I agree. They should have 4 times as many planners so it doesn’t take 6 weeks to get the first round of review comments. But, just follow the law and charge for the review they actually perform. Don’t just pick an arbitrary number that will get struck down immediately and have to be repaid with interest and attorneys fees. And to be clear, they don’t do much more than code compliance review and making design “suggestions” that aren’t enforceable.

The bureaucratic red tap in Pittsburgh is truly absurd. I already have clients that are reticent to develop in the City because of development review reputation, and its only going to get worse. None of the City departments effectively communicate with each other, and they all have their own little fiefdoms. I can't really complain, because it keeps me employed, but its definitely going to hurt investment in the City in the long run.

There isn't a city or state statute or regulation that specifically prohibits municipalities from raising revenue using review fees. However, there is a long line of appellate cases that have created that principle in common law. That precedent essentially has the same effect as if it was codified into law. A developer can sue the City, cite those cases, and have the same likelihood of success as if it were in a statute.

I represent developers in the City. I know bring, the hate. There is absolutely no way they will be able to justify the increase in court. The zoning and development review is on top of the 0.7% fee charge for the technical review of building permits by PLI. That review fee is justified because it involves engineering review of technical construction documents. For a 10 million dollar project, that's 70k in building permit fees alone.

The zoning and development fee is essentially just staff and planning commission review for compliance with the zoning code. That involves verifying setbacks, lot area, open space, and some traffic/planning studies. There is no way on earth that costs the City another 30kish in review time for the same project. That single project review would pay half the annual salary of a City Planner, of which there are only 5 or 6.

The best way to ensure that the actually cost is recouped legally (and which is how almost all other municipalities handle land development review) is to require that an escrow amount be posted by the developer and have the review staff bill their actual time and costs to that account. That way, the City is reimbursed for actual review costs, which is all they're permitted to recoup by law.

If its challenged, the City's new structure will be struck down pretty quickly. It's pretty apparent that the percentage was arbitrarily chosen to generate revenue. According to my contacts in the City, this was never run past the City law department for their opinion, which is not at all surprising.