Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Sammamish staff recommend square‑foot scaling for parks and transportation impact fees; council questions affordable‑housing exemptions
Loading...
Summary
Staff proposed a state‑law compliant methodology to scale parks and transportation impact fees by unit square footage, preserving the city's relative fee position. The council debated affordable‑housing reductions, ADU treatment and next steps toward a May 5 public hearing.
City planning staff on April 21 urged the Sammamish City Council to adopt a consultant‑recommended method for scaling parks and transportation impact fees to comply with state law that requires fees to scale with unit size.
David Pyle, director of Community Development, and Evan Fisher, the project manager, described a method developed with consultants (FCS) that converts the blended per‑unit fee into a per‑square‑foot rate and then applies a minimum and maximum bracket tied to U.S. Census and American Housing Survey distributions. For transportation, the formula divides eligible capacity‑increasing project costs by estimated new person‑trip growth; for parks it derives capital value per person and allocates future growth needs. Staff said the approach keeps Sammamish’s fees relatively aligned with neighboring cities while complying with the new legal standard.
Planning Commission members recommended the methodology and fee amounts by a 4–2 vote but urged caution because project lists and inputs will be updated. Staff recommended affordable‑housing reductions rather than full waivers: an 80% reduction for projects serving 0–50% AMI (area median income) and a 50% reduction for 51–80% AMI; legal counsel reminded the council that waiving fees for ADUs would require the city to backfill the waived portion from the general fund. Staff also recommended removing the current cap on deferrals and clarified that the city can offer deferrals until occupancy or sale.
Councilmembers asked how the formulas account for multimodal transportation goals, whether scaling will deter multifamily development, and how often fees should be revisited. Staff said the methodology’s denominator uses person trips (not vehicle trips) to make the approach multimodal, that a blended approach was selected as the most legally defensible, and that the impact‑fee code will be repealed and replaced to implement the new approach. Staff proposed a public hearing package on May 5 to adopt the scaled fees and the code changes; council agreed to consider moving forward after the public hearing.
