Fairfax County
Government
Land Development Services, DPWES
Proposed Increase to Land and Building
Development Fees
October 17, 2008
Last Fee Increase
 July 1, 2005 - Increased zoning, plan review
inspections, and permit fees
 Shifted recovery rate from 80% to 90%
 July 1, 2006 – Increased site inspection fees as part
of “phased” adjustment
2005 Fee Increase Report Card:
 Phased in the 2nd increase of site inspection fees
 Created a work group of industry representatives
and County staff to identify process improvements.
 Developed a program to support and recognize the
professionalism of plan reviewers and a system of
accountability on par with designated plan
examiners in private practice.
 More regular update to fees
Trends
 New residential and commercial development slowdown
 Increase in commercial alteration building permits issued
 Increase in the available minutes per residential
inspection
 Increase in available minutes per single discipline for
commercial inspections
 Increase in the number of complaints related to unpermitted work and work done in the resource protection
areas
Trends
 Reduced number of projects in default
 Increase in cost of doing business
 Decrease in revenue due to economic downturn
 Decrease in site, subdivision and infill lot development
LDS’ Response to Workload
Changes
 Reviewed workload measures and revenue collection







activity
Looked for ways to minimize expenses, i.e., reduced
service contracts
Explored opportunities in DPWES to “loan” staff
Transferred 16 positions to other business areas
Reduced Exempt Limited Term positions from 17 to 4
Assigned 4 positions to Strike Force Team (in
addition to 5 positions specifically assigned to the
Strike Force in FY 2009)
Holding 35 merit positions vacant
Reviewing all vacant positions and continuing to
manage positions through attrition and evaluating reassignments
2010 Proposed Fee Increases
Approach for Adjusting Fees
First….
 Categorized LDS’ activities as either “private” good or
“public” good as defined by ICMA
 Private Good


Services with identifiable customers
Solely benefits a specific customer such as plan
review, bonding, permits and inspections
 Public Good
 Services that benefit the community as a whole such
as enforcement of the grass ordinance, illegal land
disturbing activities, administration of the E&S
program, and developer bond default
Approach for Adjusting Fees
Then….
 Looked at multiple site plan types reviewed and
approved in FY 2007


Determined validity of time recorded
Compared today’s cost using hourly rate and time
expended against actual fee charged to determine
if cost of service was covered by fee

Findings…. Cost of providing services ranges from
breaking even to losing as much as 200%.
Approach for Adjusting Fees
 Reviewed Commercial and Residential building
plan review, permit and inspections activities


Compared today’s cost using hourly rate and time
expended against actual fee charged to determine
if cost of service was covered by fee
Findings…. greater disparity exists between
actual costs associated with residential plan
review and inspections than commercial plan
review and inspections
Recommendations:
Category
Waivers and Inserts
All Site Plans and Inspection
Fees
Proposed Percent
Increase
0%
39%
Infill Lot
100%
All Commercial and Residential 27%
Alteration Permit Fees
New Residential Permit Fees
50%
Note: General inflation is expected to grow 22% from 2004 the time of the last fee increase to 2009
the anticipated effective date of the current fee proposal. This 22% masks the recent increase in
fuel costs which have increased much more over the same period.
Site Review Fee Comparisons (current fees)
Non-Residential
Projects
Fairfax
(current)
Fairfax
(proposed)
Arlington
Prince
William
Loudoun
$6,190
$8,604
$1,400
$840+2.
35%
Bond
Amt
$5,294
$4,020
Office < 50,000 Sq,
Ft.
$15,610
$21,698
$6,240
$25,585
$5,313
$18,532
Telecommunication
Facility
$13,250
$18,418
$1,400
$31,864
$5,427
$50,230
$9,780
$13,594
$4,206
$8,205
$4,943
$6,680
Church
Drive Thru Pharmacy
*Montgomery
Source: Fairfax County 2008 jurisdictional survey. *LDS calculated fee based on jurisdiction’s
fee schedule.
Site Review Fee Comparisons (current fees)
Residential
Projects
Fairfax
(current)
Fairfax
(proposed)
Arlington
Prince
William
Loudoun
*Montgomery
S.F. Attached,
(192 lots, 8.53
acres)
$19,546
$27,168
$37,991
$53,880
S.F. Attached &
Detached, (49/63
lots, 30.56 acres)
$41,055
$57,066
Unavailable
$40,208
“
“
$22,980
S.F. Detached
(35 lots, 8 acres)
$12,290
$17,083
$7,026
$14,994
“
“
$15,735
S.F. Detached (7
lots, 2.1 acres)
$6,750
$9,382
$6,176
$2,574
“
“
$4,055
$12,500
$17,375
$22,756
$14,580
“
“
$16,100
S.F. Detached
(40 lots, 69.17
acres)
$2,575 +
(.0075 x
Bond Amt)
$36,180
Source: Fairfax 2008 jurisdictional survey. *LDS calculated fee based on jurisdiction’s schedule
Building Fee Comparisons (current fees)
Building
Type
Fairfax
Fairfax
Proposed
Arlington
Alexandria
Loudoun
Prince
William
Montgomery
(Enterprise)
100,000
SF New
Office
$13,000
$17,000
$90,400
$88,200
$77,700
$17,000
$236,220
200,000
SF New
Condo
$26,000
$34,000
$180,700 $151,200
$141,000
$34,000
$236,220
50,000
SF
Office Alt.
$56,250
$56,250
$32,300
$7,500
$22,500
$15,180
$58,000
3,000 Sq.
Ft., SFD
$295
$445
$1,940
$1,692
$1,267
$270
$2,115
800 Sq.
Ft., SFD
Alteration
1.5%
est.
Cost
1.5% est.
Cost
$145
$120
1% of est. $63
cost
(assumes
type I
const)
(assumes
type I
const)
(assumes
45/sf)
(assumes
ANSI Std
home)
Source: Arlington County 2007 Survey
$350
Questions and Answers