Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Impact Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sammamish Planning Commission reviews draft scaling impact-fee methodology, debates affordability and update cadence
Summary
The commission reviewed a consultant'backed formula and draft Sammamish Municipal Code to move impact fees from a flat per-unit charge to a square-foot scaling method, discussed fee amounts, affordability tiers for 30'80% AMI, indexing versus CIP-based updates, and next steps ahead of a Feb. 3 council briefing.
The Sammamish Planning Commission on Jan. 15 continued its multi-meeting review of proposed changes to the city's impact-fee program, hearing staff and consultant explanations of a scaling methodology and a draft code rewrite that would consolidate impact-fee rules into one Sammamish Municipal Code section.
Staff said the goal of the update is to produce a legally defensible fee structure that scales with building size rather than charging a flat per-unit fee. Staff presented consultant outputs that show a parks scaling rate of $3.13 per square foot and a transportation scaling rate of $7.44 per square foot as reference points for fee bands. Staff emphasized the fee formula uses the capital facilities list, project eligibility percentages and the comprehensive-plan growth estimate of 2,100 new housing units over 20 years (roughly 6,000 people) as core inputs.
Why it matters: the Legislature in 2023 required jurisdictions to move away from a flat per-unit fee toward a scaling method (options include square footage, bedroom count or trip generation). Sammamish's draft code seeks to implement a defensible scaling approach while preserving local policy choices such as the portion of a defensible maximum fee the city elects to impose and how to treat affordable housing tiers.
Key areas of debate
Affordability tiers: Staff noted the draft proposes waiving impact fees for deeply affordable housing (0'0% AMI) and that the Master Builders Association requested the commission consider fee reductions (rather than full waivers) for housing at 30'80% AMI. Commissioners generally supported considering reduced fees for that middle affordability band but discussed trade-offs, including the likely fiscal impact and legal defensibility of different approaches.
Update cadence and indexing: Commissioners disagreed about how frequently to update fees. Staff said the draft code currently includes an annual indexing mechanism (to adjust for construction-cost inflation) plus options for periodic recalculation tied to capital improvement plan (CIP) or transportation improvement plan (TIP) updates. Some commissioners favored tying substantive recalculations to CIP/TIP updates or a five-year comp-plan review rather than relying solely on an annual index to avoid drift from local priorities.
Credits, deferrals and implementation burden: Commissioners queried whether developer-built frontage or off-site improvements could be used in lieu of fees; staff clarified those are handled as system credits or through latecomer arrangements separate from impact-fee accounting. Staff cautioned that highly granular methodologies (for example, widespread use of bedroom-count approaches) can be costly to administer and might require additional staff capacity.
Schools and developer obligation: Staff reiterated the city collects school impact fees by adopting school districts'capital facilities plans by reference. Under current practice — by past council direction — Sammamish collects 75% of the district's developer obligation (higher than the 50% commonly collected in neighboring jurisdictions).
Timing and next steps: Staff will brief the City Council on Feb. 3 with the consultant present, incorporate council direction, and then return the topic to the commission for either another workshop or a public hearing depending on the council's feedback.
Representative quotes
"We are legally non-compliant with the state law on impact fees so we're overdue," staff said, urging the commission to help shape a defensible approach that council can adopt.
Commissioners and staff also discussed administrative practicality: "There's a balance between something detailed enough to be defensible and something we can implement without hiring a dedicated staff person," a staff member said.
What's next: The commission will forward comments and a question-and-answer matrix to the Feb. 3 council briefing; any formal recommendation would come after council feedback and a subsequent public hearing if scheduled.
