Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Sdcs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Astoria council hears consultant on second phase of system development charges; broadly supportive
Summary
Consultants told the Astoria City Council that transportation projects drive most SDCs and recommended moving to phase 2 of the three‑step increase; councilors asked staff to develop deferral language and a formal program for affordable‑housing relief backed by external revenue.
John Guillerducci, principal and project manager with consultant FCS, presented the city's system development charge (SDC) methodology and recommended that the council consider moving to the planned second phase of rate increases.
Guillerducci told the council that SDCs are "the these are the 1 time fees paid at the time of development by new development." He explained the two components that make up an SDC: a reimbursement fee for buy‑in to existing unused capacity and an improvement fee that funds planned growth projects. He said the project lists that drive the fees vary by service and that transportation accounted for the largest SDC‑eligible project list in the city's model.
The consultant reviewed the city's current charges, noted about $110,000 had been collected since SDCs were implemented, and recommended indexing fees annually to the Engineering News‑Record construction cost index to maintain parity with rising construction costs. He also outlined a proposed ordinance change that would credit a property's most recent use (looking back as far as 10 years) and charge only the incremental SDC when land uses change.
Councilors asked detailed questions about meter sizing, which projects are SDC‑eligible, and the legal limits under ORS 223.297–.316. Several members signaled support for the ordinance changes and for taking the next phase. Councilor Adams said she supported the changes "but at the same time, I very much support formalizing a specific program that can speak to, the types of projects specifically around housing and what our future mandates will be around that and how we can encourage that development," reflecting a desire to pair rate changes with specific housing relief measures.
The presentation closed with staff and consultants agreeing to return with specific ordinance language on deferrals and implementation details; there was no formal vote recorded in the transcript. The council recessed for a short break and resumed to continue discussion before adjourning.
