Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council adopts ordinance requiring developers to pay engineering review costs
Summary
The council adopted Ordinance 2025‑6 to require developers to pay engineering review fees and provide deposits or bonds to cover anticipated expenses; staff said deposits would be refunded if unused and final costs would reflect actual engineering expenses.
Get email alerts on the Planning Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Preston City Council unanimously adopted Ordinance 2025‑6, a change to Title 16 that requires applicants for subdivisions and certain permits to pay engineering review fees and to post a deposit or bond to secure those costs.
Why it matters: Council members and staff said the city’s current fee structure did not fully cover staff and consultant costs for subdivision engineering reviews. The ordinance directs applicants to reimburse the city for “engineering review fees and costs actually incurred” and allows the city to require a deposit or bond to cover anticipated fees.
Council discussion Planning and zoning recommended the change after a public hearing. Council members asked staff whether the requirement could create an open‑ended expense for developers. City staff and counsel said the ordinance is structured to reflect actual costs: deposits can be refunded if unused and any additional fees would correspond to documented engineering work. Staff noted that the city’s consultant engineer (Keller Associates) uses a standard fee schedule that would be reflected in follow‑up resolution(s) implementing the ordinance.
Council action Council voted to uphold the Planning and Zoning recommendation and then to introduce and adopt Ordinance 2025‑6 by roll call. The ordinance was read once in summary and then adopted after roll‑call votes showed unanimous support.
What’s next Staff indicated a subsequent resolution will set or clarify the consultant fee schedule and implementation details; council members asked staff to ensure protections so developers are charged only actual engineering costs.
Ending note: Council members emphasized that the change is intended to prevent taxpayers from subsidizing developer‑driven engineering review costs.

