Kenmore council directs 75% park-impact fee, schedules public hearing

Kenmore City Council members voted 5–1 to direct staff to develop a park impact fee calculated by square footage and to set the implementation rate at 75% of the maximum, with the fee scheduled to take effect beginning January 2027 pending a public hearing and code amendments to Kenmore Municipal Code Chapter 20.47.

Staff presented a recommended square-footage methodology and proposed a 70% implementation rate as the default in the draft study. Debbie Bent, Kenmore’s community development director, and Todd Hall, principal planner, said the square-foot approach is easier to administer than a bedroom-count method and noted that impact fees are intended to fund the proportionate share of growth-related park needs rather than the full capital cost.

Council members pressed staff on the statutory context. Council Member Culver invoked the RCW legislative intent that "new growth should pay for new growth," asking whether that compels a higher percentage. A consultant answering on staff’s behalf, Tom, said state law does not mandate a specific percentage but requires that fees be used for new capacity and that fees cannot be the sole funding source; he told council that declining property-tax revenue and limits on other capital sources make impact-fee policy an important lever.

The council debated alternatives and equity considerations. Culver argued for a higher rate, saying, "We are subsidizing market rate housing," and urged council to capture more fees now to leverage scarce public dollars. Other council members said higher fees risk passing costs to buyers or renters and stressed the city already includes carveouts that exempt affordable housing and provide sliding scales for middle and manufactured housing. Members noted bedroom-based fees can trigger disputes over floor plans and occupancy assumptions, reinforcing staff’s preference for square footage.

After initial debate, Culver proposed amending the motion to set the rate at 80%; that amendment tied 3–3 and failed. Deputy Mayor Sassin then moved a compromise amendment to set the rate at 75%; the amendment passed 4–2. The main motion, updated to reflect the 75% rate, passed on a roll-call vote 5–1.

The council’s direction instructs staff to return with a public hearing on the updated park impact fee methodology and associated municipal-code amendments (Chapter 20.47). Staff said the fee would apply to new residential development and that other funding sources—such as REET, levies, or county funding—would still be needed to cover remaining capital needs.

Next steps: staff will prepare hearing materials and an agenda bill implementing the square-footage methodology at the 75% implementation rate and will bring the ordinance/amendments to council for the scheduled public hearing.