Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bellevue staff propose modest fee increases for permitting and explain shifts in school impact fees
Summary
Development Services presented proposed 2025 fee adjustments (hourly increases of 3.3–8%), a new flat fee for simple tree removal, and notable changes to Issaquah and Renton school impact fees tied to district capital plans and state funding credits.
Development Services staff told the council that the proposed 2025 fee adjustments come from the annual cost‑of‑service study and are intended to keep permit fees regionally competitive while aligning revenue to service costs. Staff proposed hourly rate increases ranging from about 3.3% to 8% for different review and inspection functions, introduced a flat fee for a new simple tree removal permit ($141), and provided valuation‑based examples showing modest dollar increases for typical permits.
Staff explained that building permit fees follow the International Code Council valuation table adjusted by CPI‑W and that flat fees for high‑volume permit types reflect average review and inspection hours. To balance service delivery with economic cycles, staff said they will maintain reserves, hold 12 contingent positions for quick deployment, and increase consultant contracts to respond during busy periods.
On school impact fees, staff explained the apparent large decline in Issaquah single‑family fees compared with the previous cycle. The change is driven by the current capital facilities plan for Issaquah, which in this cycle did not include a growth‑related elementary school project (only a high‑school project), lower high‑school student generation rates, a higher average assessed value for multifamily units (raising tax‑payment credits), and a one‑time state School Construction Assistance Program (SCAP) funding increase that raised the state funding credit in the formula.
Councilmembers asked detailed questions about permit predictability under SB 5290 (sliding review timelines), whether expedited “white glove” or equity‑prioritized permitting programs make sense, pilot uses of AI and field technology, and how staff would handle mid‑project code changes. Staff committed to returning follow‑up materials and to continue stakeholder outreach through the Bellevue Development Committee.
Next steps: staff will capture council questions in the memory bank, continue outreach with the Bellevue Development Committee and return with requested details during upcoming STA and budget deliberations.
