Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the System Development Charges topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tigard staff propose unit‑size tiered SDCs to favor smaller homes in River Terrace 2.0
Summary
Staff outlined a draft tiered system development charge (SDC) structure that would shift fees from housing‑type categories to unit‑size tiers and suggested redistributing existing policy discounts to provide steeper relief for smaller units. Council asked for numbers and a budget‑neutral justification at future meetings (Sept. 1 and Oct. 13).
City planning staff presented a draft plan to rebuild Tigard’s parks and transportation system development charges (SDCs) around unit size rather than housing type, a change staff said would better align fees with household impacts and the city’s housing objectives.
“SDCs are a fee paid by development that covers a portion of the cost needed to expand or build infrastructure needed to support development,” staff said in the study session, explaining that the proposal would create tiers based on unit square footage and associated household size. Staff emphasized the work is ongoing and that the Sept. 1 meeting will focus on policy direction, with final numbers to follow on Oct. 13.
The current structure applies discounts and exemptions—including a 69% discount to citywide transportation SDCs, a 15% parks discount, and exemptions for ADUs and regulated affordable housing—that staff said have produced unequal incentives. “Rather than having a blanket discount on all types of development, we could instead provide steeper discounts to, for example, smaller units citywide,” staff said, describing the change as a redistribution of existing discounts and therefore budget neutral.
Councilors pressed staff on how the new structure would be implemented and whether the citywide component and supplemental geographic fees (for River Terrace 2.0) would use a single tiering approach. Assistant Director Skyler Warren told the council the consulting team is preparing detailed comparisons so the October meeting can include illustrative examples—for instance, how a 1,400‑square‑foot row house would be treated under the proposed tiered system compared with the current structure.
Council members also asked for clarity on process and fiscal impacts: how the proposal would remain budget neutral in practice, which specific funds would be affected, and whether changes would apply to projects already in permitting. Staff committed to returning with numerical analyses and comparisons in October and to providing examples of total fees (including regional and utility charges) and neighboring‑jurisdiction benchmarks.
Next steps: staff will present policy direction concepts on Sept. 1 and the refined SDC numbers on Oct. 13 for council direction and formal decisions.
