Committee reviews proposal to treat some 'previously disturbed' parcels as undeveloped for stormwater rates

The Parks & Public Works Committee on April 21 reviewed an amendment to the city’s stormwater code that would let the city treat some "previously disturbed" parcels as undeveloped — and therefore exempt from stormwater rates — if they meet narrow criteria, staff said.

Director Hamlin Boute told the committee the ordinance would define a previously disturbed parcel as land that no longer contains, or contains only limited, infrastructure or structures and that has returned substantially to conditions similar to pre-development. "If a parcel lacks city-owned stormwater infrastructure and is in a non‑productive state, all or portions of it could be considered undeveloped," Boute said.

The change is aimed in part at the Snoqualmie Mill redevelopment. Staff said the proposed exemption would apply only to parcels with a council‑approved development agreement and site plan and only while those approvals remain in force. Boute said the city expects the ordinance to reduce near‑term stormwater rate revenue but to increase collections of general facility charges (GFCs) tied to eventual development.

On finances, staff showed the six‑year utility plan adopted from last year’s rate study: projected sources of $32.8 million and total uses of $36.1 million, which left a forecasted 2030 cash balance of about $1.2 million. Boute said the ordinance, as drafted, would reduce rate revenues by roughly $500,000 (to about $21.6 million) over the six‑year window while increasing GFC receipts by about $1.9 million; after combining the ordinance effect with a 2025 budget update, staff said the 2030 ending cash balance could be approximately $1.6 million.

Council members pushed staff for clarity on the exemption test. Several members objected to language that read as if parcel "income" or profitability were a criterion. "We don't set rates based on how much discretionary income a property has," one council member said, and the mayor added that the intent is to test whether land is "in production" (occupied or used) rather than whether it generates profit. Staff agreed to revise the wording to focus on use and production rather than income generation.

Members also questioned whether the change would create a permanent "third" rate class. Staff and the mayor said the amendment would not create a new rate class but would expand the existing "undeveloped" exemption narrowly; the exemption would only apply where a development agreement and council‑approved site plan exist. Council members asked staff to return recommended language that would time‑limit the exemption or tie its duration to the development agreement term so the exemption cannot persist indefinitely if projects stall.

On regulatory jurisdiction, an engineer and staff briefed the committee on the city’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) obligations: the city inspects and enforces privately owned stormwater facilities when they exist and discharge to waters of the state, but the permit generally does not require the city to install drainage infrastructure on undeveloped sites — developers typically build ponds and catch basins and the city maintains them once accepted.

Staff emphasized the ordinance was proposed after reviewing the code and local conditions and said they had not identified other unincorporated growth‑area sites meeting the proposed criteria. Members asked for the development agreement term for the Snoqualmie Mill site and for draft language that would cap the exemption duration; staff agreed to return that information and revised language ahead of the council vote.

The committee did not take a formal vote on the ordinance at the meeting; staff will return to council with clarified language, timing options, and the development‑agreement details.