fees
a Grading Permit Fee for Swimming Pools
Permit Per Permit 0.50 $ 206 $ 103 $ 85 83% $ 103 100% 1 $ 85 $ 103 $ 103 b Grading Permit Fee for Other than Swimming Pools
Permit Per Permit 0.50 $ 206 $ 103 $ 85 83% $ 103 100% 2 $ 170 $ 206 $ 206 c Accessibility Plan Check of Building Permit 1 hour min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 243 118% $ 206 100% - $ - $ - $ - each additional hour each add'l hr 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 243 118% $ 206 100% - $ - $ - $ - d Imaging Fees per page (standard size) Per Page 0.01 $ 206 $ 2.06 $ 1.00 49% $ 2.06 100% 13,629 $ 13,629 $ 28,076 $ 28,076 e Imaging Fees per page (oversize) Per Page 0.02 $ 206 $ 4.12 $ 2.00 49% $ 4.12 100% - $ - $ - $ - 7 Planning Application Review Hourly 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 190 % $ 206 100% 260 $ 49,270 $ 53,560 $ 53,560 Commercial: Addition, Remodel, Tenant
Improvement
Commercial: Complex Tenant
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Bldg COS, Page 6 of 7

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2089 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Building Division - User Fee Study FY 2023 Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.4 FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee
No.

Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per
Activity (hours)
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Annual
Estimated
Revenues at
Full Cost
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended Fee
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
8 During Normal Business Hours 1 hour min. 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 243 118% $ 206 100% - $ - $ - $ - each additional hour each add'l hr 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 243 118% $ 206 100% - $ - $ - $ - Outside Business Hours 2 hour min. 2.00 $ 222 $ 444 $ 486 109% $ 444 100% - $ - $ - $ - each additional hour each add'l hr 1.00 $ 222 $ 222 $ 243 109% $ 222 100% - $ - $ - $ - Code Enforcement - City Attorney 1 hour min. 1.00 $ 286 $ 286 $ 286 100% $ 286 100% - $ - $ - $ - each additional hour each add'l hr 1.00 $ 286 $ 286 $ 286 100% $ 286 100% - $ - $ - $ - 9 Dirt Haul Permit n/a reference PW
fee schedule
10 Municipal Code Violation Fees
First Violation Per Violation n/a $ 100 $ 100
Per Violation n/a $ 200 $ 200
Per Violation n/a $ 500 $ 500
11 GEO Plan Review / Soils Report Review n/a Actual Cost per Geologist
12 Per Instance 0.50 $ 206 $ 103 $ 77 75% $ 103 100% 162 $ 12,474 $ 16,686 $ 16,686 13 Additional Plan Check Fee Hourly 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% - $ - $ - $ - 14 Re-Inspection Fee Hourly 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% - 15 Demolition Per Instance 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% 13 $ 2,223 $ 2,678 $ 2,678 16 Address Change Per Instance 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% - $ - $ - $ - 17 Green Building Review Per Review 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 171 83% $ 206 100% - $ - $ - $ - 18 Energy Calculation Review Fee Per Review 0.50 $ 206 $ 103 $ 85 83% $ 103 100% 369 $ 31,365 $ 38,007 $ 38,007 19 Apartment Inspection Annual Fee
Per Residential Building Per Year 3.00 $ 206 $ 618 $ 257 42% $ 257 42% 6 $ 1,542 $ 3,708 $ 1,542 Per Dwelling Unit within each Building Per Year 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 13 6% $ 13 6% 9 $ 117 $ 1,854 $ 117 20 Building Division Staff Per Hour 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 243 118% $ 206 100% - $ - $ - $ - each additional hour each add'l hr 1.00 $ 206 $ 206 $ 243 118% $ 206 100% - $ - $ - $ - TOTAL 5,344,680 6,899,937 6,764,819
Fees for Second and Each Additional
Second Violation of the Same Ordinance
Each Additional Violation of the same
GIS Mapping: New Construction, Addition,
For services requested of City Staff for which no
fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Bldg COS, Page 7 of 7

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2090 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) Prepared by NBS for the City of San Carlos
APPENDIX A.5
Cost of Service Analysis – Police

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2091 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Police Department - User Fee Study FY 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.5 1 Accident Report [1]
a property damage only
Sworn per report 0.00 $ 317 $ -
Non-sworn per report 0.17 $ 121 $ 20
Subtotal 0.17 $ 20 $ 2.00 10% $ 2 10% - $ - $ - $ -
b property damage with injuries
Sworn per report 0.00 $ 317 $ -
Non-sworn per report 0.17 $ 121 $ 20
Subtotal 0.17 $ 20 $ 2.00 10% $ 2 10% - $ - $ - $ -
c fatality
Sworn per report 0.00 $ 317 $ -
Non-sworn per report 0.17 $ 121 $ 20
Subtotal 0.17 $ 20 $ 2.00 10% $ 2 10% - $ - $ - $ -
2 County Jail Booking Fee County fee County fee
3 Crime Report
Sworn per report 0.00 $ 317 $ -
Non-sworn per report 0.25 $ 121 $ 30
Subtotal 0.25 $ 30 $ 2.00 7% $ 2 7% - $ - $ - $ -
4 False Alarm Response
a First Response
Sworn first call 0.66 $ 317 $ 209
Non-sworn first call 0.03 $ 121 $ 4
Subtotal 0.69 $ 213 $ - 0% $ - 0% 1,080 $ - $ 230,536 $ - b Subsequent Calls
Sworn per call 0.66 $ 317 $ 209
Non-sworn per call 0.03 $ 121 $ 4
Subtotal 0.69 $ 213 $ 205.00 96% $ 205 96% 600 $ 123,000 $ 128,076 $ 123,000 5 Impounded Vehicle [2]
a towed for criminal offenses
Sworn per instance 0.00 $ 317 $ -
Non-sworn per instance 1.00 $ 121 $ 121
Subtotal 1.00 $ 121 $ 101.00 83% $ 101 83% - $ - $ - $ - Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per Activity
(hours)
FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Recovery
Fee
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended
Fee
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Police COS, Page 1 of 3

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2092 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Police Department - User Fee Study FY 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.5 Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per Activity
(hours)
FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Recovery
Fee
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended
Fee
b
towed for all other offenses (abandoned,
blocking driveways, etc.)
Sworn per instance 0.00 $ 317 $ -
Non-sworn per instance 1.00 $ 121 $ 121
Subtotal 1.00 $ 121 $ 101.00 83% $ 101 83% 45 $ 4,545 $ 5,450 $ 4,545 6 Unruly Gatherings
a First Call
Sworn per hour 1.00 $ 317 $ 317
Non-sworn per hour 0.00 $ 121 $ -
Subtotal 1.00 $ 317 $ - 0% $ - 0% - $ - $ - $ -
b Subsequent Calls
Sworn per hour 1.00 $ 317 $ 317
Non-sworn per hour 0.00 $ 121 $ -
Subtotal 1.00 $ 317 $ 306.00 96% $ 306 96% - $ - $ - $ - 7 Alarm Permit
a new
Sworn initial fee 0.00 $ 317 $ -
Non-sworn initial fee 0.08 $ 121 $ 10
Subtotal 0.08 $ 10 $ - 0% $ - 0% 120 $ - $ 1,211 $ -
8 Processing Permit for Excessive Cats & Dogs
Sworn per instance 0.00 $ 317 $ -
Non-sworn per instance 1.00 $ 121 $ 121
Subtotal 1.00 $ 121 $ 101.00 83% $ 101 83% - $ - $ - $ - 9 Processing Police Officer Subpoena per hour [3] 1.00 $ - $275/day
deposit per GC
%
$275/day
deposit per GC
% $ - $ - $ -
10 Tape of Radio/Video Transmission, Digital or
Hard-copy Photographs Per Request 0.17 $ 121 $ 20 actual cost of materials %
actual cost of
materials
% - $ - $ - $ -
11 Credit Card and eCheck Charges Each
Transaction
n/a Actual Cost Actual Cost
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Police COS, Page 2 of 3

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2093 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Police Department - User Fee Study FY 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.5 Current Fee /
Deposit
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee No. Fee Name
Fee Unit /
Type
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per Activity
(hours)
FBHR
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Annual Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Recovery
Fee
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended
Fee
12 For services requested of City staff which have no
fee listed in this fee schedule, the City Manager or
the City Manager's designee shall determine the
appropriate fee based on the established hourly
rates for this department/division. Additionally,
the City will pass-through to the applicant any
discrete costs incurred from the use of external
service providers if required to process the specific
application.

Non-Sworn Staff Members of the Police Department: per hour 1.00 $ 121 $ 121 $ 101.00 83% $ 101 83% $ - $ - $ - Sworn Staff Members of the Police
Department: per hour 1.00 $ 317 $ 317 $ 306.00 96% $ 306 96% $ - $ - $ - TOTAL 127,545 365,273 127,545
[Notes]
[1] CA VC 20012 allows for recovery of the actual cost of providing accident report copies
[2] Towing charges are separate
[3] As set by GC 68096
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Police COS, Page 3 of 3

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2094 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) Prepared by NBS for the City of San Carlos
APPENDIX A.6
Cost of Service Analysis – Recreation

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2095 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Parks and Recreation - User Fee Study FY 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.6 A. Parks, Facility, Room, and Amenity Rentals [2]

1. Adult Community Center Room Rentals

2. Youth Center Facility Rentals

3. San Carlos Library Community Room Rental

4. Picnic Sites Rentals (March - October)

5. Bocce Ball

6. Rental Application Fee 0.17 $ 177 $ 30 $ 25 84% $ 30 100% - $ - $ - $ -

7. Special Event Permit:

New Request
PW Maintenance Staff 2.00 $ 246 $ 493
Full-Time 3.00 $ 177 $ 532
Part-Time 0.00 $ 30 $ -
Public Works 0.33 $ 191 $ 63
Police 0.33 $ 121 $ 40
Planning 0.17 $ 300 $ 50
Building 0.17 $ 206 $ 34
Subtotal: 5.99 $ 1,212 $ 386 32% $ 400 33% 2 $ 772 $ 2,424 $ 800 Repeat Request
PW Maintenance Staff 2.00 $ 246 $ 493
Full-Time 2.50 $ 177 $ 443
Part-Time 0.00 $ 30 $ -
Public Works 0.33 $ 191 $ 63
Police 0.33 $ 121 $ 40
Planning 0.17 $ 300 $ 50
Building 0.17 $ 206 $ 34
Subtotal: 5.49 $ 1,123 $ 274 24% $ 375 33% 26 $ 7,124 $ 29,206 $ 9,750 City Staff On-Site Time During Event See Hourly Rates See Hourly Rates B. Athletics ("Per Season/Per Quarter")

1. Light Use (Fields). Per hour [3] $ 36 $ 31 $ 32

2. Sports League Field Use Fee (per player) [3]
San Carlos Youth Softball (Girls) $ 86 $ 38 $ 66
Youth Baseball $ 86 $ 38 $ 66
Soccer $ 86 $ 52 $ 66

3. Baseball / Soccer Sports Tournament:

New Request Permit Fee
PW Maintenance Staff 2.00 $ 246 $ 493
Full-Time 3.00 $ 177 $ 532
Part-Time 0.00 $ 30 $ -
Subtotal: 5.00 $ 1,025 $ 280 27% $ 350 34% - $ - $ - $ - Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee
No.

Fee Name
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per Activity
(hours)
Fully Burdened
Hourly Rate
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Current Fee /
Deposit
Annual Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Recovery
Fee
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended
Fee
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Recreation COS, Page 1 of 3

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2096 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Parks and Recreation - User Fee Study FY 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.6 Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee
No.

Fee Name
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per Activity
(hours)
Fully Burdened
Hourly Rate
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Current Fee /
Deposit
Annual Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Recovery
Fee
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended
Fee
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
Repeat Request Permit Fee
PW Maintenance Staff 2.00 $ 246 $ 493
Full-Time 2.50 $ 177 $ 443
Part-Time 0.00 $ 30 $ -
Subtotal: 4.50 $ 936 $ 168 18% $ 300 32% 3 $ 504 $ 2,808 $ 900 Field Use Fee (per hour) [2]

4. Tennis:

Tennis Club Permitted Use (per hour, per court) [2]
Non-Resident Tennis Club (per hour, per court) [2]

5. Snack Shack Use
Fall Season (August 15 - November 30) [2]
Spring Season (March 1 - May 31) [2]

6. Snack Shack Use (Outside of Primary Youth Sports Seasons) Weekly Rental Fee (Mon - Sun) [2]
C. Miscellaneous

1. Park Fitness Group Rental [2]

2. Administrative fees (apply to class registration only) Registration
PW Maintenance Staff 0.00 $ 246 $ -
Full-Time 0.08 $ 177 $ 14
Part-Time 0.00 $ 30 $ -
Subtotal: 0.08 $ 14 $ 10 71% $ 10 71% 4,804 $ 48,040 $ 68,115 $ 48,040 Refund
PW Maintenance Staff 0.00 $ 246 $ -
Full-Time 0.08 $ 177 $ 14
Part-Time 0.00 $ 30 $ -
Subtotal: 0.08 $ 14 $ 16 113% $ 10 71% 126 $ 2,016 $ 1,787 $ 1,260

3. Neighborhood Block Party Permit
PW Maintenance Staff 1.00 $ 246 $ 246
Full-Time 1.00 $ 177 $ 177
Part-Time 0.00 $ 30 $ -
Subtotal: 2.00 $ 424 Fee Waived % Fee Waived % - $ - $ - $ -

4. Technology Fee [1]

5. Hourly Rates
PW Maintenance Staff 1.00 $ 246 $ 246 $ 184.00 75% $ 246 100% 126 $ 23,184 $ 31,046 $ 31,046 Full-Time Recreation Staff 1.00 $ 177 $ 177 $ 162.00 91% $ 177 100% 126 $ 20,412 $ 22,332 $ 22,332 Part-Time Recreation Staff 1.00 $ 30 $ 30 $ 52.00 174% $ 30 100% 126 $ 6,552 $ 3,764 $ 3,764 NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Recreation COS, Page 2 of 3

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2097 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Parks and Recreation - User Fee Study FY 2023
Cost of Service Estimate for Fee Related Services and Activities APPENDIX A.6 Activity Service Cost Analysis Cost Recovery Analysis Annual Estimated Revenue Analysis Fee
No.

Fee Name
Notes
Estimated
Average Labor
Time Per Activity
(hours)
Fully Burdened
Hourly Rate
Cost of Service
Per Activity
Current Fee /
Deposit
Annual Estimated
Revenues at Full
Cost Recovery
Fee
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Recommended
Fee
Existing Cost
Recovery %
Recommended
Fee Level /
Deposit
Recommended
Cost Recovery %
Estimated
Volume of
Activity
Annual Estimated
Revenues at
Current Fee
D. Community Events [2]
TOTAL $ 108,604 $ 161,481 $ 117,892
[Notes]
[1] NBS did not evaluate. Fee is $2 per registration
[2] NBS did not evaluate on an individual fee level basis - see City staff report and master fee schedule for rates
[3] Cost of service per activity as provided by City
Recreational Programs
Fees imposed for recreational programs offered by the City shall be set at the discretion of the Parks and Recreation Director, not to exceed the cost of the individual programs. The City's full cost of implementing an individual program may be calculated as follows: Program Cost of Service = [ (A x B) + C + D + E + F + G ]
A = Estimated time for City staff to implement the individual program B = Applicable hourly rates for the staff functions involved in the implementation of the individual program (below).

C = Actual cost incurred by the City for any outside service provider involved in the individual program.

D = Actual cost incurred by the City for any specific materials acquired for use during the individual program.

E = Prevailing facility rental and/or field use fees imposed by the City and reflected in its Master Fee Schedule.

F = Prevailing department / City administrative fee
G = Actual costs incurred by the City to rent and/or use facilities/fields from other entities
The calculated cost of service above represents the maximum fee that could be imposed by the City for an individual recreation program. The City may recover between 0% and 100% of the cost of service. Cost recovery targets may vary by individual recreation program, at the discretion of the Parks and Recreation Director as determined during the seasonal development of the City's program offerings. The City may also set differential fee for resident and non-resident participants as long as neither fee exceeds the cost of service. Any person with a home San Carlos mailing address is considered a resident. A San Carlos PO Box or business address will not be taken as proof of residency. A non-resident is someone who lives in another City. Non-resident fees will be charged at 20% of the class fee up to a $20 maximum per class.

NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/12/2022 Recreation COS, Page 3 of 3

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2098 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) Prepared by NBS for the City of San Carlos
APPENDIX B.1
Comparative Fee Survey – Administrative Departments

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2099 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Finance Division - Comparison Fee Survey FY 2022
APPENDIX B.1
1 Returned Check
First Item per first check $ 25 $ 25 $ 25 $ 25 $ 30 $ 25 $ 30 $ 25 $ 25 Each Additional Item
per
subsequent
check
$ 35 $ 35 $ 35 $ 35 $ 30 $ 30 $ 30 $ 35 $ 25
2 For services requested of City Staff for which no fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the Department Director shall determine the appropriate fee based on the following hourly rates for staff time:

Finance Division Staff (Per Hour) Per Hour $ 186 $ 193 193 $ $ 205 No Comparison Actual Cost
(subject to $500
deposit)
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
Fee No. Fee Name Menlo Park San Mateo Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos
Current Fee
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee
Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee Belmont Burlingame Foster City Redwood City NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Finance COS, Page 1 of 2

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2100 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
City Clerk Department - Comparison Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.1 1 Copy Charges: $0.10/page $0.10/page $.10/page $0.30/page $0.25/page $4.66 for 1st page,
$0.25 for each
additional page
$0.10/page (81/2 x
11); $0.20 (11x17) $0.10/page $0.15/page
2 Copy Charges - CD $0.50/CD $0.50/CD $0.50/CD No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 3 Copies of City Subdivision Ordinances, Zoning Ordinances, CAFR, Municipal Code Book, Standard Bid Specifications, Standard Detail, Work Program
n/a Free/website, or
Copy Charge
Free/website, or
Copy Charge
Free/website, or
Copy Charge No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 4 Document Certification base fee Fee Waived $ 10 Fee Waived No Comparison $ 17 $ 16 No Comparison No Comparison $ 1.50 5 Agenda or Minutes Subscription n/a Free/website, or
Copy Charge
Free/website, or
Copy Charge
Free/website, or
Copy Charge No Comparison No Comparison 142 $ $30, $45 respectively No Comparison $6, $12 respectively 6 Research per hour $ 186 $ 193 $ 193 No Comparison No Comparison $ 98 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 7 For services requested of City Staff for which no fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the Department Director shall determine the appropriate fee based on the following hourly rates for staff time:

City Clerk Department Staff (Per Hour) per hour $ 193 186 $ 193 $ 205 $ No Comparison Actual Cost (subject to $500 deposit) No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Fee No. Fee Name San Mateo Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame Foster City Menlo Park
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee
Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee Redwood City
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Clerk COS, Page 2 of 2

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2101 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) Prepared by NBS for the City of San Carlos
APPENDIX B.2
Comparative Fee Survey – Community Development – Planning Division

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2102 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Planning Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.2 1 Appeal, Planning Commission
a Fee Each $1,808 $5,991 $1,808 $266 $631 Actual Cost (subject to $500 deposit)
Appeals of staff decision
$110.00; Menlo Park
resident appeal of Planning
Commission decision on
somebody else’s project
$110.00; Owner occupant
appeal of Planning
Commission decision
related to his/her owneroccupied house $110.00; All
other appeals of Planning
Commission decisions
$1,000.00 deposit
$755 for Appeal of any
permit/fee deposit less
than $4,500. $3,151 for
any permit/fee deposit
$4,500 or more.
$519
2 Appeal, City Council
a Fee Each $1,608 $5,991 $1,608 $1,069 $631 Actual Cost (subject to $500 deposit) No Comparison No Comparison $519
3 Attorney's Fees
Support to Planning
projects that require
Deposit
Actual Cost $412/hr $0
Actual cost / +
$2,500 minimum
deposit.

No Comparison No Comparison
$120.35, plus actual cost
of City Attorney time,
until compliance is
achieved
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
Support to projects on a
"fixed"/"flat" fee basis Actual Cost $286/hr $0 Actual Cost - 2 Hr. Minimum No Comparison No Comparison
$120.35, plus actual cost
of City Attorney time,
until compliance is
achieved
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
4 Below Market Rate (BMR),
Housing Plan Each $1,475 $2,097 $2,097 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 5 Below Market Rate (BMR),
Builder Alternative Deposit $500 Initial Deposit
$2,996 $500 Initial
Deposit
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 6 Below Market Rate (BMR),
Housing Agreement Deposit $500 Initial Deposit
$0 $500 Initial
Deposit
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame San Mateo Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Planning COS, Page 1 of 11

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2103 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Planning Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.2 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame San Mateo Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City 7 CEQA
a Document Filing
Fee Each $210 $188 $188 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison b Categorical Exemption
City Processing Fee Each $422 $377 $377 $298 $134 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $500 Department of Fish
and Game / County
Recording Fees
Each
Actual Cost of
DFG / County
Fees
$0
Actual Cost of
DFG / County
Fees
c
Initial Study/Negative
Declaration/Mitigated
Negative/EIR
Actual Cost (subject to
$5,000 deposit)
City Processing Fee Deposit $300.75 - $757.15 plus
200% of permit fee
Consultant Review Deposit Actual Cost with
$5,000 deposit
Actual Cost with
$5,000 deposit No Comparison
d Mitigation Monitoring n/a Actual Cost with
$1,000 deposit
Actual Cost with
$1,000 deposit No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $515 No Comparison Initial Deposit - remaining
cost determined for each
project
new Cell Tower Application
6409 Application Each $0 $899 $899
Other Applications Actual
Actual Cost of
Consultant
Study
$0 Actual Cost of
Consultant Study
8 Creek Exception
City Processing Fee Each $2,529 $4,493 $4,493
Consultant Review Each
Actual Cost of
Consultant
Study
$0 Actual Cost of
Consultant Study
Actual Cost with
$3,000 deposit
Actual Cost with
$3,000 deposit
$0
No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
Actual Cost with $5,000
deposit
No Comparison
No Comparison $626 Plan Check, $198
Permit
Staff Review and Processing
of Environmental
Documents $ 5,000.00
Deposit *Fee based on cost
of consultant to prepare
report plus staff time at
hourly billing rate.

Circulation System
Assessment – per
development project
$4,000.00
No Comparison
Set by State
$16,916 plus cost of Contract x

1.3; Initial Study Staff fee of
$8,943 for planning and $1,192
negative declaration fee' EIR
$34,950 plus cost of contract x

1.3 $6,908 for Environments,
Negative Declaration (R-1
and R-2); EIR is 20% of
contract;
Initial Study/Negative
Declaration $5,000 initial
deposit; Initial Study/EIR
$10,000 initial deposit
No Comparison
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Planning COS, Page 2 of 11

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2104 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Planning Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.2 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame San Mateo Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City 9 Design Review - Single Family
a
Single Family, New Home
(RDRC)
Fee Each $6,320 $10,485 $10,485
b
Single Family, First Floor
Addition (RDRC)
Fee Each $4,214 $7,489 $7,489
c
Single Family, Second Floor
Addition (RDRC)
Fee Each $6,320 $10,485 $10,485
d
Single Family, First Floor
Addition (Staff)
Fee Each $1,264 $2,996 $2,996
e
Single Family, Second Floor
Addition (Staff)
Fee Each $2,107 $4,493 $4,493

10.1 Design Review (MR, M/U,
Comm, ND) - Staff Review/
Approval
a New Building
Fee Each $8,427 $17,974 $17,974 $1,552
Actual Cost (subject to
$3,000 deposit at time of
filing)
b Major Alteration
Fee Each $5,056 $12,582 $12,582 $1,187
c Minor Alteration
Fee Each $3,371 $9,586 $9,586 $1,187
Single-Unit Residential
$1,373
Multi-Unit Residential 25
units or fewer $2,209
Multi-Unit Residential 26
units or greater $3,261
5,000 Gross Square Feet or
Less $1,373
5,001 - 10,000 Gross Square
Feet $2,209
10,001 Gross Square Feet or
Greater $3,261
Single-Family Design Review -
Tier 2 (Zoning Administrator
Review w/o ZA hearing) $2,981;
Single-Family Design Review -
Tier 2 (Zoning Administrator
Review w/ZA hearing) $3,875;
Single-Family Design Review -
Tier 3 (Planning Commission
Review) $6,000
$500 initial deposit for
design review by consulting
architect
No Comparison
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
New Building Construction
$10,508; additions $9,912;
Building or Sign Colors;
Preliminary Design Review $298;
Administrative Design Review -
exterior modifications $2,832;
Administrative Sign Review $894
Actual Cost (subject to
$3,000 deposit at time of
filing)
No Comparison No Comparison
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Planning COS, Page 3 of 11

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2105 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Planning Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.2 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame San Mateo Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City

10.2 Design Review (MR, M/U,
Comm, ND) - Planning
Commission
Review/Approval
a
New Building (Planning
Commission)
Fee Each $8,427 $21,269 $21,269 $1,324
Actual Cost (subject to
$3,000 deposit at time of
filing)
b
Major Alteration (Planning
Commission)
Fee Each $5,056 $15,877 $15,877 $1,324
c
Minor Alteration (Planning
Commission)
Fee Each $3,371 $12,881 $12,881 $1,324
11 Design Review (Other)
a A - Frames
Fee Each $105 $150 $105 $1,127
Actual Cost (subject to
$1,000 deposit at time of
filing)
b
Accessory Structures
(Includes large decks)
Fee Each $1,264 $1,797 $1,264 No Comparison
c Architectural Peer Review
Fee Each $3,000 Initial
Deposit
$0 $3,000 Initial
Deposit
$100 50 sq. ft. or less; over 50
sq. ft. and less $198 than 200 sq.
ft.; $255 over 2000 sq. ft.;
$2,820 sign variance; $113
removal of illegal sign
$836
d
Mills Acts Designated
Projects
City Processing Fee Each $603 $1,797 $603 No Comparison $628 Mills Act Contracts
$124 Mills Act Reporting
Historic Consultant
Review
Deposit /
Actual Cost
$5,000 Initial
Deposit
$0 $5,000 Initial
Deposit
$10,135 No Comparison
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
Actual Cost (subject to
$500 deposit at time of
filing)
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
Planning Commission Review
$1,789 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
Actual Cost (subject to
$3,000 deposit at time of
filing)
No Comparison
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Planning COS, Page 4 of 11

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2106 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Planning Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.2 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame San Mateo Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City e
Miscellaneous (awnings,
trash, replacement
materials, site plan review,
landscape)
Fee Each $422 $599 $599 No Comparison No Comparison
$294 sign review by staff;
$1,500 deposit sign review
by planning commission
No Comparison $302 per landscaping unit
f
Outdoor Uses Dining &
Retail Sales
Fee Each $948 $1,797 $1,348 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison g Sign Program
Fee Each $2,107 $5,991 $5,991
Building or Sign Colors, Planning
Commission Review $1,260;
Administrative Sign Review $630
$640 $26 - $53 $191 re-facing an approved
sign
$2,039 No Comparison
h
Signs - (Planning
Commission)
Fee Each $2,107 $4,493 $4,493 No Comparison $1,500 No Comparison $1,221 i Signs (Staff)
Fee Each $422 $1,198 $1,198 $630 $294 $180 $1,546 plus consultant cost j Temporary Banner
Fee Each $210 $300 $300 No Comparison No Comparison No Charge No Comparison $46 new Minor Alterations
Fee Each $0 $1,198 $1,198 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 12 Document Imaging Per 1/2 hr -
1/2 hr min. $90 $94 $94 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 13 Domestic Fowl and NonHousehold Pets
a Fee Each $269 $1,130 $269 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $205.52 new
Excessive Noise Compliance
Permit
a Fee Each $0 $599 $599 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $100 50 sq. ft. or less; over
50 sq. ft. and less $198 than
200 sq. ft.; $255 over 2000
sq. ft.; $2,820 sign variance;
$113 removal of illegal sign
$26 - $53
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Planning COS, Page 5 of 11

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2107 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Planning Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.2 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame San Mateo Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City 15 Final Inspection, SingleFamily
a Fee Each $422 $599 $599 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 16 Final Inspection, Other
a Fee Each $842 $1,198 $842 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 17 General Plan Amendment
Fee Each $8,427 $11,983 $8,427 $15,501 $1,515
Actual cost (subject to
$5,000 minimum deposit
at time of filing)
$8,000 deposit $15,250 0.59% of valuation
18 Grading and Dirt Haul
Certificate
Fee Each $2,107 $2,996 $2,107 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $75 permit application
fee, Net CY x total miles
traveled on city streets
including round trip x
$0.54
No Comparison
19 Historic Preservation
a City Processing Fee n/a $210 $599 $599
b
Historic Assessment -
Consultant Review Each Actual Cost with $2,000 deposit $0 Actual Cost with $2,000 deposit c Mills Act Contract
Fee Each $1,005 $4,493 $4,493
20 Interdepartmental Plan
Review
a Building
See Building Fee
Schedule for Per
Review Charge
n/a
See Building Fee
Schedule for Per
Review Charge
$275/hr No Comparison
b Engineering
See Engineering
Fee Schedule n/a
See Engineering
Fee Schedule and
/ or Hourly Rates
Apply
No Comparison 25% of Building Permit Fee
c Fire See Fire Fee
Schedule n/a See Fire Fee Schedule $275/hr 0.34% of valuation d Police See Police Fee
Schedule n/a
See Police Fee
Schedule and/or
Hourly Rates
Apply
No Comparison
e
Economic Development -
Housing
Planning Hourly
Rate Applies n/a Planning Hourly Rate Applies No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
Mills Act Self Reporting
$124
$628
No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison No Comparison
Historic Building Alteration,
Planning Commission Review
$10,135
No Comparison
No Comparison No Comparison
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Planning COS, Page 6 of 11

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2108 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Planning Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.2 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame San Mateo Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City 21 Other City Commission
Review
Fee Each $842 $1,198 $1,198 $1,789 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 22 Plan Check for Building
Permits
a
Major (New MultiFamily, Mixed-Use,
Commercial, Industrial)
$2,529 $3,595 $3,595
b
Moderate (New SingleFamily, Commercial
additions/alterations)
$1,054 $1,498 $1,498
c
Minor (Single-Family
Additions, Accessory
Dwelling Units)
$210 $899 $899
new
Accessory Dwelling
Units (not a part of the
previous approval)
$0 $899 $899
23 Pre-Application Development
Review
new
General/Initial
Questions
Each $0 $599 No Charge
a Major n/a $4,741 $8,987 $6,740
b Minor Each $2,107 $5,991 $2,996
24 Protected Tree Removal
a City Processing Fee
Fee Each $210 $599 $599 $81 $107 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison b Arborist
Fee Each $250 Initial
Deposit
$0 $500 Initial
Deposit
No Comparison $270 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison c Investigative Report
Fee Each $500 Initial
Deposit
$0 $500 Initial
Deposit
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison d
Illegal Tree Removal
(additional arborist report
fees apply)
Civil Penalty Penalty
Double the
Application Fee,
plus assessed
penalties per
Muni Code
Double the
Application Fee,
plus assessed
penalties per
Muni Code
No Comparison $1,282 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Actuals cost charged by a
city designated private tree
care company
$490 - $1,610 50% of building permit $160/hr
Fee is per consultant's rate +
reimbursement of
staff/consultant time (0.05%
building valuation on those
building permits whose
valuation is over $5,000
25% of building permit 70% of building permit
No Comparison
$967 preliminary plan check
for new construction; $484
preliminary plan check for
remodel
No Comparison $400 deposit No Comparison $2,500 - $25,000 deposit NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Planning COS, Page 7 of 11

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2109 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Planning Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.2 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame San Mateo Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City new Protected Tree Notice
Fee Each $0 $300 $300 $317 $107 Protected Tree
Removal No Comparison $120 Tree Protection Plan Review
No Comparison No Comparison
new Tree Replanting Fee per tree $ - $ 1,486 $ - No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Landscape in Lieu $336.86
per landscape unit
25 Public Notice Fee
City Processing Fee Per Hearing $422 $599 $599 $317 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Actual Costs Public Notice List Preparation $479
26 Restrictive Covenants
Fee Each $422 $599 $599 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 27 San Mateo County Recording
Fees
City Processing Fee $422 $599 $599
County Fee Per County fee
schedule n/a Per County fee schedule
28 Subdivisions
a
Subdivision, Major (5 or
more lots)
Fee Each $16,854 $23,965 $23,965 $4,431 per map
b
Subdivision, Minor (up to 4
lots) or for Condominium
Maps
Fee Each $2,529 $3,595 $3,595
c
Lot Line Adjustment, Parcel
Mergers
Fee Each $842 $1,198 $1,198
d Conditional Exceptions
Fee Each $4,214 $5,991 $5,991
e Lot Verification
Fee Each $422 $599 $599
f Map Extension
Fee each $842 $1,198 $1,198
No Comparison No Comparison
$8,105 per map
$2,595
$742.85 (or actual cost)
$742.85 (or actual cost)
No Comparison
$6,000 subdivision map
$15,250 deposit
$1,492
No Comparison
No Comparison
Subdivision Ordinance and City
Code Exception
Per County fee schedule Per County fee schedule Per County fee schedule Per County fee schedule Per County fee schedule Per County fee schedule NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Planning COS, Page 8 of 11

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2110 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Planning Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.2 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame San Mateo Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City 29 Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Plan
a City Staff Review Each $2,949 $4,194 $4,194
b Consultant Review Actual $700 Initial
Deposit
n/a $700 Initial
Deposit
30 Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) Review Each
a Annual Each $500 Initial
Deposit
$1,498 $500 Initial
Deposit
b 5-Year $500 Initial
Deposit
$2,996 $500 Initial
Deposit
c Consultant Review n/a $700 Initial
Deposit
n/a $700 Initial
Deposit
31 Use Permits
a
Conditional Use PermitPlanning Commission
Fee Each $5,268 $8,987 $8,987
No new construction $9,017; All
others $9,912; Administrative
permit $2,832
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison b
Minor Use Permit - Zoning
Administrator
Fee Each $2,529 $4,493 $4,493 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $6,000 initial deposit c
Use Permits (Development
Standards)
Fee Each $2,529 $3,595 $3,595 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $7,500 No Comparison d Temporary
Fee Each $842 $2,397 $2,397 No Comparison No Comparison $150.15 (or actual cost); minor events are exempt No Comparison $1,492 No Comparison e Amendment
Fee Each $2,107 $3,595 $3,595 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $3,386 $3,000 - $10,000 initial deposit
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison No Comparison
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Planning COS, Page 9 of 11

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2111 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Planning Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.2 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame San Mateo Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City 31 Variance
Fee Each $8,427 $11,983 $11,983 No Comparison No Comparison $2,000 deposit $3,000 deposit $3,386 No Comparison 33 Waivers
Fee Each $842 $2,397 $1,198 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 34 Zoning Administrator
Determination
Fee Each $1,685 $2,397 $2,397 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 35 Zoning Ordinance
Amendment
a
Major Rezone/PD/Map and
Text
Fee Each $16,854 $23,965 $23,965
b
Moderate Rezone/PD/Map
and Text
Fee Each $8,427 $11,983 $11,983
c
Minor Rezone/PD/Map and
Text
Fee Each $4,214 $5,991 $5,991
36 Minor staff review
a
ABC/DMV Zoning Affidavit
Review
Fee Each $210 $599 $599 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison b Business Registration
Fee Each $101 $300 $101 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison c Home Occupations
Fee Each $101 $300 $101 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $93 No Comparison No Comparison d
Home Occupation
Revocation Hearing
Fee Each $1,685 $2,397 $2,397 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $93 No Comparison No Comparison e Massage
Fee Each $632 $899 $899 No Comparison No Comparison $88.45 - $517.10 No Comparison $199 Renewal, $631 Initial No Comparison f
Other Zoning Affidavit
Review
Fee Each $842 $1,198 $1,198 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $8,000 deposit No Comparison
Actual cost (subject to
$5,000 deposit at time of
filing)
General Plan Amendment,
Zoning Text/Map
Amendment $15,250
$8,218 re-zoning
General Plan Amendment,
Rezoning, or Zoning Ordinance
Amendment $15,501
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Planning COS, Page 10 of 11

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2112 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Planning Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.2 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame San Mateo Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City g Parking Calculation
Fee Each $632 $899 $899 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison h
Records Search and
Determination
Fee Each $422 $599 $599 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison i Code Compliance
Fee Each $842 $1,198 $1,198 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $250 + $50/unit No Comparison 37 Credit Card and eCheck
Charges
Each
Transaction
Actual Cost $0 Actual Cost 2.45% of transaction No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 2.6% of transaction new SB-9 Application
No Lot Split $0 $10,485 $10,485
Lot Split $0 $10,485 $10,485
39 For services requested of City
Staff for which no
fee/deposit is listed in this
Master Fee Schedule, the
Department Director shall
determine the appropriate
fee/deposit based on the
following hourly rates for
staff time involved in the
service.

Planning Division Staff Per Hour $210 $300 $300 $298 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $156 $275 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Planning COS, Page 11 of 11

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2113 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) Prepared by NBS for the City of San Carlos
APPENDIX B.3
Comparative Fee Survey – Public Works - Engineering

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2114 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department - Comparative Fee Survey Fiscal FY 2022 APPENDIX B.3 1 Final Map Review
(Includes up to 3 Reviews)
a. Parcel (4 lots or less)
City Processing Fee per project $ 2,387 2,411 $ 2,387 $ $9,425 deposit
equivalent to 32
hours; hourly rate in
$295 excess
$1,130 first 2 sheets
plus $240 for each
additional sheet
$800 deposit minimum +
Actual Costs $4,431 per map
Consultant Review per project
Deposit / Actual
Cost $ - Deposit / Actual Cost
Actual cost plus
%30 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
b. Subdivision (5 or more lots)
City Processing Fee per project $ 2,797 $ 2,769 $ 2,769 $14,726 deposit
equivalent to 50
hours, hourly rate
$295 in excess
$ 4,366.00 plus
deposit, plus $266.00
for each additional lot
in excess of 5 lots; plus
actual City consultant
costs

3.0% of the approved
engineers' estimated costs
of construction of
improvements including a
10% contingency
$3,330 first 2 sheets
plus $240 for each
additional sheet
$800 deposit minimum +
Actual Costs $8,105 per map
Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
$ - Deposit /
Actual Cost
Actual cost plus
%30 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison c 4th and Subsequent Review
City Processing Fee per submittal $ 289 $ 286 $ 286 No Comparison Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
$ - Deposit /
Actual Cost
Actual cost plus
%30
Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee
Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont San Mateo
No Comparison No Comparison
Burlingame
No Comparison
Redwood City
No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison
Foster City Menlo Park
No Comparison
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Public Works COS, Page 1 of 6

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2115 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department - Comparative Fee Survey Fiscal FY 2022 APPENDIX B.3 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee
Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont San Mateo Burlingame Redwood City Foster City Menlo Park 2 Civil Plan Check
(Includes up to 3 Reviews)
a. Minor Projects
City Processing Fee per project $ 1,929 $ 1,910 $ 1,910 Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
$ - Deposit /
Actual Cost
b. Moderate Projects
City Processing Fee per project $ 3,761 $ 3,724 $ 3,724 Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
$ - Deposit /
Actual Cost
c. Major Projects
City Processing Fee per project $ 5,497 $ 5,443 $ 5,443 Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
$ - Deposit /
Actual Cost
c. 4th and Subsequent Review
City Processing Fee per submittal $ 482 $ 477 $ 477
Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
$ - Deposit /
Actual Cost
3 Utility Companies Plan Check:
a Minor each $ 191 193 $ 191 $ $670 per app
b. Moderate each $ 382 386 $ 382 $ No Comparison
c. Major deposit $ 668 675 $ 668 $ $810 per app + 5.35% of eng. cost estimate
4 Construction Inspection (Including Utilities)
a. Minor Projects (1-3 inspections) per project $ 434 $ 430 $ 430 b. Moderate Projects (4-5 inspections) per project $ 723 $ 716 $ 716 c. Major Projects (6-10 inspections) per project Deposit / Actual Cost
$ - Deposit /
Actual Cost
d. Additional Inspection each $ 145 $ 143 $ 143 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
$295 per hour
No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison No Comparison
$810 per app + 5.35%
of eng. cost estimate
185 - 1,000 CY: $1,595 +
$45 per 50 CY greater
than 185
1,001 - 10,000 CY: $3,653
+ $74 per 100 CY greater
than 1,000
Over 10,000 CY: $9,618 +
$59 per 100 CY greater
than 10,000
No Comparison
$2,500 min deposit
No Comparison

3.0% of the approved
engineers' estimated costs
of construction of
improvements including a
10% contingency
$164.70 Application Fee
plus: Actual Cost (includes
time and material and all
direct and indirect costs)

3.0% of the approved
engineers' estimated costs
of construction of
improvements including a
10% contingency
No Comparison
$800 minimum deposit +
Actual Costs
$800 minimum deposit +
Actual Costs
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Public Works COS, Page 2 of 6

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2116 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department - Comparative Fee Survey Fiscal FY 2022 APPENDIX B.3 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee
Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont San Mateo Burlingame Redwood City Foster City Menlo Park 5 Post Construction Stormwater Device Monitoring per device, every 5 years
$ 382 386 $ 382 $ No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 10% of Building Permit $587.51 per project +
$395 erosion a control
compliance deposit
6 Dirt Hauling
a. per CY per CY $ - 2.35 $ 2.10 $ $3 per CY over 50
CY
$1.00 per ton/per mile $0.54 per net CY/mile
7 Planning & Building Dept. Plan Check:
a. Planning Referral
City Processing Fee per project $ 964 $ 955 $ 955 No Comparison Consultant Review per project Deposit / Actual
Cost
$ - Deposit /
Actual Cost Actual Costs
b. Building Referral, Review of On-site Civil each $ 382 386 $ 382 $ 40% of base Building
Permit and Plan Check
Fee
8 Debris Box/Storage Container Permit per permit
a. Duration up to two weeks $ 286 96 $ 86 $
b. Monthly $ 286 289 $ 286 $
No Comparison
No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison $ 54.85
No Comparison
No Comparison
$10/container/day
No Comparison No Comparison

3.0% of the approved
engineers' estimated costs
of construction of
improvements including a
10% contingency
No Comparison
$500 min deposit or
$50/ton, whichever is
greater
$120 per week
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Public Works COS, Page 3 of 6

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2117 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department - Comparative Fee Survey Fiscal FY 2022 APPENDIX B.3 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee
Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont San Mateo Burlingame Redwood City Foster City Menlo Park 9 Encroachment Permit Administrative Fee per permit $ 95 96 $ 95 $ $ 524 No Comparison $164.70 Application Fee
plus Actual Cost* (Requires
a deposit of 5% of the
estimated construction
cost with $1,000 minimum;
deposit will be renewed
when it reaches 50% of the
original required amount);
$164.70 Application Fee
plus: Actual Cost (includes
time and material and all
direct and indirect costs)
$500 Minor
Encroachments; $825
plus 3% of the cost
estimate with final
fee based on staff
hourly billing rates
$ 714 $214 - $723
10 Outside Sewer Agreement Fee deposit Deposit $5,000 $ - Deposit 5,000 11 Community Banner (Hang & Remove):
for-profit organization Each $ 191 193 $ 191 $ $ 331 $ 214 non-profit organization Each No Charge 191 $ No Charge No Comparison No Comparison 12 Wide Load Processing Each $ 18 $ 95 $ 16 Set by State Set by State Set by State Set by State Set by State Set by State 13 Sidewalk Dining or Outdoor Display Approval
Initial Each Initial Review $ 286 289 $ 286 $
Annual Each Annual
Review
$ 286 289 $ 286 $
No Comparison
No Comparison
$162.50 application fee
plus $750 required deposit
No Comparison
$ 810
$480 one week
display and two week
display on Santa Cruz
Ave
No Comparison
$385 Sidewalk and
Pedestrian Mall Outdoor
Dining - encroachment
permit application fee
$385 Sidewalk and
Pedestrian Mall Outdoor
Dining - parklet
encroachment permit
No Comparison
$379 plus certificate of
insurance
No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Public Works COS, Page 4 of 6

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2118 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department - Comparative Fee Survey Fiscal FY 2022 APPENDIX B.3 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee
Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont San Mateo Burlingame Redwood City Foster City Menlo Park 14 Temporary NO PARKING Signs per sign $ 1.00 $ - $ 1.00 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $ 1.07 $ 3 15 six month permit $ 96 $ 95 $ 95 No Comparison $63 annually No Comparison No Comparison $40 - $100 per month $40 - $100 per month each No Charge 31 $ No Charge
six month permit $ 143 35 $ 31 $
16 Exception to the Winter Moratorium on Grading per week long request
$ 95 96 $ 95 $
17 "Street Cut" fee per Ordinance Section 12.08.310.C.2 per opening $ 671 $ - $ 600 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 18 Video Review of Existing Sewer Lateral each $ 145 $ 143 $ 143 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $ 896 19 Starting Work Without a Permit per permit Actual Cost - $ Actual Cost No Comparison Double Permit Fee No Comparison Double Permit Fee Minimum of 100% of all building permit fees
20 Grading Bond Policy (per 12.08.100)
<1,000 CY per city policy per city policy - $ per city policy $884 for up to 50
cu. yds; $884 +
$3/cu. yds. For over
50 cu. yds.
$1,409 - $2,127
$84.05 Grading Permit for
up to 50 cu. yds.; $134.20
Grading Permit for 51-100
cu. yds.; $130.40 plus
$61.80/ for each 100 cu.
yds.
>1,000 CY per city policy per city policy - $ per city policy $884 for up to 50
cu. yds; $884 +
$3/cu. yds. For over
50 cu. yds.
$2,487 - $3,384
$674.20 plus $294.70/ for
each 101-1,000 cu. yds.;
$3,252.20 + $129.05 plus
$129.05/ for each 10,000
cu. Yds.
21 C.4 Inspection
per hour -
minimum 1.5
hours
$ 191 221 $ 191 $ No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 22 Credit Card and eCheck Charges Each Transaction Actual Cost $ - Actual Cost 2.45% of transaction
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 2.6% of transaction new Parklet Program
a. Encroachment Permit Administrative Fee per permit No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $ 500 b. Encroachment Permit - Downtown Area Per Permit/Per 6 mo.
$ 935 - $ - $ No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $ 250 c. Encroachment Permit - Other Areas (industrial arts, etc) Per Permit/Per 6 mo.
$ 935 - $ - $ No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $ 250 d. Cleaning Fee per l.f./per 6 mo $ - $ 13 $ - No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Semi-Annual Permit Parking in City Lots
No Comparison
East San Carlos Parking Permit Program-Residential
Part of the Program
East San Carlos Parking Permit Program-Business part
of the Program
No Comparison
No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Public Works COS, Page 5 of 6

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2119 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Public Works Department - Comparative Fee Survey Fiscal FY 2022 APPENDIX B.3 Fee No. Fee Name Fee Unit / Type
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee
Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont San Mateo Burlingame Redwood City Foster City Menlo Park new Tree Replanting Fee $ -
$1,486 + Actual
Cost
$ - No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Landscape in Lieu
$336.86 per landscape
unit
25 Maintenance Staff per hr. $ 184 $ 246 $ 246 $ 295
Engineering Staff per hr. $ 191 193 $ 191 $ No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Public Works COS, Page 6 of 6

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2120 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) Prepared by NBS for the City of San Carlos
APPENDIX B.4
Comparative Fee Survey – Community Development – Building Division

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2121 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Building Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.4 1 a Valuation Based Fees - Building Permit (Single Family Residential) $1 - $5,000: Assume $5,000 valuation $ 134.00 $ 145.33 $ 182.45 $ 235.50 $ 602.30 $ 539.50 $5,001 - $25,000: Assume $15,000 Valuation $ 344.10 $ 315.53 $ 403.95 $ 442.70 $ 894.41 $ 695.81 $25,001 - $50,000: Assume $37,500 Valuation $ 1,286.00 $ 784.88 $ 828.75 $ 1,088.50 $ 1,988.85 $ 1,361.64 $50,001 - $100,000: Assume $75,000 Valuation $ 2,143.50 $ 1,544.23 $ 1,308.75 $ 1,715.90 $ 3,173.50 $ 2,293.20 $100,001 - $500,000: Assume $300,000 Valuation $ 3,860.00 $ 6,323.58 $ 3,465.00 $ 4,396.00 $ 8,701.71 $ 5,476.27 $500,001 - $1,000,000: Assume $750,000 Valuation $ 6,004.00 $ 9,645.25 $ 7,487.50 $ 9,267.54 $ 14,470.50 $ 8,840.00 $1,000,001 and up: Assume $1MM Valuation $ 6,859.00 $ 11,437.45 $ 9,630.00 $ 11,814.78 $ 15,346.39 $ 10,710.67 b. Valuation Based Fees - Building Permit (Multi-Family Residential / Commercial / Industrial) $1 - $10,000: Assume $5,000 Valuation $ 134.00 $ 145.33 $ 182.45 $ 235.50 $ 1,052.96 $ 571.39 $10,001 - $25,000: Assume $15,000 Valuation $ 344.10 $ 315.53 $ 403.95 $ 442.70 $ 1,457.96 $ 900.99 $25,001 - $50,000: Assume $37,500 Valuation $ 1,286.00 $ 784.88 $ 828.75 $ 1,088.50 $ 2,949.82 $ 1,532.58 $50,001 - $100,000: Assume $75,000 Valuation $ 2,143.50 $ 1,544.23 $ 1,308.75 $ 1,715.90 $ 5,183.22 $ 2,619.23 $100,001 - $500,000: Assume $300,000 Valuation $ 3,860.00 $ 6,323.58 $ 3,465.00 $ 4,396.00 $ 9,394.00 $ 5,190.74 $500,001 - $1,000,000: Assume $750,000 Valuation $ 6,004.00 $ 9,645.25 $ 7,487.50 $ 9,267.54 $ 13,349.86 $ 9,737.53 $1,000,001 - $10,000,000: Assume $5,500,000 Valuation $ 37,729.00 $ 31,417.45 $ 35,730.00 $ 38,364.78 $ 47,893.71 $ 20,685.93 $10,000,001 - $20,000,000: Assume $15,000,000 Valuation $ 73,605.86 $ 73,597.45 $ 91,530.00 $ 94,414.78 $ 174,104.47 $ 52,319.28 $20,000,001 - $50,000,000: Assume $35,000,000 Valuation $ 240,099.00 $ 162,397.45 $ 206,830.00 $ 212,414.78 $ 261,126.44 $ 88,274.78 $50,000,000+ $ 480,199.00 $ 233,437.45 $ 299,630.00 $ 306,814.78 $ 304,351.44 $ 106,474.78 c Valuation Based Fees - Standard Plan Check (Single Family Residential) $1 - $5,000: Assume $5,000 valuation $ 102.00 $ 94.46 $ 118.59 $ 164.85 $ 301.15 $ 377.65 $5,001 - $25,000: Assume $15,000 Valuation $ 258.50 $ 205.09 $ 262.57 $ 309.89 $ 447.21 $ 487.07 $25,001 - $50,000: Assume $37,500 Valuation $ 965.13 $ 510.17 $ 538.69 $ 761.95 $ 994.42 $ 953.15 $50,001 - $100,000: Assume $75,000 $ 1,608.00 $ 1,003.75 $ 850.69 $ 1,201.13 $ 1,586.75 $ 1,605.24 $100,001 - $500,000: Assume $300,000 $ 2,896.00 $ 4,110.33 $ 2,252.25 $ 3,077.20 $ 4,350.86 $ 3,833.39 $500,001 - $1,000,000: Assume $750,000 Valuation $ 4,503.00 $ 6,269.41 $ 4,866.88 $ 6,487.28 $ 7,235.25 $ 6,188.00 $1,000,001 and up: Assume $1MM Valuation $ 5,144.00 $ 7,434.34 $ 6,259.50 $ 8,270.34 $ 7,673.20 $ 7,497.47 d Valuation Based Fees - Standard Plan Check (Multi-Family Residential / Commercial / Industrial) $1 - $10,000: Assume $5,000 Valuation $ 102.00 $ 94.46 $ 118.59 $ 164.85 $ 526.48 $ 428.54 $10,001 - $25,000: Assume $15,000 Valuation $ 258.50 $ 205.09 $ 262.57 $ 309.89 $ 728.98 $ 675.74 $25,001 - $50,000: Assume $37,500 Valuation $ 965.13 $ 510.17 $ 538.69 $ 761.95 $ 1,474.91 $ 1,149.44 $50,001 - $100,000: Asume $75,000 Valuation $ 1,608.00 $ 1,003.75 $ 850.69 $ 1,201.13 $ 2,591.61 $ 1,964.42 $100,001 - $500,000: Assume $300,000 Valuation $ 2,896.00 $ 4,110.33 $ 2,252.25 $ 3,077.20 $ 4,697.00 $ 3,893.06 $500,001 - $1,000,000: Assume $750,000 Valuation $ 4,503.00 $ 6,269.41 $ 4,866.88 $ 6,487.28 $ 6,674.93 $ 7,303.15 $1,000,001 - $10,000,000: Assume $5,500,000 Valuation $ 28,319.00 $ 20,421.34 $ 23,224.50 $ 26,855.35 $ 23,946.86 $ 15,514.45 $10,000,001 - $20,000,000: Assume $15,000,000 Valuation $ 107,999.15 $ 47,838.34 $ 59,494.50 $ 66,090.35 $ 87,052.24 $ 39,239.46 $20,000,001 - $50,000,000: Assume $35,000,000 Valuation $ 180,244.00 $ 105,558.34 $ 134,439.50 $ 148,690.35 $ 130,563.22 $ 66,206.08 $50,000,000+ $ 360,494.00 $ 151,734.34 $ 194,759.50 $ 214,770.35 $ 152,175.72 $ 79,856.08 Redwood City
No Comparison - Fees Not
Valuation Based
No Comparison - Fees Not
Valuation Based
Fee
No.

Fee Name San Mateo
Building Permits
Burlingame Foster City San Carlos Current
Fee
Belmont Menlo Park
No Comparison - Fees Not
Valuation Based
No Comparison - Fees Not
Valuation Based
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Bldg COS, Page 1 of 5

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2122 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Building Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.4 Redwood City Fee
No.

Fee Name San Mateo Burlingame Foster City San Carlos Current Fee
Belmont Menlo Park
2 Permitted Values for Construction:
$ 232.00 $ 200.00 $ 165.00
Interior Remodels $ 117.00 $ 150.00 $ 108.00
$ 48.00 $ 50.00 $ 90.00
Decks $ 39.00 No Comparison $ 15.00
Commercial Shell $ 57.00 No Comparison comparison n/a
Tenant Improvements $ 57.00 No Comparison comparison n/a 3 Electrical Permit
a Residential: New Single Family $ 171.00 $ 204.00 $ 238.00 $ 66.00 $ 272.99 each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.14 0.12 $ $.02/sq. ft. $ 0.15 b Residential: Addition & Remodel $ 171.00 $ 238.00 204.00 $ 66.00 $ $ 272.99 each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.14 0.12 $ $.02/sq. ft. $ 0.15 c Residential: New Multiple Family $ 171.00 $ 238.00 204.00 $ 66.00 $ $ 272.99 each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.14 0.12 $ $.02/sq. ft. $ 0.15 d Commercial: New Shell Building $ 171.00 $ 204.00 $ 1,175.02 each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.12 $ 0.15
e $ 171.00 $ 204.00 $ 1,175.02
each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.12 $ 0.15
f $ 312.00 $ 360.00 $ 690.00
each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.12 $ 0.23
g Swimming Pool, Spa, or Hot Tub $ 178.00 $ 436.00 $ 188.00 $ 54.60 $ 338.00 $467 - $781 No Comparison h Temporary Power Pole $ 178.00 $ 145.00 $ 125.00 $ 54.55 $ 144.00 $ 356.00 No Comparison i Main Electrical Service $ 178.00 No Comparison $ 64.00 $67.40 - $136.65 No Comparison $ 155.00 No Comparison j $ 85.00 No Comparison $ 108.00 No Comparison $ 150.00 No Comparison $ 375.76 k New or Replacement Sub-Panel $ 178.00 No Comparison No Comparison 40.10 $ 150.00 $ No Comparison No Comparison l Miscellaneous Electrical Permit $ 116.00 $ 87.00 157.00 $ 27.15 $ No Comparison 155.00 $ No Comparison m Residential PV Solar Fee $ 227.00 $450 + $15 per KW
above 15 KW No charge No Comparison No Comparison $468 + $16 per KW above 15 KW $1,000 up to 50KW;
$1,000 plus $7 per Add'l
KW over 50KW up to
250KW; $2,400 plus $5 for
each add'l KW over 251
KW
n Commercial PV Solar Fee $ 227.00 $450 + $15 per KW
above 15 KW $411 + $333 per hour No Comparison No Comparison $1,180 for 50 KW or less,
$1,180 + $7 per KW for 51 -
250 KW, $1,180 + $5 per KW
for 251 KW or more
$1,000 up to 50KW;
$1,000 plus $7 per Add'l
KW over 50KW up to
250KW; $2,400 plus $5 for
each add'l KW over 251
KW
No Comparison
Garages and Accessory Structures
Commercial: Addition, Remodel, Tenant Improvement
Commercial: Complex Tenant Improvements (Car Washes, Dry Cleaners, Laundries, Labs, R&D, Biotech, Restaurants, Spray Booths, Hazardous Areas)
New Residential and Additions
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison
$155 per permit issuance
New or Replacement Circuit for HVAC or Other
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Bldg COS, Page 2 of 5

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2123 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Building Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.4 Redwood City Fee
No.

Fee Name San Mateo Burlingame Foster City San Carlos Current Fee
Belmont Menlo Park
4 Plumbing Permit
a Residential: New Single Family (1700 sq. ft.) $ 171.00 $ 47.00 $ 272.99 each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.14 No Comparison
b Residential: Addition & Remodel (1,700 sq. ft.) $ 171.00 $ 47.00 $ 272.99 each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.14 No Comparison
c Residential: New Multiple Family (1,700 sq. ft.) $ 171.00 $ 47.00 $ 908.25 each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.14 No Comparison
d Commercial: New Shell Building (1,700 sq. ft.) $ 171.00 $ 47.00 $ 908.25 each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.14 $ 0.23
e Commercial: Addition, Remodel, Tenant Improvement (1,700 sq. ft) $ 171.00 $ 47.00 $ 908.25 each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.14 $ 0.23
f Commercial: Complex Tenant Improvements (Car Washes, Dry Cleaners, Laundries, Labs, R&D, Biotech, Restaurants, Spray Booths, Hazardous Areas) (3,000 s.f.) $ 357.00 $ 47.00 $ 908.25 each additional sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.14 $ 0.23
g Miscellaneous Plumbing Permit $ 116.00 $ 40.00 23.00 $ $ 86.05 No Comparison No Comparison h Swimming Pool, Spa, or Hot Tub $ 171.00 $149 - $223 $185 - $246 No Comparison 38.00 $ No Comparison i Water Heater Replacement $ 104.00 $ 159.00 $ No Comparison 38.00 61.00 $ $ 478.52 j Gas Piping Extension for New FAU or HVAC $ 85.00 $148 + $29 for each add'l outlet over 5
$40 plus $8 for each add'l
outlet over 5
$4 for 1-5 outlets; $4
for each outlet over 5 No Comparison No Comparison
5 Mechanical Permit
a Residential: New Single Family $ 171.00 $ 47.00 $ 272.99 each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.14 No Comparison
b Residential: Kitchen & Bath Remodel $ 85.00 $ 47.00 $ 272.99 c Commercial: New Shell Building $ 171.00 $ 47.00 $ 908.25 each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.14 $ 0.23
d $ 171.00 $ 47.00 $ 908.25
each additional sq. ft. $ 0.07 $ 0.14 $ 0.23
e $ 357.00 $ 47.00 $ 908
each additional sq. ft. $ 0.08 $ 0.14 $ 0.23
f New FAU or HVAC Installations $ 267.00 $ 104.00 160.00 $ $226 - $331 $375.76 -$781.61 g Replacement FAU or HVAC $ 178.00 $ 104.00 160.00 $ $226 - $331 $375.76 -$781.61 h Miscellaneous Mechanical $ 116.00 $ 31.00 27.00 $ No Comparison No Comparison $66 per permit issuance plus
$307 per supplemental
permit issuance
$66 per permit issuance plus
$307 per supplemental
permit issuance
$155 per permit issuance
Commercial: Addition, Remodel, Tenant Improvement $155 per permit issuance $86.05 per permit
issuance plus $86.05
per supplemental
permit issuance
$86.05 per permit
issuance plus $86.05
per supplemental
permit issuance
$159 + $73 for each
supplemental permit
$160 each issuance of
permit plus $20 for each
supplemental permit
Commercial: Complex Tenant Improvements (Car Washes, Dry Cleaners, Laundries, Labs, R&D, Biotech, Restaurants, Spray Booths, Hazardous Areas)
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Bldg COS, Page 3 of 5

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2124 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Building Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.4 Redwood City Fee
No.

Fee Name San Mateo Burlingame Foster City San Carlos Current Fee
Belmont Menlo Park
6 Miscellaneous Building Fees
a Grading Permit Fee for Swimming Pools
Permit $ 85.00 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison b Grading Permit Fee for Other than Swimming Pools
Permit $ 85.00 $884 for 0-50CY, $884 +
$3/CY over 50 CY
$1,409 up to 100CY, $2,127
up to $1,000CY, $2,487 up
to 10,000CY, $3,384 over
10,000CY
$86.05 up to 50CY,
$134.20 up to $100CY,
$130.40 + $61.80/each
100CY, $674.20 +
$294.70/each 1,000CY,
$3,252.20 +
$129.50/each 10,000CY
$331 up to 50CY
$331 up to 100CY, $8/each
add'l 100CY
$859 for 1,000CY minimum,
$41/each add'l 1,000CY
$2,514 for 10,000CY
(minimum), $83/each add'l
10,000CY
$3,973 for 10,000CY
(minimum), $83/each add'l
10,000CY
c Accessibility Plan Check of Building Permit $ 243.00
each additional hour $ 243.00
d Imaging Fees per page (standard size) $ 1.00
e Imaging Fees per page (oversize) $ 2.00
7 Planning Application Review $ 189.50 No Comparison
$523 Single Family
Dwelling (Addition)
S1,045 Single Family
Dwelling (New)
$2,087 Multi-Family
and Commercial/Industrial
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 8 During Normal Business Hours $ 243.00 $ 298.00 $ 274.00 Actual Cost First ½ hour - $132 $ 156.00 $ 266.77 each additional hour $ 243.00 $ 298.00 $ 274.00 Actual Cost $ 82.00 $ 156.00 $ 266.77 Outside Business Hours $ 486.00 $298/hr, 2hr min. $274/hr, 2hr min. Actual Cost, including overhead, 4hr min. $214, 2hr min. $156/hr, 2hr min. $266.77/hr, 2hr min. each additional hour $ 243.00 $298/hr, 2hr min. $274/hr, 2hr min. Actual Cost, including overhead, 4hr min. $214, 2hr min. $156/hr, 2hr min. $266.77/hr, 2hr min.

Code Enforcement - City Attorney $ 286.00 No Comparison No Comparison $120.35, plus actual
cost of City Attorney
time
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
each additional hour $ 286.00 No Comparison No Comparison $120.35, plus actual
cost of City Attorney
time
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison
No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison
Fees for Second and Each Additional Reinspection:

No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison Add'l 5% of permit fee with
minimum of $5 No Comparison Actual Cost
No Comparison No Comparison
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Bldg COS, Page 4 of 5

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2125 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Community Development Department - Building Division - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.4 Redwood City Fee
No.

Fee Name San Mateo Burlingame Foster City San Carlos Current Fee
Belmont Menlo Park
9 Dirt Haul Permit reference PW fee
schedule $295 plus $3 per CY No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 10 Municipal Code Violation Fees
First Violation $ 100.00
$ 200.00
$ 500.00
11 GEO Plan Review / Soils Report Review Actual Cost per Geologist
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 12 $ 77.00 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 13 Additional Plan Check Fee $ 171.00 $298/hour $333/hour Actual Cost No Comparison $155/hour, 1/2 hr min.
$278.18/hour
1/2 hr min.
14 Re-Inspection Fee $ 171.00 $ 298.00 $ 274.00 Actual Cost $ 160.00 $ 156.00 $ 266.77 15 Demolition $ 171.00 No Comparison No Comparison $ 341.05 $149 - $203 $ 176.00 $ 230.44 16 Address Change $ 171.00 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $ 129.00 $ 152.00 $ 905.00 17 Green Building Review $ 171.00 No Comparison Additional 25% of building permit
No Comparison
$1 for valuation $1.00 -
$25,000; $2 for valuation
$25,001 - $50,000; $3 for
valuation $50,000 - $75,000;
$4 for valuation $75,001 -
$100,00; $1 for every
$25,000 or fraction thereof
above $100,000
No Comparison No Comparison
18 Energy Calculation Review Fee $ 85.00 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 19 Apartment Inspection Annual Fee
Per Residential Building $ 257.00 $ 298.00 $ 274.00 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Per Dwelling Unit within each Building $ 13.00 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 20 Building Division Staff $ 243.00 $ 298.00 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $ 200.00 each additional hour $ 243.00 $ No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 298.00 $ 200.00 Each Additional Violation of the same ordinance within 36-months A Penalty Fee Equal To The
Amount Of The Permit Fee
Will Be Imposed In Projects
Undertaken Without The
Appropriate Permits
No Comparison
For services requested of City Staff for which no fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the Department Director shall determine the appropriate fee No Comparison
Second Violation of the Same Ordinance within 36-months GIS Mapping: New Construction, Addition, Alteration
No Comparison
$100-$500 per violation
for conservative water
measures
No Comparison
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Bldg COS, Page 5 of 5

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2126 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) Prepared by NBS for the City of San Carlos
APPENDIX B.5
Comparative Fee Survey – Police

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2127 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Police Department - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.5 1 Accident Report
a property damage only $ 20 2 $ 2 $
$23 for first page,
plus $0.30 per add'l
page
$0.25 per page $4.35 -$6.04 $2 per report, add'l
copy $0.10 per page
$19 first 8 pages, +
$1/page if > 8 pages $0.15 per page
b property damage with injuries $ 20 2 $ 2 $
$23 for first page,
plus $0.30 per add'l
page
$0.25 per page $4.35 -$6.04 $2 per report, add'l
copy $0.10 per page
$19 first 8 pages, +
$1/page if > 8 pages $0.15 per page
c fatality $ 20 2 $ 2 $
$23 for first page,
plus $0.30 per add'l
page
$0.25 per page $4.35 -$6.04 $2 per report, add'l
copy $0.10 per page
$19 first 8 pages, +
$1/page if > 8 pages $0.15 per page
2 County Jail Booking Fee No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Determined by county 3 Crime Report $ 30 2 $ 2 $
$23 for first page,
plus $0.30 per add'l
page
$0.25 per page $4.35 -$6.04 $2 per report, add'l
copy $0.10 per page
$19 first 8 pages, +
$1/page if > 8 pages $0.15 per page
4 False Alarm Response
a First Response $ - $ 213 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Free b Subsequent Calls
city fee +
passthrough cost
$ 213 205 $ 2,055 $ $125 - $525
$50 each for 3-5
alarms
$100 each for 6 or
more alarms
Police Security Alarm
Response - Standard
Response: $60.35 -
$314.15
Police Security Alarm
Response - High Risk
Response: $780.30 -
$1,718.70
Standard - False Alarm
Response: $88 - $108
High Risk - False Alarm
Response: $175 - $216
$189 third or more $ 104.00
5 Impounded Vehicle
a towed for criminal offenses $ - $ 101 $ 101 No Comparison $ 160.00 $ 64.70 No Comparison $ 100.00 $ 81.00 b
towed for all other offenses (abandoned, blocking
driveways, etc.) $ 91 121 $ 101 $ No Comparison $ 64.70 160.00 $ No Comparison 100.00 $ $ 81.00 6 Unruly Gatherings
a First Call $ 317 - $ - $ No Comparison cost of hours of Officer response No Comparison - $ No Comparison $ 90
b Subsequent Calls $ 317 306 $ 306 $ No Comparison cost of hours of Officer response No Comparison
$100 plus repair to
damaged City
property and cost of
officer per hour
No Comparison $ 90
Fee No. Fee Name San Mateo Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame Foster City Menlo Park
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee
Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee
County fee
Redwood City
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Police COS, Page 1 of 2

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2128 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Police Department - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.5 Fee No. Fee Name San Mateo Fee Unit /
Type
San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont Burlingame Foster City Menlo Park
San Carlos 100%
Recovery Fee
Level
San Carlos
Proposed Fee Redwood City
7 Alarm Permit [1]
a new $ - $ 10 $ - $ 50 $ 18.00 No Comparison $ 26.00 No Comparison No Comparison 8 Processing Permit for Excessive Cats & Dogs $ 121 101 $ 101 $ No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 9 Processing Police Officer Subpoena per hour $275/day
deposit per GC n/a $275/day deposit per GC No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 275.00 $ No Comparison $6 per 1/4 hour for clerical
costs +
$0.10 per page +
Actual cost for
reproduction of oversize
documents, documents
requiring special
processing, postage,
retrieval/return of records
held-off site
10 Tape of Radio/Video Transmission, Digital or Hard-copy Photographs n/a actual cost of materials $ 20 actual cost of materials $200 per hour $18 per tape plus costs of tape $ 35 No Comparison $ 24 $12 for DVD /CD/ Flash
Drive Recording
$5 for Photos
11 Credit Card and eCheck Charges
n/a
actual cost $ actual cost -

2.45% of transaction
for $10,000 and above No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 12 For services requested of City staff which have no fee listed in this fee schedule, the City Manager or the City Manager's designee shall determine the appropriate fee based on the established hourly rates for this department/division.

Additionally, the City will pass-through to the applicant any discrete costs incurred from the use of external service providers if required to process the specific application.

Non-Sworn Staff Members of the Police Department: per hour $ 101 $ 121 $ 101 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Sworn Staff Members of the Police Department: per hour $ 317 306 $ 306 $ No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $20.12 - $130.11 NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Police COS, Page 2 of 2

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2129 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) Prepared by NBS for the City of San Carlos
APPENDIX B.6
Comparative Fee Survey – Recreation

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2130 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Parks and Recreation - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.6 A. Parks, Facility, Room, and Amenity Rentals
1 Adult Community Center
Resident
Weekday
Hourly: $62-
$97;
Weekend
$449 - $931
Base, plus
$97 Hourly
Additional
n/a - market
based
Weekday
Hourly: $62-
$97; Weekend
$449 - $931
Base, plus $97
Hourly
Additional
Private Resident: $50-$85
City/ School District Use: No
Charge
Resident: $126 - $420 / hr
Resident: $40-$175
depending on room.
(2 Hr. Minimum)
Resident: $50-$212 /hr
Resident: $100 deposit + $40-
$150 / hr depending on room.

Non-Resident
Weekday
Hourly: $74-
$116;
Weekend
$538 - $1,117
Base, plus
$116 Hourly
Additional
n/a - market
based
Weekday
Hourly: $74-
$116;
Weekend $538
- $1,117 Base,
plus $116
Hourly
Additional
Private Non-Resident: $60-
$135
Commercial: $75-$170
City/ School District Use: No
Charge
Non-Resident: $151 - $504 / hr
Non-Resident: $65-
$250 depending on
room.
(2 Hr. Minimum)
Non-Resident: $70-$286
/hr
Non-Resident: $100 - $500
deposit + $60 - $300 / hr
depending on room
Non-Profit
Weekday
Hourly: $44-
$55;
Weekend
$314- $651
Base, plus
$68 Hourly
Additional
n/a - market
based
Weekday
Hourly: $44-
$55; Weekend
$314- $651
Base, plus $68
Hourly
Additional
Belmont based NonProfits: $30-$40
Non-Belmont based NonProfits: $40-$65
City/ School District Use: No
Charge
Resident Non-Profit: $94.5 - $315/
hr
Non-Resident Non Profit: $151 -
$504 / hr
No Comparison No Comparison
Non-Profit: $100 - $500
deposit for two free
rentals/month, and $20 - $75 /
hr for non-profit additional
uses Monday 8am - Friday 4pm
Redwood City San Mateo
$15 - $200 per hour,
depending on room/event
classification
Burlingame Foster City Menlo Park Fee
No.

Fee Description San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
100% Recovery
Fee Level
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Recreation COS, Page 1 of 5

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2131 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Parks and Recreation - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.6 Burlingame Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City San Mateo Fee No.

Fee Description San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
100% Recovery
Fee Level
2 Youth Center
Resident
Weekday
Hourly: $45-
$103;
Weekend
$173-$283
Base, plus
$56-$112
Hourly
Additional
n/a - market
based
Weekday
Hourly: $45-
$103;
Weekend $173-
$283 Base,
plus $56-$112
Hourly
Additional
Private Resident: $180
Non-Resident
Weekday
Hourly: $54-
$123;
Weekend
$201 - $374
Base, plus
$74-$134
Hourly
Additional
n/a - market
based
Weekday
Hourly: $54-
$123;
Weekend $201
- $374 Base,
plus $74-$134
Hourly
Additional
Private Non-Resident:
$260
Commercial: $310
Non-Profit
Weekday
Hourly: $31-
$72;
Weekend
$122-$198
Base, plus
$39-$78
Hourly
Additional
n/a - market
based
Weekday
Hourly: $39-
$61; Weekend
$281-$582
Base, plus $61
Hourly
Additional
Belmont based NonProfits: $80
Non-Belmont based NonProfits: $105

3. San Carlos Library Community Room Rental Varies n/a 64.00 $ No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $35 /hr Residents: $90/hr
Non-Resident: $135/hr
Non-Profits: Two free
rentals/month, and $25/hr for
RWC non-rpofits and $37.50/hr
for non-RWC non-profits for
additional uses
$80-$350 depending on
room

4. Picnic Sites Rentals (March - October) Varies n/a $72 - $137 $30 - $650 $182 - $438 depending on the site No Comparison $10 - $20/hr $15 - $100 $50 -$425

5. Bocce Ball (per hour) $ n/a hourly rate 17.00 No Comparison $28.50/hr/court $20/hr No Comparison $40 deposit $11/booking for 4 hrs or
less
$25/booking for 4+ hours

6. Rental Application Fee $ 30.00 25.00 $ 30.00 $ No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison See above Facility Rental
Fees
See above Facility Rental
Fees
See above Facility
Rental Fees
Ages 10 - 15: $15
Ages 16 - 17: $40
Drop In: $1/day
See above Facility Rental Fees
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Recreation COS, Page 2 of 5

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2132 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Parks and Recreation - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.6 Burlingame Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City San Mateo Fee No.

Fee Description San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
100% Recovery
Fee Level

7. Special Event Permit:

New Request $ 764 280 $ 235 $ No Comparison $267 - $534 deposit per event No Comparison Special Event Park
Rentals
Resident: $16
Non-Resident: $22
Weddings in Park
Resident: $150
Non-Resident: $250
Bedwell Bayfront Park
$100 per day
Standard Fee $806
Non-Profit Fee: $475
(Min. 2 Hours)
$25 /hr.

Repeat Request $ 692 168 $ 147 $ No Comparison $267 - $534 deposit per event No Comparison Park Rentals
Resident: $16
Non-Resident: $22
Weddings in Sharon Park
Resident: $150
Non-Resident: $250
Bedwell Bayfront Park
$100 per day
Standard Fee $806
Non-Profit Fee: $475
(Min. 2 Hours)
$25 /hr.

B. Athletics ("Per Season/Per Quarter")

1. Light Use (Fields). Per hour $ n/a 29 31 $
Belmont based NonProfits: $15
Non-Belmont based NonProfits: $20
Private Resident: $15
Private Non-Resident: $20
Commercial: $30
$41 per hour $30 - $35 per hour Resident: $10
Non-Resident: $21 $30 per hour $25 per hour

2. San Carlos Youth Softball (Girls): Field Use Fee (per player) $ n/a 35 38 $ (Youth Activity per hour,
2 hour min.)
Belmont based NonProfits: $20-$30
Non-Belmont based NonProfits: $30-$45
Private Resident: $20-$30
Private Non-Resident: $30-
$60
Commercial: $50-$75
City/ School District Use: No
Charge
Non-Profit Resident: $21-$31 per
hour
Non-Profit Non-Resident: $31-47
per hour
Private/ Commercial Resident:
$31-$47 per hour
Private/ Commercial NonResident: $31-$47 per hour
Resident: $10/resident
per season
Non-Resident: $45 /hr
Resident: $11 /hr
Non-Resident: $19 /hr
Resident: $40 - 60 per hour
Non-Resident: $50 -75 per
hour
$ 8.00
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Recreation COS, Page 3 of 5

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2133 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Parks and Recreation - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.6 Burlingame Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City San Mateo Fee No.

Fee Description San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
100% Recovery
Fee Level
Youth Baseball: Field Use Fee (per player) $ n/a 35 38 $ Same as Youth Softball Same as Youth Softball Same as Youth Softball Same as Youth Softball Same as Youth Softball Same as Youth Softball

3. Baseball / Soccer Sports Tournament:

New Request Permit Fee $ 764 280 $ 235 $ No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Repeat Request Permit Fee $ 168 $ 692 $ 147 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison

5. Soccer: Field Use Fee (per player) $ n/a 48 52 $ See other Field Use fees above
City/ School District Use: No
Charge
Non-Profit Resident: $25-$36 per
hour
Non-Profit Non-Resident: $36-59
per hour
Private/ Commercial Resident:
$36 $59 per hour
Private/ Commercial NonResident: $36-$59 per hour
See other Field Use
fees above
Resident: $38 /hr
Non-Resident: $56 /hr
Resident: $60 - $90 per hour
Non-Resident: $75 - 110 per
hour
See other Field Use fees
above
Field Use Fee (per hour) $ n/a 20 25 $ See other Field Use fees above See other Field Use fees above See other Field Use fees above See other Field Use fees
above See other Field Use fees above See other Field Use fees above

4. Tennis:

Tennis Club Permitted Use (per hour, per court) $ n/a 12 13 $ $ 15.00 $20 per hour, per court Non-Resident Tennis Club (per hour, per court) $ n/a 17 19 $ $ 20.00 $30 per hour, per court

5. Snack Shack Use
Fall Season (August 15 - November 30) $ - $ - $ - No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Spring Season (March 1 - May 31) $ - $ - $ - No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison

6. Snack Shack Use (Outside of Primary Youth Sports Seasons) Weekly Rental Fee (Mon - Sun) $ - $ - $ - No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $25 per hour $9 per hour per court
Resident: $23 - $38 / hr
Non-Resident: $27 - $62 / hr
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Recreation COS, Page 4 of 5

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2134 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Parks and Recreation - Comparative Fee Survey FY 2022 APPENDIX B.6 Burlingame Foster City Menlo Park Redwood City San Mateo Fee No.

Fee Description San Carlos
Current Fee
Belmont San Carlos
Proposed Fee
San Carlos
100% Recovery
Fee Level
C. Miscellaneous

1. Park Fitness Group Rental $ n/a 21 23 $ No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Resident: $17 /hr
Non-Resident: $22 /hr No Comparison $25 /hr

2. Administrative fees (apply to class registration only) Registration $ 12 10 $ 10 $ Processing Fee: $30
Residents: $12
Non-Residents: Add 20% to class
fee
$ 25.00 70/30 Split with Instructor
Refund $ 25 16 $ 15 $ No Comparison $ 8.00 No Comparison $ 25.00

3. Neighborhood Block Party Permit Fee Waived - $ Fee Waived No Comparison $61 + $8 for each add'l barricade over 6
No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison

4. Technology Fee $ - 2 $ 2 $ Technology Access Fee
$75 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison $ 1.00

5. Hourly Rates
PW Maintenance Staff $ 246 184 $ 246 $
Full-Time Recreation Staff $ 177 162 $ 177 $
Part-Time Recreation Staff $ 30 52 $ 30 $
D. Community Events

1. Farmer's Market
Vendor: Single-Booth $ City Policy City Policy 40 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Vendor: Double-Booth $ City Policy City Policy 50 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Vendor: Triple-Booth $ City Policy City Policy 85 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Non-Profit Booth $ City Policy City Policy 50 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Merchant Booth $ City Policy City Policy 100 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison

2. Downtown Block Party, Concerts, Night of Holiday Lights, Goblin Walk, etc.

Food Vendor $ City Policy City Policy 150 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Handmade Crafts Vendor $ City Policy City Policy 150 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison Business Vendor $ City Policy City Policy 150 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
No Comparison No Comparison
$41/hr for Field Attendant No Comparison No Comparison
$61 + $8 for each add'l barricade
over 6
Fees vary based on Special
Events Schedule
$19 Rental Officer/hr
$29 Custodian/hr
$18/hr
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com Toll-Free:800.676.7516 Recreation COS, Page 5 of 5

10.a.2
Packet Pg. 2135 Attachment: NBS Citywide User Fee Study Report (User Fee Schedule) City of San Carlos
Proposed
User Fee Schedule - FY2022-23

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2136 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

FEE SCHEDULE PAGE
Schedule of Administrative Fees 3
Schedule of Community Development Department, Planning Division Fees 4 Schedule of Public Works Department Fees 9
Schedule of Community Development Department, Building Division Fees 13 Schedule of Fire Department Fees 19
Schedule of Police Department Fees 22
Schedule of Parks and Recreation Department Fees 24

CITY OF SAN CARLOS

COST OF SERVICES FEE SCHEDULE
Table of Contents

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2137 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Administrative Services Fees
Returned Check [1]
First Item Per First Check $ 25
Each Additional Item Per Subsequent
Check $ 35
Credit Card and eCheck Charges Each Transaction Actual Cost Copy Charges: Per Page $.10/page
Copy Charges - CD Per CD $0.50/CD
Copies of City Subdivision Ordinances, Zoning Ordinances, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, Municipal Code Book, Standard Bid Specifications, Standard Detail, Work Program Free/website, or
Copy Charge
Document Certification Per Request Fee Waived
Agenda or Minutes Subscription Free/website, or
Copy Charge
Research Per Hour, or
Fraction Thereof $ 193
For services requested of City Staff for which no fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the City Manager or Department Director shall determine the appropriate fee based on the following hourly rates for staff time:

Finance Division Staff (Per Hour) Per Hour 193 $
City Clerk Department Staff (Per Hour) Per Hour 193 $
[Notes]
[1] Fee set by California Civil Code Ch. 522 Section 1719. Additional charges may apply if not paid within 30 days of receipt of written demand for payment letter
Proposed Fee /
Deposit Service Fee Unit / Type Notes
3 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2138 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Community Development Department, Planning Division Fees Appeal, Planning Commission Per Appeal $ 2,000
Appeal, City Council Per Appeal $ 2,000
Attorney's Fees
Support to Planning projects that require Deposit Per Project Actual Cost / + $2,500 Minimum Deposit
Support to Projects on a "Fixed"/"Flat" Fee Basis Per Project Actual Cost - 2 Hours Minimum
Below Market Rate (BMR), Housing Plan Per Project $ 2,097 Below Market Rate (BMR), Builder Alternative Per Project $ 2,097 Below Market Rate (BMR), Housing Agreement Per Project $ 2,696 CEQA
Document Filing Per Project $ 300
Categorical Exemption
City Processing Fee Per Project $ 599
Department of Fish and Game / County Recording Fees Per Project Actual Cost of DFG / County Fees
Initial Study/Negative Declaration/Mitigated Negative/EIR City Processing Fee Per Project Actual Cost with
$3,000 deposit
Consultant Review Per Project Actual Cost with
$5,000 deposit
Mitigation Monitoring Per Project Actual Cost with
$1,000 deposit
Cell Tower Application [3]
6409 Application Each $ 1,198
Other Applications Each Actual Cost / T&M
Creek Exception
City Processing Fee Per Project $ 4,493
Consultant Review Per Project Actual Cost of
Consultant Study
Design Review - Single Family
Single Family, New Home (RDRC) Per Project $ 10,485
Single Family, First Floor Addition (RDRC) Per Project $ 7,489 Single Family, Second Floor Addition (RDRC) Per Project $ 10,485 Single Family, First Floor Addition (Staff) Per Project $ 2,996 Single Family, Second Floor Addition (Staff) Per Project $ 4,493 Design Review (MR, M/U, Comm, IND) - Staff Review / Approval New Building Per Project $ 17,974
Major Alteration Per Project $ 12,582
Minor Alteration Per Project $ 9,586
Proposed Fee /
Deposit Service Fee Unit / Type Notes
4 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2139 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Community Development Department, Planning Division Fees Proposed Fee /
Deposit Service Fee Unit / Type Notes
Design Review (MR, M/U, Comm, IND) - Planning Commission Review / Approval
New Building (Planning Commission) Per Project $ 21,269 Major Alteration (Planning Commission) Per Project $ 15,877 Minor Alteration (Planning Commission) Per Project $ 12,881 Design Review (Other)
A - Frames Per Project $ 150
Accessory Structures (Includes large decks) Per Project $ 1,797 Architectural Peer Review Per Project $3,000 Initial Deposit Mills Acts Designated Projects
City Processing Fee Per Project $ 1,797
Historic Consultant Review Per Project [4] $5,000 Initial Deposit Miscellaneous (awnings, trash, replacement materials, site plan review, landscape) Per Project $ 599
Outdoor Uses Dining & Retail Sales Per Project $ 1,797
Sign Program Per Project $ 5,991
Signs - (Planning Commission) Per Project $ 4,493
Signs (Staff) Per Project $ 1,198
Temporary Banner Per Project $ 300
Minor Alterations Per Project $ 1,198
Document Imaging Per 1/2 Hour - 1/2
Hour Minimum
$ 150
Domestic Fowl and Non-Household Pets Per Project $ 1,797 Excessive Noise Compliance Permit Per Project $ 599
Final Inspection, Single-Family Per Project $ 599
Final Inspection, Other Per Project $ 1,198
General Plan Amendment Per Project $ 11,983
Grading and Dirt Haul Certificate Per Project $ 2,996
Historic Preservation
City Processing Fee Per Project $ 599
Historic Assessment - Consultant Review Per Project Actual Cost with $2,000 deposit
Mills Act Contract Per Project $ 4,493
Interdepartmental Plan Review
Building Per Project
See Building Fee
Schedule for Per
Review Charge
Engineering Per Project
See Engineering Fee
Schedule and / or
Hourly Rates Apply
Fire Per Project See Fire Fee Schedule
Police Per Project
See Police Fee
Schedule and/or
Hourly Rates Apply
Economic Development - Housing Per Project Planning Hourly Rate Applies
5 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2140 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Community Development Department, Planning Division Fees Proposed Fee /
Deposit Service Fee Unit / Type Notes
Other City Commission Review Per Project $ 1,198
Plan Check for Building Permits
Major (New Multi-Family, Mixed-Use, Commercial,
Industrial) Per Project $ 3,595
Moderate (New Single-Family, Commercial
additions/alterations) Per Project $ 1,498
Minor (Single-Family Additions, Accessory Dwelling Units) Per Project $ 899 Accessory Dwelling Units (Not a Part of The Previous
Approval) Per Project $ 899
Pre-Application Development Review
General/Initial Questions Per Project No Charge
Major Per Project [2] $ 8,987
Minor Per Project [1] $ 5,991
Protected Tree Removal Permit / Pruning Permit
City Processing Fee Per Project $ 300
Arborist Per Project $500 Initial Deposit
Investigative Report Each $500 Initial Deposit
Illegal Tree Removal (additional arborist report fees apply) Penalty Double the
Application Fee, plus
assessed penalties per
Muni Code
Protected Tree Notice Each $ 150
Tree Replanting Fee Per Tree See Public Works Fee
Schedule
Public Notice Fee
City Processing Fee Per Hearing $ 599
Restrictive Covenants Each $ 599
San Mateo County Recording Fees
City Processing Fee Each $ 599
County Fee Each Per County fee
schedule
Subdivisions
Subdivision, Major (5 or more lots) Per Project $ 23,965 Subdivision, Minor (up to 4 lots) or for Condominium Maps Per Project $ 3,595 Lot Line Adjustment, Parcel Mergers Per Project $ 1,198 Conditional Exceptions Per Project $ 5,991
Lot Verification Per Project [5] $ 599
Map Extension Per Project $ 1,198
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan
City Staff Review Per Project $ 4,194
Consultant Review Per Project $700 Initial Deposit
6 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2141 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Community Development Department, Planning Division Fees Proposed Fee /
Deposit Service Fee Unit / Type Notes
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Review
Annual Each $500 Initial Deposit
5-Year Each $500 Initial Deposit
Consultant Review Deposit / Actual
Cost
$700 Initial Deposit
Use Permits
Conditional Use Permit- Planning Commission Per Project $ 8,987 Minor Use Permit - Zoning Administrator Per Project $ 4,493 Use Permits (Development Standards) Per Project $ 3,595 Temporary Per Project $ 2,397
Amendment Per Project $ 3,595
Variance Per Project $ 11,983
Waivers Per Project $ 1,198
Zoning Administrator Determination Per Project $ 2,397
Zoning Ordinance Amendment
Major Rezone/PD/Map and Text Per Project $ 23,965
Moderate Rezone/PD/Map and Text Per Project $ 11,983
Minor Rezone/PD/Map and Text Per Project $ 5,991
Minor staff review
ABC/DMV Zoning Affidavit Review Per Project $ 599
Business Registration Per Project $ 101
Home Occupations Per Project $ 101
Home Occupation Revocation Hearing Per Project $ 2,397
Massage Per Project $ 899
Other Zoning Affidavit Review Per Project $ 1,198
Parking Calculation Per Project $ 899
Search and Determination Per Project [6] $ 599
Code Compliance Per Project $ 1,198
Technology Fee Per Permit 0.4% of Total
Permit Fee Amount
General Plan Maintenance and Update - Staff Support Per Project 1% of Building
Project Valuation
for all New
Commercial and
Additions; Fee is
Applied on Building
Permit
General Plan Maintenance and Update - Contract Services Per Project

0.15% of Building
Project Valuation
for all New
Commercial and
Additions; Fee is
Applied on Building
Permit
7 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2142 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Community Development Department, Planning Division Fees Proposed Fee /
Deposit Service Fee Unit / Type Notes
Credit Card and eCheck Charges Each Transaction Actual Cost SB-9 Application
No Lot Split Each $ 10,485
Lot Split Each $ 10,485
For services requested of City Staff for which no fee/deposit is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the City Manager or Department Director shall determine the appropriate
fee/deposit based on the following hourly rates for staff time involved in the service.

Planning Division Staff Per Hour $ 300
[Notes]
[7] Per the City's Tree Ordinance, the arborist may request a fee in lieu of tree replanting if there is no possibility to plant on site [6] Not charged for public records requests
[1} Includes up to 2, 1-hour meetings with multiple departments [2] Other City department fees/deposits may apply
[3] Governed by FCC, section 6409
[4] Fees for historical consultants apply
[5] Public Works fees apply
8 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2143 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Public Works Department Fees
Final Map Review
(Includes up to 3 Reviews)
Parcel (4 lots or less)
City Processing Fee Per Project $ 2,387
Consultant Review Per Project
Deposit / Actual
Cost
Subdivision (5 or more lots)
City Processing Fee Per Project $ 2,769
Consultant Review Per Project
Deposit / Actual
Cost
4th and Subsequent Review
City Processing Fee Per Submittal $ 286
Consultant Review Per Submittal Deposit / Actual
Cost
Civil Plan Check [1]
(Includes up to 3 Reviews)
Minor Projects
City Processing Fee Per Project $ 1,910
Consultant Review Per Project
Deposit / Actual
Cost
Moderate Projects
City Processing Fee Per Project $ 3,724
Consultant Review Per Project
Deposit / Actual
Cost
Major Projects
City Processing Fee Per Project $ 5,443
Consultant Review Per Project
Deposit / Actual
Cost
4th and Subsequent Review
City Processing Fee Per Submittal $ 477
Consultant Review Per Submittal Deposit / Actual
Cost
Utility Companies Plan Check: [2]
Minor Each $ 191
Moderate Each $ 382
Major Deposit / Actual
Cost
$ 668
Proposed Fee /
Deposit Service Notes Fee Unit / Type
9 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2144 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Public Works Department Fees
Proposed Fee /
Deposit Service Notes Fee Unit / Type
Construction Inspection (Including Utilities) [3]
Minor Projects (1-3 inspections) Per Project $ 430
Moderate Projects (4-5 inspections) Per Project $ 716
Major Projects (6-10 inspections) Deposit / Actual
Cost
Deposit / Actual
Cost
Additional Inspection Each $ 143
Post Construction Stormwater Device Monitoring Per Device, Every 5 Years
$ 382
Dirt Hauling Per CY $ 2.10
Planning & Building Dept. Plan Check:

Planning Referral
City Processing Fee Per Project $ 955
Consultant Review Per Project
Deposit / Actual
Cost
Building Referral, Review of On-site Civil Per Project $ 382 Debris Box/Storage Container Permit
Duration up to two weeks Per Permit $ 86
Monthly Per Permit $ 286
Encroachment Permit Administrative Fee Per Permit $ 95
Outside Sewer Agreement Fee Deposit / Actual
Cost
Deposit $5,000
Community Banner (Hang & Remove):
for-profit organization Each $ 191
non-profit organization Each No Charge
Wide Load Processing Each [5] $ 16
Sidewalk Dining or Outdoor Display Approval
Initial Each Initial Review $ 286
Annual Each Annual
Review
$ 286
10 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2145 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Public Works Department Fees
Proposed Fee /
Deposit Service Notes Fee Unit / Type
Temporary NO PARKING Signs Per Sign $ 1
Semi-Annual Permit Parking in City Lots
Downtown Employee Parking Program Per Six Month
Permit
$ 95
East San Carlos Parking Permit Program-Residential Part of the Program
Each No Charge
East San Carlos Parking Permit Program-Business part of the Program
Per Six Month
Permit
$ 35
Exception to the Winter Moratorium on Grading Per Week-long Request
$ 95
"Street Cut" fee per Ordinance Section 12.08.310.C.2 Per Opening $ 600 Video Review of Existing Sewer Lateral Each $ 143
Starting Work Without a Permit Per Permit Actual Cost
Grading Bond Policy (per 12.08.100)
<1,000 CY Per City Policy
Valuation of
Improvements +
20% Contingency
>1,000 CY Per City Policy
Valuation of
Improvements +
20% Contingency,
plus Performance
Bond
Industrial / Commercial Business Stormwater C.4 Inspection Fee
Per Hour -
Minimum 1.5
Hours
$ 191
Technology Fee Per Permit

0.4% of Total
Permit Fee Amount
Credit Card and eCheck Charges Each Transaction Actual Cost 11 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2146 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Public Works Department Fees
Proposed Fee /
Deposit Service Notes Fee Unit / Type
Parklet Program
Encroachment Permit Administrative Fee Per Permit $ 95
Encroachment Permit - Downtown Area Per Permit / Per 6
Months $ 933
Encroachment Permit - Other Areas (Industrial Arts, etc.) Per Permit / Per 6 Months $ 933
Cleaning Fee Per Linear Foot /
Per 6 Months $ 12.82
Tree Replanting Fee Per Tree [4] $ 1,486
For services requested of City Staff for which no fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the City Manager or Department Director shall determine the appropriate fee based on the following hourly rates for staff time involved in the service.

Maintenance Staff per hr. $ 246
Engineering Staff per hr. $ 191
[Notes]
[1] Minor
One (1) single family residence
o < 1000 CY of grading
o >= 1000 CY of grading
Moderate
Abandonment of R/W or Easement
Two or more (2+) single family residences (<1 acre)
o C.3 Regulated
o Not C.3 Regulated
multi-family/mixed-use/commercial/industrial (< 1 acres) o C.3 regulated
o Not C.3 regulated
Major
Two or more (2+) single family residences (>= 1 acre)
Multi-family/mixed-use/commercial/industrial (>= 1 acres) Major project - new main line installation or replacement including sewer, storm, water, gas, and electric, major point repair, major development projects including offsite improvements. [5] Set by Title 21 of California Code of Regulation Section 1411.3 [2] Minor project - point repair or maintenance, service line repair or replacement, replacement of overhead utilities, traffic control only,
Moderate project - installation of overhead utilities, installation of equipment at a specific location (not linear),
Major project - installation or replacement of underground utilities, [3] Minor project - sewer lateral repair or installation (outside of roadway), sidewalk, curb, gutter, driveway, traffic control (only), minor utility point repair, installation or maintenance (above ground), discharge, minor roadway improvement,
Moderate project - sewer lateral repair or installation (within roadway), soil boring, moderate utility point repair, installation or maintenance (underground), [4] Amount of fee for the 24th box tree is subject to change based on actual vendor cost 12 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2147 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Community Development Department, Building Department Fees 2%
Less Than $5,000
Building Permit Fee base fee under $5,000 $ 309
Plan Check Fee base fee under $5,000 $ 258
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $5,000 $ 309
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 26.78
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $5,000 $ 258
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 18.54
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $25,000 $ 927
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 28.84
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $25,000 $ 695
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 22.66
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $50,000 $ 1,648
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 28.84
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $50,000 $ 1,236
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 22.66
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $100,000 $ 3,090
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 8.24
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $100,000 $ 2,318
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 6.18
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $500,000 $ 6,592
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 6.18
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $500,000 $ 4,944
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 4.12
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $1,000,000 $ 9,888
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 7.42
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $1,000,000 $ 7,416
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 5.56
$25,000 - $49,999
$50,000 - $99,999
$100,000 - $499,999
$500,000 - $999,999
$1,000,000 and Up
Service
Building Permits (single Family Residential)
$5,000 - $24,999
Proposed Fee /
Deposit Fee Unit / Type Notes
13 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2148 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Community Development Department, Building Department Fees 2%
Service Proposed Fee /
Deposit Fee Unit / Type Notes
Less Than $10,000
Building Permit Fee base fee under
$10,000 $ 515
Plan Check Fee base fee under
$10,000 $ 824
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $10,000 $ 515
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 45.32
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $10,000 $ 824
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 18.54
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $25,000 $ 1,545
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 37.08
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $25,000 $ 1,236
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 32.96
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $50,000 $ 2,472
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 41.20
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $50,000 $ 2,060
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 32.96
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $100,000 $ 4,532
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 14.42
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $100,000 $ 3,708
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 10.30
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $500,000 $ 9,888
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 16.48
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $500,000 $ 7,416
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 14.42
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $1,000,000 $ 17,716
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 8.24
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $1,000,000 $ 14,832
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 53.56
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $10,000,000 $ 88,580
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 8.86
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $10,000,000 $ 41,200
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 7.42
$1,000,000 - $9,999,999
$10,000,000 - $19,999,999
$10,000 - $24,999
$25,000 - $49,999
$50,000 - $99,999
Building Permits (Multi-Family Residential / Commercial / Industrial) $100,000 - $499,999
$500,000 - $999,999
14 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2149 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Community Development Department, Building Department Fees 2%
Service Proposed Fee /
Deposit Fee Unit / Type Notes
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $20,000,000 $ 177,160
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 3.54
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $20,000,000 $ 115,360
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 3.44
Building Permit Fee base fee @ $50,000,000 $ 283,456
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 4.25
Plan Check Fee base fee @ $50,000,000 $ 218,360
each add'l $1,000 or
fraction thereof $ 4.37
Permitted Values for Construction:
per sq. ft. $ 232
Interior Remodels per sq. ft. $ 117
per sq. ft. $ 48
Decks per sq. ft. $ 39
Commercial Shell per sq. ft. $ 57
Tenant Improvements per sq. ft. $ 57
Electrical Permit
Residential: New Single Family
Permit 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206
Each additional sq. ft. per sq. ft. $ 0.08
Residential: Addition & Remodel
Permit 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206
Each additional sq. ft. per sq. ft. $ 0.08
Residential: New Multiple Family
Permit 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206
Each additional sq. ft. per sq. ft. $ 0.08
Commercial: New Shell Building
Permit 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206
Each additional sq. ft. per sq. ft. $ 0.08
Permit 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206
Each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08
Permit 3,000 sq. ft. min. $ 2,060
Each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.46
Swimming Pool, Spa, or Hot Tub Per Permit $ 247
Temporary Power Pole Per Permit $ 247
Main Electrical Service Per Permit $ 247
Per Permit $ 103
New or Replacement Sub-Panel Per Permit $ 247
Miscellaneous Electrical Permit Per Permit $ 206
PV Solar Fee Per Permit $ 309
New or Replacement Circuit for HVAC or Other
Commercial: Addition, Remodel, Tenant Improvement
$20,000,000 - $49,999,999
$50,000,000 and Up
New Residential and Additions
Garages and Accessory Structures
Commercial: Complex Tenant Improvements (Car Washes, Dry Cleaners, Laundries, Labs, R&D, Biotech, Restaurants, Spray Booths, Hazardous Areas)
15 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2150 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Community Development Department, Building Department Fees 2%
Service Proposed Fee /
Deposit Fee Unit / Type Notes
Plumbing Permit
Residential: New Single Family
Permit 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206
Each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08
Residential: Addition & Remodel
Permit 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206
Each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08
Residential: New Multiple Family
Permit 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206
Each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08
Commercial: New Shell Building
Permit 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206
Each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08
Permit 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206
Each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08
Permit 3,000 Sq. Ft. Minimum $ 2,060
Each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.46
Miscellaneous Plumbing Permit Per Permit $ 206
Swimming Pool, Spa, or Hot Tub Per Permit $ 206
Water Heater Replacement Per Permit $ 104
Gas Piping Extension for New FAU or HVAC Per Permit $ 103 Mechanical Permit
Residential: New Single Family
Permit 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206
Each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08
Residential: Kitchen & Bath Remodel Per Permit $ 103
Commercial: New Shell Building
Permit 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206
Each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08
Permit 1,700 sq. ft. min. $ 206
Each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.08
Permit 3000 sq. ft. min. $ 618
Each additional sq. ft. per add'l sq. ft. $ 0.14
New FAU or HVAC Installations Per Permit $ 330
Replacement FAU or HVAC Per Permit $ 206
Miscellaneous Mechanical Per Permit $ 206
Miscellaneous Building Fees
Grading Permit Fee for Swimming Pools Per Permit $ 103
Grading Permit Fee for Other than Swimming Pools Per Permit $ 103 Accessibility Plan Check of Building Permit 1 hour min. $ 206 Each additional hour each add'l hr. $ 206
Imaging Fees per page (standard size) Per Page $ 2.06
Imaging Fees per page (oversize) Per Page $ 4.12
Planning Application Review Per Permit $ 206
During Normal Business Hours 1 hour min. $ 206
Each additional hour each add'l hr. $ 206
Outside Business Hours 2 hour min. $ 444
Each additional hour each add'l hr. $ 222
Code Enforcement-City Attorney 1 hour min. [1] $ 286
Each additional hour each add'l hr. [1] $ 286
Commercial: Addition, Remodel, Tenant Improvement
Commercial: Complex Tenant Improvements (Car Washes, Dry Cleaners, Laundries, Labs, R&D, Biotech, Restaurants, Spray Booths, Hazardous Areas)
Commercial: Addition, Remodel, Tenant Improvement
Commercial: Complex Tenant Improvements (Car Washes, Dry Cleaners, Laundries, Labs, R&D, Biotech, Restaurants, Spray Booths, Hazardous Areas)
Fees for Second and Each Additional Re-inspection:
16 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2151 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Community Development Department, Building Department Fees 2%
Service Proposed Fee /
Deposit Fee Unit / Type Notes
Dirt Haul Permit n/a reference PW fee
schedule
Municipal Code Violation Fees
First Violation Per Violation $ 100
Per Violation $ 200
Per Violation $ 500
GEO Plan Review / Soils Report Review n/a Actual Cost per Geologist
Per Instance $ 103
Additional Plan Check Fee Per Hour $ 206
Re-Inspection Fee Per Hour $ 206
Demolition Per Instance $ 206
Address Change Per Instance $ 206
Green Building Review Per Review $ 206
Energy Calculation Review Fee Per Review $ 103
Apartment Inspection Annual Fee
Per Residential Building Per Year $ 257
Per Dwelling Unit within each Building Per Year $ 13
Per Permit

0.4% of Total
Permit Fee
Amount
Per Project
1% of Building
Project Valuation
for all New
Commercial and
Additions; Fee is
Applied on
Building Permit
Per Project

0.15% of Building
Project Valuation
for all New
Commercial and
Additions; Fee is
Applied on
Building Permit
Construction Time Limits Extension Fee
Fees for Additional Extensions
1st 60 Day Extension Per Project [2]

0.5% of Total
Value of Project
2nd 60 Day Extension Per Project [2]

1.0% of Total
Value of Project
3rd 60 Day Extension Per Project [2]

1.5% of Total
Value of Project
Construction Time Limits Completion Penalties
Period of Time That Projects Remain Incomplete Beyond Applicable Time Limits 30 Day Grace Period Per Project $0
31st Day Through 60th Day Per Project

0.01% Per Day of
Total Value of
Project
61st Day Through 120th Day Per Project

0.015% Per Day
of Total Value of
Project
121st Day & Every Day Thereafter Per Project

0.02% Per Day of
Total Value of
Project
Technology Fee
Add'l Violation of the same ordinance within 36-mths
General Plan Maintenance and Update - Staff Support
General Plan Maintenance and Update - Contract Services GIS Mapping: New Construction, Addition, Alteration
Second Violation of the Same Ordinance within 36-mths
17 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2152 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Community Development Department, Building Department Fees 2%
Service Proposed Fee /
Deposit Fee Unit / Type Notes
Credit Card and eCheck Charges Each Transaction Actual Cost Building Division Staff Per Hour $ 206
Each Additional Hour Each add'l hr. $ 206
[Notes]
[1] Subject to change per City Attorney contract
[2] The Building Official may waive an extension fee in the event he/she finds the complexity or size of the project requires a greater time than allotted or the reason for the extension request may be considered beyond the owner's control For services requested of City Staff for which no fee is listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the City Manager or Department Director shall determine the appropriate fee based on the following hourly rates for staff time involved in the service:
18 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2153 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Fire Department Fees
Fees are subject to change based on Redwood City Fee Schedule updates The prices listed are for reference only
Staff Time Consultation [1]
Fire Chief Per Hour $ 276
Deputy Fire Chief Per Hour $ 251
Fire Marshal Per Hour $ 221
Battalion Chief Per Hour $ 231
Fire Prevention Officer Per Hour $ 140
Administrative Staff Per Hour $ 110
Inspection Fees
State of California Mandated Annual Fire Inspection Cycle Group E, Public and Private Schools, K-12th Grade (exempt from fees by state law) Annual
Group I, In-Patient Medical Care (appropriate hourly rate when requested by State Licensing). Annual
Group R-2, Hotel, Motel, Condo/Town-Home Apartment Buildings (defined as Multi-Family Dwelling Units accommodating three or more units) Annual 10 or fewer units $ 195
11 to 25 units $ 324
26 or greater $ 389
International Fire Code Related Inspections by occupancy classification and frequency. (These inspections are conducted by the fire companies and fire inspector of the San Carlos Fire Department)
Group A, Assembly related occupancy for 50 or more persons $ 180 Group B, Office complex and assembly occupancy with 49 or less occupants $ 180 Group F, Moderate hazard, Industrial and Factory Occupancy $ 120 Group H, High Hazard, Industrial/Chemical, Factory Occupancy $ 197 Group M, Mercantile/Sale of Merchandise Occupancy $ 58
Group S, Light hazard and Storage occupancy $ 120
Service Proposed Fee /
Deposit
Fee Unit /
Type Notes
19 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2154 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Fire Department Fees
Fees are subject to change based on Redwood City Fee Schedule updates The prices listed are for reference only
Service Proposed Fee /
Deposit
Fee Unit /
Type Notes
Construction Inspection Plan Check and Fees
Development Service Plan Check
Building or Planning Plan Check $ 327
Specialized Permits and Specific Cost Recovery Fee (Includes inspections and False Alarm Fee)
Fire Alarm Systems
Plan Check $ 737
Permit for monitoring systems $ 227
Permit for manual systems $ 227
Permit for automatic systems $ 335
Permit for combination systems $ 449
False Alarm Fee:

1. More than two reported ringing alarms at a building site which requires a response assignment in a 90-day cycle, in which the system was activated maliciously. Person or persons responsible for the malicious activation will be billed.

2. Reported alarm activation(s) in which the system has continually malfunctioned, or is in disrepair, and a response assignment was dispatched.

This fee is only required, when the third and any such there after alarm response for malfunctioning alarm has been reported in a 90-day cycle.

Property owner shall receive the bill for: $ 718
Sprinkler Systems & Special Systems
One or Two Family Dwelling Fire Sprinkler System (NFPA 13D) Plan Check $ 737
Permit $ 227
Fire Protection Underground PRIVATE (NFPA 24)
Plan Check $ 718
Permit without a Fire Pump $ 227
Permit with a Fire Pump $ 342
Residential or Commercial Fire Sprinkler System (NFPA 13 or 13R) Plan Check $ 737
Permit – Single Story (includes T.I.) $ 342
Permit – Multi-Story $ 449
Fixed Extinguishing Systems
Plan Check $ 342
Permit $ 227
Standpipe Systems
Plan Check $ 342
Permit $ 227
20 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2155 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Fire Department Fees
Fees are subject to change based on Redwood City Fee Schedule updates The prices listed are for reference only
Service Proposed Fee /
Deposit
Fee Unit /
Type Notes
Credit Card and eCheck Charges Each
Transaction
Actual Cost
Other
The city staff has the authority to charge actual cost incurred including time, material, and overhead if a fee does not approximate actual cost incurred.

PENALTY FOR DELINQUENT PAYMENTS
Delinquent more than 30 days Doubling of
Original Fee
(Per Fire Code Section 105.1.2)
[Notes]
[1] Per section 5: Penalties of the City of San Carlos Fire Code, the City shall be permitted to impose a cost recovery fee based on actual hours and hourly rates (as noted above) for work required by Fire personnel to gain compliance of violation of the Fire Code.
21 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2156 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Police Department Fees
Accident Report [1]
Property damage only per report $ 2
Property damage with injuries per report $ 2
Fatality per report $ 2
County Jail Booking Fee County fee
Crime Report per report $ 2
False Alarm Response
First Response first call Fee Waived
Subsequent Calls per call $ 205
Impounded Vehicle [2]
Towed for criminal offenses per instance $ 101
Towed for all other offenses (abandoned, blocking
driveways, etc.) per instance $ 101
Unruly Gatherings
First Call $ -
Subsequent Calls per hour $ 306
Alarm Permit
New initial fee Fee Waived
Processing Permit for Excessive Cats & Dogs per instance $ 101 Processing Police Officer Subpoena per hour [3]
$275/day deposit
per GC
Tape of Radio/Video Transmission, Digital or Hard-copy
Photographs Per Request
actual cost of
materials
Credit Card and eCheck Charges Each Transaction Actual Cost Non-Sworn Staff Members of the Police Department: per hour $ 101 Sworn Staff Members of the Police Department: per hour $ 306 For services requested of City staff which have no fee listed in this fee schedule, the City Manager or the City Manager's designee shall determine the appropriate fee based on the established hourly rates for this department/division. Additionally, the City will pass-through to the applicant any discrete costs incurred from the use of external service providers if required to process the specific application.

Proposed Fee /
Deposit Service Fee Unit / Type Notes
22 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2157 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Police Department Fees
[Notes]
[1] CA VC 20012 allows for recovery of the actual cost of providing accident report copies
[2] Towing charges are separate
[3] As set by GC 68096
23 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2158 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Parks and Recreation Department Fees
Parks, Facility, Room, and Amenity Rentals
Adult Community Center Room Rentals 3-hour minimum
Park View Room [2] R $ 82 $ 787 $ 102
NR $ 99 $ 945 $ 122
NP $ 58 $ 551 $ 72
Patio Room [2] R $ 65 $ 471 $ 102
NR $ 78 $ 565 $ 122
NP $ 46 $ 330 $ 72
Park View Patio Room [2] R $ 102 $ 977 $ 102
NR $ 122 $ 1,172 $ 122
NP $ 72 $ 684 $ 72
Game Room [2] R Not Available $ 471 $ 102
NR Not Available $ 565 $ 122
NP Not Available $ 330 $ 72
Chestnut Room [2] R $ 65 $ 471 $ 102
NR $ 78 $ 565 $ 122
NP $ 46 $ 330 $ 72
Loft [2] R $ 65 $ 471 $ 102
NR $ 78 $ 565 $ 122
NP $ 46 $ 330 $ 72
Rental Application Fee : $25 (non-refundable; will be applied to the rental fee) Patio Fee with ACC rental : $50 (may only be rented in conjunction with the Patio Room, Parkview Room, or Game Room) Kitchen Fee : $50 R, NR and NP (limited use; restrictions apply - information included in the rental packet) Youth Center Facility Rentals 2-hour minimum
Gym (Full) [2][3] R $ 108 $ 297 $ 117
NR $ 129 $ 392 $ 141
NP $ 75 $ 208 $ 82
Gym (Half) [2][3] R $ 67 Not Available Not Available
NR $ 80 Not Available Not Available
NP $ 47 Not Available Not Available
$ -
Dance Studio [2][3] R $ 59 $ 202 $ 67
NR $ 70 $ 243 $ 80
NP $ 41 $ 141 $ 47
Arts & Crafts Room [2][3] R $ 47 $ 182 $ 59
NR $ 56 $ 211 $ 78
NP $ 33 $ 128 $ 41
Homework Room [2][3] R $ 47 $ 182 $ 59
NR $ 56 $ 211 $ 78
NP $ 33 $ 128 $ 41
Rental Application Fee : $25 (non-refundable; will be applied to the rental fee) Kitchen Fee : $25 R, NP and NR (limited use; restrictions apply - information included in the rental packet) Additional Services as Required Per Rental (Adult & Youth Centers):

Facility Attendant $30 Per Hour $30 Per Hour
Janitorial Services $220 Per Event or
Actual Cost
$220 Per Event or
Actual Cost
Insurance Actual Cost Actual Cost
Deposit - Parkview, Patio, Billiard Rooms n/a $500 Per Event Deposit - Patio, Chestnut Rooms, Gym n/a $250 Per Event San Carlos Library Community Room Rental $67 Per Hour n/a Service Notes
Category
(R=Resident,
NR=NonResident,
NP=Non-Profit)
Proposed Fees
Weekday Hourly
(Mon-Fri 5PM)
Weekend (Fri 5PM -
Sun)
Weekend Hourly
Additional
24 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2159 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Parks and Recreation Department Fees
Picnic Sites Rentals (March - October)
Laureola West Side Picnic Area, Laureola Park [4] $ 144 Per Event Playground Picnic Area, Burton Park [4] $ 144 Per Event Les Mundell Grove, Burton Park [4] $ 98 Per Event
Chestnut Picnic Area, Burton Park [4] $ 98 Per Event
Tot Lot Picnic Area, Burton Park [4] $ 75 Per Event
Arguello Park: Sunny Site, Shady Site [4] $ 75 Per Event Crestview Park Picnic Area [4] $ 75 Per Event
Bocce Ball
Court 1, Burton Park $ 18 Per Hour
Court 2, Burton Park $ 18 Per Hour
Rental Application Fee $ 30 Each
Special Event Permit
New Request [1] $ 400 Per Event
Repeat Request [1] $ 375 Per Event
City Staff On-Sire Time During Event See Hourly Rate Per Hour Athletics ("Per Season/Per Quarter")
Light Use (Fields) $ 32 Per Hour
Field Use Fee
R-NP $ 26 Per Hour
NR-NP $ 32 Per Hour
Sports League Field Use Fee:

San Carlos Youth Softball (Girls) $ 66 Per Player
Youth Baseball $ 66 Per Player
Soccer $ 66 Per Player
Baseball / Soccer Sports Tournament:

New Request Permit Fee $ 350 Per Event
Repeat Request Permit Fee $ 300 Per Event
Tennis:

Tennis Club Permitted Use $ 14 Per Hour, Per Court
Non-Resident Tennis Club $ 20 Per Hour, Per Court
Snack Shack Use
Fall Season (August 15 - November 30) $ 300 Per Season
Spring Season (March 1 - May 31) $ 300 Per Season
Snack Shack Use (Outside of Primary Youth Sports Seasons) Rental Fee (Mon - Sun) $ 50 Per Week
Miscellaneous
Park Fitness Group Rental $ 25 Per Hour
Administrative fees (apply to class registration only)
Registration $ 10 Per Registrant
Refund $ 10 Per Registrant
Neighborhood Block Party Permit Fee Waived
Community Events - City Sponsored
Including but not limited to: Farmers Market, Hometown Days, Art & Wine Faire, Night of Holiday Lights, Goblin Walk, Concerts, Downtown Block Party, etc.

Fees charged for City-sponsored Community Events shall be set at the discretion of the Parks and Recreation Director and shall not exceed the estimated and reasonable cost of conducting the event
Per City Council authorization on February 28, 2022, Hometown Days booth fees with the exception of San Mateo County Health Department permit County Health Department permit fees and equipment rental fees will be waived for all non-profit organizations Service Notes Primary Rate Unit
25 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2160 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
COST OF SERVICES (USER FEES) FY 2022-23 Proposed
Schedule of Parks and Recreation Department Fees
PW Maintenance Staff $ 246
Full-Time $ 177
Part-Time $ 30
Recreational Programs
Fees imposed for recreational programs offered by the City shall be set at the discretion of the Parks and Recreation Director, not to exceed the cost of the individual programs. The City's full cost of implementing an individual program may be calculated as follows:

Program Cost of Service = [ (A x B) + C + D + E + F + G ] A = Estimated time for City staff to implement the individual program.

B = Applicable hourly rates for the staff functions involved in the implementation of the individual program (below).

C = Actual cost incurred by the City for any outside service provider involved in the individual program.

D = Actual Cost incurred by the City for any specific materials acquired for use during the individual program E = Prevailing facility rental and/or field use fees imposed by the City and reflected in its Master Fee Schedule F = Prevailing department / City administrative fee
G = Actual costs incurred by the City to rent and/or use facilities/fields from other entities The calculated cost of service above represents the maximum fee that could be imposed by the City for an individual recreation program. The City may recover between 0% and 100% of the cost of service. Cost recovery targets may vary by individual program, at the discretion of the Parks and Recreation Director as determined during the seasonal development of the City's program offerings. The City may also set differential fee for resident and non-resident participants as long as neither fee exceeds the cost of service. Any person with a home San Carlos mailing address is considered a resident. A San Carlos PO Box or business address will not be taken as proof of residency. A non-resident is someone who lives in another City. Non-resident fees will be charged at 20% of the class fee up to a $20 maximum per class. [Notes]
[1] In addition to Parks and Recreation staff time, time is spent by other City departments. Breakdown of other departments time and hourly rate information involved in approving special event permits is as follows:
20 minutes of Public Works staff time at $191 per hour; 20 minutes of Police staff time at $101 per hour;
10 minutes of Planning staff time at $300 per hour, and; 10 minutes of Building staff time at $206 per hour.
[2] Includes facility staff. Additional charge for janitorial services and insurance as needed. [3] Facility rental available for Youth related events only [4] Additional Charge for Insurance as Needed
For services requested of City staff which have no fee listed in this fee schedule, the City Manager or the City Manager's designee shall determine the appropriate fee based on the established hourly rates for this department/division. Additionally, the City will passthrough to the applicant any discrete costs incurred from the use of external service providers if required to process the specific application.

Service Primary Rate Notes Unit
26 of 26

10.a.3
Packet Pg. 2161 Attachment: Proposed Master Fee Schedule FY2023 (User Fee Schedule)