Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council previews consolidated development‑fee schedule and impact‑fee study updates
Summary
Planning staff proposed a consolidated development‑fee schedule to align fees with cost of service and reduce third‑party review costs; Friese & Nichols outlined an updated impact‑fee study process and new statutory notice requirements. Council asked staff for supporting data (hourly time breakdowns, sample impacts on a single‑family build) and to post the fee matrix to the discussion board for committee review.
Staff presented a consolidated development fee schedule designed to reflect the cost of service and to stop subsidizing development from the general fund. The proposal centralizes fees across departments, standardizes recoverability calculations and contemplates bringing some plan-review and inspection capacity in‑house (including one development‑services engineer) to reduce third‑party review costs.
Staff said many fees were outdated (not updated since 2019), that the consolidated schedule will improve transparency and that some fees may be reduced for small residential permits by removing duplicate third‑party charges. Staff proposed fee calculations based on hourly costs and recommended annual review tied to the budget process.
Consultant Jessica Vassar of Friese & Nichols reviewed the scope of a required five‑year impact‑fee update (water, wastewater and roadway): recent legislative changes lengthen the public‑notice process and require a two‑thirds council vote to adopt ordinances raising impact fees; the CIP must be coordinated so that impact‑fee‑eligible projects match the impact fee CIP; and the city must perform an independent audit of impact‑fee accounts if fees increase. Council asked the consultant to reduce in‑person meetings where possible to reduce cost and to coordinate the study with any pending CIP changes before finalizing the scope.
Council asked staff for the supporting matrix and hourly breakdowns used to calculate fees, scenario examples showing the net effect on a typical single‑family build, and suggested circulating the detailed Excel matrix on the discussion board and to advisory committees for review before adoption.
