Sammamish Planning Commission backs consultant impact‑fee methodology, urges council to assess full fees; approves affordable‑housing discounts and ADU/addition

At its April 2, 2026 meeting the Sammamish Planning Commission voted to accept a consultant study on scaling parks and transportation impact fees and recommended that the City Council assess 100% of the maximum calculated fees, while approving a set of targeted relief measures for affordable housing and changes to fee administration.

The action followed a staff presentation by Evan Fischer, senior management analyst with Community Development, who told the commission that the consultant used a historic‑investment methodology for parks (capturing total asset value, including donated land) and a person‑trip basis for transportation. "The idea of the historic investment methodology is to capture the total asset value of our park system as it is and that sets a benchmark for the level of park service we've provided to the city," Fischer said in the meeting packet presentation and on the record.

The meeting included extended public and commissioner debate about technical inputs and local policy choices. Paul Stikney, a public commenter, urged more market‑rate housing to raise revenue and questioned some of the consultant tables, saying the packet did not make clear why ostensibly similar units pay markedly different fees. "I strongly assert the way forward is adding market rate housing," Stikney told the commission during public comment.

Commissioners pressed staff and the consultant on several points: whether donated parkland should be counted in total valuation (staff and the consultant clarified that donated land and improvements are included and that explains the roughly $399 million total park valuation reported in the study); how eligibility percentages for projects on the capital improvements plan (CIP) were calculated; and whether the transportation methodology sufficiently accounts for multimodal and sidewalk projects. Staff responded that person‑trips (rather than vehicle trips) were used to better align multimodal improvements and that CIP and transportation master plan inputs can be updated and reassessed in future review cycles.

Despite those concerns, the commission voted to accept the FCS report and its methodology as the basis for the fee schedule (recorded vote: 4 in favor, 2 opposed). The commission then voted to recommend that City Council assess 100% of the maximum scaled, calculated parks and transportation fees (recorded vote on the 100% recommendation: 4 in favor, 2 opposed). Chair Mike Bresco said the commission would include the technical concerns and dissenting opinions in the transmittal so Council would have the full record.

At the same meeting the commission adopted several policy refinements aimed at balancing revenue needs with housing affordability and local priorities: it unanimously approved tiered discounts for affordable housing (staff recommendation adopted) that waive fees for housing at 0–50% AMI, reduce fees by 50% for units at 51–80% AMI, and reduce fees by 20% for units at 81–100% AMI; it approved exemptions for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and certain additions to existing homes to encourage smaller units and flexible housing (vote carried with one abstention noted); and it recommended removing the local cap on fee deferrals so projects may defer payment to occupancy or first sale consistent with state law practice (motion carried).

Staff and commissioners stressed that accepting the consultant's methodology does not bind Council to collect 100% of the calculated fees; the commission repeatedly framed the percentage decision as a policy lever that the Council may choose to adjust. Fischer told commissioners the proposed code also builds in an interval to revisit assumptions and inputs as part of the CIP and budget process so fees can be recalibrated over time.

Next steps: staff will prepare the transmittal letter and incorporate clarifications and dissenting opinions; the commission asked staff to circulate a draft to dissenting commissioners before it is submitted. According to staff, the recommendation is scheduled for transmittal in time for the City Council packet publication (materials due April 17 ahead of the April 21 Council meeting).