Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Permit Fees And Code topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Port Orchard staff propose broad updates to permit and fee resolution, including new ADU, inspection and bond fees

3055208 · April 18, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

City staff presented a proposed fee resolution that updates permit processing, adopts new basic-plan and preapproved ADU rules, adjusts building valuation, raises some inspection rates and adds administrative fees for performance bonds-in-lieu of construction.

Nick Bond, a city staff presenter, asked the finance committee on April 15 to review a proposed fee resolution that would adopt and update a wide range of Development and Community Development (DCD) and public-works fees before sending the resolution to city council.

Bond said the packet posted to the committee had a clean copy and that a red-line version of the 27-page exhibit was made available the same day. He told the committee the resolution does not change how the city calculates valuation-based permit fees, but it updates the building-valuation table to current International Code Council figures and adds or adjusts several discrete fees.

Key changes Bond described include: clarifying that permit payments are taken at the counter or online rather than by mail; extending “basic plan” review availability beyond single-family homes to include accessory dwelling units (ADUs), townhomes and duplexes; exempting certain preapproved ADU plan reviews from repeat review fees and charging $225 for each use of a basic plan; updating building-valuation square-foot costs using the ICC table (the residential class 5b estimate cited in the packet was $195.50 per square foot); adding or raising fees for manufactured-home inspections to reflect multiple in-field inspections; adding a small fee for staff review of developer fire-flow reports; creating a fee for adult-family-home local inspections required by state law; and adding a fee for inspections of temporary tents and membrane structures to capture weekend and after-hours inspection costs.

Bond said the hourly rate used to bill work outside routine permit activity will increase for engineering-level reviews to $100 per hour and that the city will charge time-and-a-half for inspections outside normal business hours. The proposal also would add an administrative fee of $750 for performance bonds posted in lieu of completing construction work (the fee is intended to cover roughly 10 hours of tracking and administration), with additional inspections billed hourly.

Committee members raised technical questions and asked staff to provide a red-line version for council and for additional outreach to the building community. John Morrissey and other members queried specific line items — for example, whether the small fee for installing or replacing a dryer duct applied to first installs or replacements — and requested clarifying staff notes for items that are longstanding in code but not often changed.

Bond said permit-center revenues have grown and that permit and plan-review receipts are a material source of general-fund revenue; staff estimated permit-related revenue in recent years on the order of $1.6 million annually (staff asked the committee to consider that fee revenue offsets permit-center operating costs and consultant expenses). Bond recommended sending the red-line version to council after committee review and offered to do additional outreach to the construction trade association if committee members wanted more engagement before council review.

Next steps: staff will provide the red-line fee resolution to committee members and schedule the item for a council agenda or work-study session per the committee’s preference.