02/18/2025 - Work Study - Packet0�84
Meeting Location: Contact us:
ORCHARD
Council Chambers Phone (3potorchad
216 Prospect Street cityhall@portorchardwa.gov
Port Orchard, WA 98366 www.portorchardwa.gov
City Council
Work Study Session
Tuesday, February 18, 2025
6:30 PM
Pursuant to the Open Public Meetings Act, Chapter 42.30 RCW, the City Council is conducting its public meeting
in a hybrid format with options for in -person attendance in the Council Chambers at City Hall or remote viewing
and participation via Zoom (link below). The meeting is streamed live on the City's YouTube channel, click here.
Remote Access
Link: https://us02web.zoom.usA/89643869925
Zoom Meeting ID: 896 4386 9925
Zoom Call -In: 1 253 215 8782
Guiding Principles
Are we raising the bar in all of our actions?
Are we honoring the past, but not living in the past?
Are we building positive connections with our community and outside partners?
Is the decision -making process building a diverse, equitable, and inclusive community?
1. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
2. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. Kitsap County Block Grant Program (Joel Warren) 20 Minutes
B. Park Impact Fee Rate Structure and Amendments to POMC 20.182 Impact Fees (Bond)
45 Minutes
3. GOOD OF THE ORDER
4. ADJOURNMENT
ADA Requirements
In compliance with the American with Disabilities Act, if you need accommodations to participate in this meeting, please
contact the City Clerk's office at (360) 876-4407. Notification at least 48 hours in advance of meeting will enable the City
to make arrangements to assure accessibility to this meeting.
February 18, 2025 Meeting Agenda
REMINDER: Please silence all electronic devices while City Council is in session.
To subscribe to our general news & public notices click the link: http://portorchardwa.gov/subscribe
For current City Council member and contact information, please visit https://portorchardwa.gov/departments/city-
council/.
For Committee Membership please visit https://portorchardwa.gov/city-council-advisory-committees/.
February 18, 2025 Meeting Agenda
K
0�4 City of Port Orchard
ORCHARD 216 Prospect Street, Port Orchard, WA 98366
(360) 876-4407 • FAX (360) 895-9029
Agenda Staff Report
Discussion Items: Kitsap County Block Grant Program (Joel Warren) 20 Minutes
Meeting Date: February 18, 2025
Prepared By: Nick Bond, AICP, Community Development Director
Summary and Background: Joel Warren is the Program Supervisor at the Kitsap County Department of
Human Services. Joel will be making a presentation to the City Council on the Block Grant Program
2026-2030 Consolidated Plan. The PowerPoint Presentation has been included in the packet.
Relationship to Comprenhensive Plan: N/A
Recommendation: This is a presentation from an outside agency.
Alternatives: N/A
Attachments:
Port Orchard Presentation. pptx
3
1• G cl,gomil
. �7 ►• ro r74
• VV-d Isthetl n7d I ne?
• H wcanynuoildbutetothisone?
Coordinated Grant Application Process
➢ Annual competitive process
➢ Policy Plan outline priorities
• Posted for a 15-day comment period and public hearing
➢ RFP & NOFA posted each Spring
➢ All programs use Survey Monkey
➢ Capital Grant Recommendation Committee (GRC) has
representatives from each city, each Commissioner district,
and one at -large
➢ County program staff determine project eligibility
➢ County staff and GRC evaluate and score each application
➢ Committee deliberates to allocate funding
➢ Funding recommendations are posted for a 30-day
comment period and forwarded to the BOCC for a public
hearing and final approval.
7
a- Its •::a
Citizen
Participation
Plan
Policy 5 —yr Annual
MConsolidated Action
Plan Plan Plan
CAPER
N 1! 94 WMm,44%,0.4%o. ro :� 1 0 t00
5-YeEr,drt Rai
Ross
• C xrrnx,itylrput4 S.rvE�s(pi-bic&arwxgr)a-dstdKddclEroj-EJtetiorls
• nsEd,t
■ C3ta+aWeTErtd resorts
■ Q#a+S.p a eld resorts
■ 9rA6jcRcm
• Da/dopstretegestorr-i3didalifiedrieeds&EAirrEteoutmmes
C-eyoer plat ojTudedtothe3rategcRm
0
10
.M- mw
QftagthaiM(&r\eA m-sJtetirnsWthdties
a-da xie� HLDprovideddEtaaiddLtafmm
I c thff StUddrepU ts)
CbcrdreedGat Ppoic ticnCade
•• • '• • : ••` •
15N )v 5
Ram"toIUD
11
Port Orchard Projects
c4itai ' • a •
••: '•o 'o r '25 1 =t: 1
'• ;• : • o ••• :; $351,237GDB3(2MY2024)
.•-A• -,• • :v' 1• fit: 1.5
:• tmmntyP::• •e :: r. • 8Hmmqrre202D
11
SmAoes
Kt,s.epCmmntyRfflaroes4: ► 0.ti ■i •: • f r•• i • iiq
14
U rks
Survey Link 4 https://rb.gV/dV8pk9
Email Data/Reports/Comments 4 Bonnie Tufts & Joel Warren
Bonnie Tufts 4 Btufts@kitsap.gov
Joel Warren 4 Jwarren@kitsap.gov
15
0�4 City of Port Orchard
ORCHARD 216 Prospect Street, Port Orchard, WA 98366
(360) 876-4407 • FAX (360) 895-9029
Agenda Staff Report
Discussion Items: Park Impact Fee Rate Structure and Amendments to POMC 20.182 Impact Fees
(Bond) 45 Minutes
Meeting Date: February 18, 2025
Prepared By: Nick Bond, AICP, Community Development Director
Presenter: Nick Bond, AICP, Community Development Director
Summary and Background: In 2023, the State Legislature passed two bills addressing housing that
require changes to the City's Park Impact Fee rate structure and to the municipal code. One bill, SB
5258 includes a provision codified in RCW 82.02.060 (1) that requires that impact fees reflect the
proportionate impact of new housing units based on square footage, number of bedrooms, or trips
generated. The alternatives for compliance with this new law are discussed in the attached memo and
rate alternatives comparison spreadsheet. The other new law that was passed was part of HB 1337
concerning Accessory Dwelling Units. This bill requires that cities may not charge impact fees on the
construction of new ADUs that is greater than 50% of the impact fees that are/would be imposed on
the principal unit. Compliance with this law is addressed both in the provided memo and spreadsheet
as well as in the draft code revisions attached hereto. Staff proposes to address both of these related
mandates in a single ordinance.
The City Council should review the rate alternatives, and direct staff on the Council's preferred
alternative. Council should also review the draft code language and provide any feedback on the
proposal to staff. It is recommended that Council schedule a public hearing on the proposed rates and
code change for March 11, 2025 and consider adoption of an ordinance at that meeting.
Relationship to Comprenhensive Plan: Park Impact Fees are based authorized under the Growth
Management Act and are discussed in the City's Comprehensive Plan. The Parks, Recreation, and
Open Space (PROS) Plan is adopted by reference to the Comprehensive Plan and includes a project list
and funding plan that utilizes park impact fees to pay for parks capacity projects and PROS plan
implementation.
Recommendation: Review and discuss the alternatives presented in the attached park impact fee
memo and the draft code language to comply with state law concerning impact fees. Provide direction
to city staff.
Alternatives: The attached memo outlines a variety of alternatives for a new park impact fee rate
structure.
Attachments:
HEV
Port Orchard PIF Comparison Spreadsheet.pdf
Parks Impact Fee Rate Memo Square Footage Vs Number of Bedrooms.pdf
20.182.075 ADU Impact Fee Code Language.docx
Ii F
Square Footage Park Impact Fee Rates
Housing Type Example
Current Rate
2-Year Average $2.53 per sq ft
2-Year Net
4-Year Average $2.49 per sq ft
4-Year Net
6-Year Average $2.45 per sq ft
6-Year Net
Single Family Home 5,000 Square Feet
$6,482.92
$12,650.00
$6,167.08
$12,450.00
$5,967.08
$12,250.00
$5,767.08
Single Family Home 4,000 Square Feet
$6,482.92
$10,120.00
$3,637.08
$9,960.00
$3,477.08
$9,800.00
$3,317.08
Single Family Home 3,000 Square Feet
$6,482.92
$7,590.00
$1,107.08
$7,470.00
$987.08
$7,350.00
$867.08
Single Family Home 2,000 Square Feet
$6,482.92
$5,060.00
-$1,422.92
$4,980.00
-$1,502.92
$4,900.00
-$1,582.92
Duplex Unit 1,400 Square Feet
$4,679.51
$3,542.00
-$1,137.51
$3,486.00
-$1,193.51
$3,430.00
-$1,249.51
Duplex Unit 1,200 Square Feet
$4,679.51
$3,036.00
-$1,643.51
$2,988.00
-$1,691.51
$2,940.00
-$1,739.51
Duplex Unit 1,000 Square Feet
$4,679.51
$2,530.00
-$2,149.51
$2,490.00
-$2,189.51
$2,450.00
-$2,229.51
Triplex/Fourplex Units 1,000 Square Feet
$4,588.63
$2,530.00
-$2,058.63
$2,490.00
-$2,098.63
$2,450.00
-$2,138.63
Triplex/Fourplex Units 800 Square Feet
$4,588.63
$2,024.00
-$2,564.63
$1,992.00
-$2,596.63
$1,960.00
-$2,628.63
Triplex/Fourplex Units 600 Square Feet
$4,588.63
$1,518.00
-$3,070.63
$1,494.00
-$3,094.63
$1,470.00
-$3,118.63
3 Bedroom Apartment 1,000 Square Feet
$4,565.90
$2,530.00
-$2,035.90
$2,490.00
-$2,075.90
$2,450.00
-$2,115.90
2 Bedroom Apartment 800 Square Feet
$4,565.90
$2,024.00
-$2,541.90
$1,992.00
-$2,573.90
$1,960.00
-$2,605.90
1 Bedroom Apartment 600 Square Feet
$4,565.90
$1,518.00
-$3,047.90
$1,494.00
-$3,071.90
$1,470.00
-$3,095.90
Studio Apartment 400 Square Feet
$4,565.90
$1,012.00
-$3,553.90
$996.00
-$3,569.90
$980.00
-$3,585.90
Doublewide Manufactured Home 960 Square Feet
$5,410.21
$2,428.80
-$2,981.41
$2,390.40
-$3,019.81
$2,352.00
-$3,058.21
Triplewide Manufactured Home 1,440 Square Feet
$5,410.21
$3,643.20
-$1,767.01
$3,585.60
-$1,824.61
$3,528.00
-$1,882.21
ADU 2-Bedroom 800 Square Feet
$2,282.96
$2,024.00
-$258.96
$1,992.00
-$290.96
$1,960.00
-$322.96
ADU 1-Bedroom 600 Square Feet
$2,282.96
$1,518.00
-$764.96
$1,494.00
-$788.96i
$1,470.00
-$812.96
ADU Studio 480 Square Feet
$2,282.96
$1,214.40
-$1,068.56
$1,195.20
-$1,087.761
$1,176.00
-$1,106.96
Number of Bedrooms Park Impact Fee
Rates
Housing Type Example
Current Rate
2-Year Average $1,673.46 Per Bedroom
2-Year Net
4-Year Average $1,616.73 Per Bedroom
4-Year Net
6-Year Average $1,720.88 Per Bedroom
6-Year Net
10-Year Average $1,760.29 Per Bedroom
10-Year Net
Single Family Home 5 Bedroom
$6,482.92
$8,367.30
$1,884.38
$8,083.65
$1,600.73
$8o604.40
$2,121.48
$8,801.45
$2,318.53
Single Family Home 4 Bedroom
$6,482.92
$6,693.84
$210.92
$6,466.92
-$16.00
$6,883.52
$400.60
$7,041.16
$558.24
Single Family Home 3 Bedroom
$6,482.92
$5,020.38
-$1,462.54
$4,850.19
-$1,632.73
$5,162.64
-$1,320.28
$5,280.87
-$1,202.05
Single Family Home 2 Bedroom
$6,482.92
$3,346.92
-$3,136.00
$3,233.46
-$3,249.46
$3,441.76
-$3,041.16
$3,520.58
-$2,962.34
Duplex Unit 3 Bedroom
$4,679.51
$5,020.38
$340.87
$4,850.19
$170.68
$5,162.64
$483.13
$5,280.87
$601.36
Duplex Unit 2 Bedroom
$4,679.51
$3,346.92
-$1,332.59
$3,233.46
-$1,446.05
$3,441.76
-$1,237.75
$3,520.58
-$1,158.93
Duplex Unit 1 Bedroom
$4,679.51
$1,673.46
-$3,006.05
$1,616.73
-$3,062.78
$1,720.88
-$2,958.63
$1,760.29
-$2,919.22
Triplex/Fourplex Units 3 Bedroom
$4,588.63
$5,020.38
$431.75
$4,850.19
$261.56
$5,162.64
$574.01
$5,280.87
$692.24
Triplex/Fourplex Units 2 Bedroom
$4,588.63
$3,346.92
-$1,241.71
$3,233.46
-$1,355.17
$3,441.76
-$1,146.87
$3,520.58
-$1,068.05
Triplex/Fourplex 1 Bedroom/Studio
$4,588.63
$1,673.46
-$2,915.17
$1,616.73
-$2,971.90
$1,720.88
-$2,867.75
$1,760.29
-$2,828.34
3 Bedroom Apartment
$4,565.90
$5,020.38
$454.48
$4,850.19
$284.29
$5,162.64
$596.74
$5,280.87
$714.97
2 Bedroom Apartment
$4,565.90
$3,346.92
-$1,218.98
$3,233.46
-$1,332.44
$3,441.76
-$1,124.14
$3,520.58
-$1,045.32
1 Bedroom Apartment
$4,565.90
$1,673.46
-$2,892.44
$1,616.73
-$2,949.17
$1,720.88
-$2,845.02
$1,760.29
-$2,805.61
Studio Apartment
$4,565.90
$1,673.46
-$2,892.44
$1,616.73
-$2,949.17
$1,720.88
-$2,845.02
$1,760.29
-$2,805.61
ADU 2-Bedroom
$2,282.96
$3,346.92
$1,063.96
$3,233.46
$950.50
$3,441.76
$1,158.80
$3,520.58
$1,237.62
ADU 1-Bedroom/Studio
$2,282.96
$1,673.46
-$609.50
$1,616.73
-$666.23
$1,720.88
-$562.08
$1,760.29
-$522.67
18
CITY OF PORT ORCHARD
!AY o1
Department of Community Development
r. nur 216 Prospect Street
Port Orchard, WA 98366
Memorandum
To: The City Council
From: Nicholas Bond, AICP
Date: February 11, 2025
Re: Park Impact Fee Rate — Compliance with RCW 82.02.060 (1)
Background: In 2022, the City of Port Orchard completed its most recent update to the
Parks, Recreation, and Open Space (PROS) Plan in 2022. The 2022 PROS Plan included a
rate study for the City's Park Impact Fee charged on new residential development. The Parks
Impact Fee was adopted by the City Council via Ordinance 013-22 and included an annual
CPI adjustment that was to take effect annually on March 1 thereafter.
Since adoption, the Washington Legislature passed SB 5258 and imposed new requirements
concerning the assessment of impact fees. This new law, adopted to "expand housing options
by easing barriers to the construction and use of accessory dwelling units," requires local
jurisdictions that utilize impact fees to adopt a rate structure that charges proportionately lower
impact fees for smaller housing units based on square footage, number of bedrooms, or trips
generated (with the third approach applying only to transportation impact fees). Compliance
with the new law is required within six months of adoption of the required periodic update to
the comprehensive plan. In Port Orchard's case, this means that a new rate structure must
be adopted by July 1, 2025, as Port Orchard's periodic update was adopted prior to the
deadline of December 31, 2024.
In 2023 the legislature also passed HB 1337, also designed to encourage the allowance of
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) as a housing option. This law established new requirements
for ADUs, including a rule that cities may not charge impact fees on the construction of new
ADUs that is greater than 50% of the impact fees that are/would be imposed on the principal
unit.
At Issue: Port Orchard's existing rate structure, adopted prior to the adoption of these new
laws, was largely developed consistent with the spirit of SB 5258 and HB 1337 by assessing
lower fees for building types that typically contain fewer Persons Per Household (PPH) when
compared to a single-family house. The rate study that led to the existing rate structure
calculated a cost per person for the city to maintain its Existing Level of Service (ELOS)
standards, based on the City's projected population growth. The rate study determined the
cost per person to maintain ELOS strategy using the Office of Financial Management PPH
data to proportionately assess a rate charged on each housing type, including detached
houses, duplexes, manufactured homes, 3- and 4-plexes, apartments, and ADUs. The
current fee schedule in effect from March 1, 2025 through February 28, 2026, is provided as
Figure 1. A table showing April 1, 2022, PPH data is shown as Figure 2.
Page 1 of 7
10972168.1 - 366922 - 0001
19
Figure 1. The Current Parks Impact Fee Schedule March 1, 2025 through February 28, 2026.
Park Impact Fees
Single Family Residence
$6,482.92
Duplex (Each Unit)
$4,679.51
Tri- or Four-plex (Each Unit)
$4,588.63
Multi-plex (5 or more units, Each Unit)
$4,565.90
ADU (Accessory Dwelling Unit)
$2,282.96
New Manufactured Home
$5,410.21
Figure 2. April 1, 2022 Office of Financial Management Persons Per Household Data used
to create the Port Orchard Parks Impact Fee schedule for non -single family residences.'
1-Unit
2-Unit
3- & 4-Unit
5 or more
Manufactured
units
Homes
Persons Per
2.841564
2.058219
2.012658
2.004415
2.370629
Household
Proposals for Action - Rate Structure Alternatives: To comply with SB 5258, the City must
decide whether to assess future park impact fees based either on (1) the square footage of a
residential unit or (3) the number of bedrooms in a unit. The City has collected and maintained
square footage data on residential construction since 2004 and data on the number of
bedrooms in new homes since 2015. This data was used to convert the City's current fee
structure into anew fee structure that complies with state law.2 Staff seeks direction on which
approach the City Council would prefer between options (1) and (2). Staff's recommendation
is option 2, as described below.
• Option (1) - Square Footage Alternative: The first option permitted under SB 5258
is to calculate the rate based on the average square footage of a residential unit. By
calculating the average square footage of new homes constructed over a range of years, the
City can take the existing park impact fee rate that is based on the average persons per
household numbers for Port Orchard and instead divide that fee by the average square
footage for that range of years. Within option (1), Staff has identified five alternative per
square foot park impact fee ranges with corresponding rates that are supported by the data
and that the City Council could choose to implement under the square footage alternative.
Staffs recommendation is Alternative 2, as explained below.
' It should be noted that OFM does not provide a persons per household estimate for
ADUs. Consistent with best practices, the City, in conjunction with its expert
consultant for the rate study, based the calculation for ADUs on an assumption of 1
PPH.
2 This memorandum and supporting calculations were prepared by Community
Development Director Nicholas Bond, AICP, a credential land use planning expert,
utilizing data compiled by Beckwith Consulting Group in conjunction with the 2022
PROS Plan and associated impact fee study.
2
10972168.1 - 366922 - 0001
20
These are the five alternative ranges3:
Alternative 1: 2-year average new home size.
Alternative 2: 4-year average new home size.
Alternative 3: 6-year average new home size.
Alternative 4: 10-year average new home size.
Alternative 5: 21-year average new home size (max range of data).
When considering these five alternatives, trends in home size were evaluated and key
observations were made. First, a major shift in average house square footage began in 2017.
City staff attributes this to two events. First, construction in McCormick Woods resumed after
the sale of this property to McCormick Communities. Prior to annexation in 2009 and through
the years following the Great Recession (2007-2010), activity in McCormick Woods West, and
North was on hold. Second, the homes in this part of Port Orchard are much larger than
average and skew the average house size data. As there are more than 2,000 remaining
homes to build in this part of the city, staff recommends that data prior to 2017 be discarded
as it does not reflect the likely scale of development planned in future years. Third, data
indicates that the Covid-19 global pandemic and the shift to telework has likely skewed new
housing sizes beginning in 2020. While a return to the office shift has begun, some
teleworking is likely here to stay. This shift in where residents work (and thus the size/use of
residential structures for non-residential purposes) is another reason to discard this older data.
Finally, the global pandemic also resulted in inflation, with associated skyrocketing
construction costs and increasing interest rates. These factors likely also contribute to the
recent downward trend in house size, though house size still well above pre-2017 levels. Due
to these four factors, staff recommends that only Alternative ranges 1, 2, and 3 are utilized.
Figure 3. Average detached house size 2004-2024 including garages.
Average Square Footage by Year
4000
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
,ct Ln l0 I, 00 cn O r-i N M -zt In LD n 00 0) O i 4 N M
0 0 0 0 0 0-1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 -1 ci N N N N N
O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N
3 One variable that was considered is that the City's square footage data is inclusive of
uninhabited garages which can vary in size. In the absence of permitting data for garage
square footage, staff has deducted 500 square feet from all homes for an assumed 2+ car
garage, based on the average size for an attached garage constructed with a detached home.
3
10972168.1 - 366922 - 0001
21
By applying the average new house square footage for Alternatives 1, 2, and 3, sans an
assumed 500 square feet for an estimated average size attached garage, the per square
footages rates can be established for each alternative by dividing the average square
footage by the current single family park impact fee rate, $6,482.92.
Alternative 1: 2-year average new home size excluding garage — 2,566 square feet:
$2.53 Per Square Foot
Alternative 2: 4-year average new home size excluding garage — 2,608 square feet:
$2.49 Per Square Foot
Alternative 3: 6-year average new home size excluding garage — 2,643 square feet:
$2.45 Per Square Foot
Based on the compiled data and analysis outlined above, Staff recommends that if the
Council chooses Option (1), Alternative range 2 be utilized.
• Option (2) - Bedrooms Alternative. The second option endorsed by the legislature
is to utilize the average number of bedrooms. By calculating the average number of
bedrooms constructed in new homes over a range of years, the City can use the existing
park impact fee rate that is based on the average persons per household numbers for Port
Orchard and instead divide that fee by the average number of bedrooms for that range of
years. Staff has identified four alternative ranges and associated calculated park impact fee
rates that are supported by the data and could be implemented under the per bedroom
alternative. Staff's recommendation is Alternative 2, as explained below.
Staff identified four ranges of years for this option 4, as follows:
Alternative 1: 2-year average number of bedrooms.
Alternative 2: 4-year average number of bedrooms.
Alternative 3: 6-year average number of bedrooms.
Alternative 4: 10-year average number of bedrooms.
Similar to the changes seen in square footage over time, there have been some change in
the average number of bedrooms constructed in new houses in Port Orchard. However, there
was less increase from the renewal of construction activity at McCormick Woods, West, and
North in 2017, while there was a slight increase for the Covid-19 pandemic when extra
bedrooms were sought for home office use. The average number of bedrooms has declined
slightly from the 2022 peak. Figure 4 shows that change in average bedroom size since 2015.
4 A fifth alternative, a 21-year average number of bedrooms, going back as far as the square
footage alternative presented in the previous section, was not available due to a lack of
data. Additionally, in contrast to the square footage alternative, deductions for uninhabited
square footage (garages, etc.) is not needed when using the rate per bedroom approach.
2
10972168.1 - 366922 - 0001
W"
Figure 4. Change in average number of bedrooms in new homes from 2015-2024.
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
# of Bedrooms
2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024
By applying the average new house bedroom quantities for Alternatives 1, 2, 3, and 4, per
bedroom rates can be established for each alternative by dividing the average number of
bedrooms for a range of years by the current single family park impact fee rate, $6,482.92.
Alternative 1: 2-year average number of bedrooms — 3.9:
$1,673.46 Per Bedroom
Alternative 2: 4-year average number of bedrooms — 4:
$1,616.73 Per Bedroom
Alternative 3: 6-year average number of bedrooms — 3.8:
$1,720.88 Per Bedroom
Alternative 4: 10-year average number of bedrooms — 3.7:
$1,760.29 Per Bedroom
Based on the compiled data and analysis outlined above, Staff recommends that if the Council
chooses Option (2), Alternative 2 be utilized.
One challenge with the per bedroom approach is ensuring that the City is able to accurately
forecast annual revenues and to ensure that the new rate structure provides sufficient revenue
to implement the PROS Plan. In the past four years, the City has seen some inconsistency
in the number of houses built based on bedroom size even though the average number of
bedrooms in houses for this period appears to be stable. If consumer preferences were to
shift toward houses with fewer bedrooms or if spec home builders choose to build houses with
fewer bedrooms, the City may fall short of revenue.
5
10972168.1 - 366922 - 0001
23
Figure 5. Total number of units constructed by year 2021-2024.
Bedroom Units by Year
200
150
c
v
100
E
Z 50
0
2-Bed 3-Bed 4-Bed 5-Bed
Number of bedrooms
0 2021 0 2022 0 2023 . 2024
6-Bed
• Comparison of the Per Square Footage and Per Bedroom Alternatives: The
attached spreadsheet shows a comparison of the square footage and per bedroom
alternatives and sub -alternatives with examples for a variety of housing types at different sizes
or bedroom counts. Where fees would be higher than current rates, the new fee is shown in
red. Where it would be lower than the current rate, it is shown in green.
It is notable that under the square footage alternative, all building types except larger than
average homes would see a decrease in park impact fee rate. Moreover, the discount is more
pronounced compared to the per bedroom alternative. However, the per square footage
alternative would charge significantly higher fees for large houses compared to the current flat
rate for all single-family houses.
The per bedroom alternative generally lowers fees compared to the current flat rate for units
with few bedrooms and raises it for units with many bedrooms. However, the change in fee
is less pronounced than for the square footage model in most instances.
When comparing these two allowable approaches under state law, the Council will need to
consider its objectives in choosing the preferred approach. The per square foot rate provides
greater incentives to construct middle housing types. However, the per bedroom approach
may more accurately reflect the demand for and impacts on park facilities. Whether a
bedroom is large or small, the occupant of that bedroom is likely to create an equal demand
for park facilities, assuming single occupancy bedrooms. The per bedroom approach is more
in line with the current persons per household rate structure adopted pursuant to the 2022
PROS plan.
Staff Recommendation. The City Council should discuss the pros and cons of the per
square footage approach and the per bedroom approach of establishing a revised park impact
fee rate. Once an approach has been agreed upon, the merits of the sub alternatives
described herein should be considered.
As outlined herein, staffs recommendation is to utilize the per bedroom approach and the 4-
year average number of bedrooms. There are a variety of reasons for recommending this
approach.
6
10972168.1 - 366922 - 0001
24
Bedrooms are a better metric for park impact compared to square footage. More
bedrooms are likely to support more persons per household. More square footage is
not always going to equate to more bedrooms or persons per household. Square
footage could be an indicator of a large primary bedroom and bathroom, entertaining
space, kitchen, hobby space, recreational space, or other space the does not
otherwise correspond to parks impact.
2. The per bedroom option does not require the city to make assumptions about
uninhabited space (a 2- vs. 3-car garage), an unfinished basement, or storage space,
and is easier to calculate and administer.
3. The per bedroom approach using the 4-year number of bedroom per house average
has the least variation from the current persons per household rate structure. This
provides the closest possible fee structure to current rates ensuring that proformas for
project in progress are minimally impacted by a change in rate structure.
4. The 4-year average number of bedrooms reflects the highest average number of
bedrooms and therefore the lowest per bedroom rate. Choosing the lowest rate option
will be easier to justify to the development community for the 2-4 year period prior to
Port Orchard's next PROS plan and park impact fee rate study update. During this
time, the City can see how this new rate structure impacts building activity and factor
this information into its next update.
5. The per bedroom approach is more likely to ensure that the City's Park impact fee
revenue projections are met. If the city were to significantly reduce park impact fees
for small units such as apartments (of which many units are currently planned), the
units in the pipeline would generate less park impact fee revenue than forecasted and
could jeopardize the City's ability to complete parks projects as planned.
The reasoning behind recommending a 4-year average for both square footage and per
bedroom is largely due to the seismic shifts in consumer preferences since the start of the
pandemic combined with a slight downward trend in square footage attributed to high interest
rates and construction costs. The last 4 years are vastly different than the years preceding
2020 due to these factors. These factors appear likely to exist though at least the completion
of the next PROS plan and park impact fee rate study update.
Attachments. Rate Structure Alternatives Spreadsheet
7
10972168.1 - 366922 - 0001
25
20.182.075 Accessory Dwelling Unit Impact Fee Calculations
(1) Accessory dwelling units shall be charged impact fees in accordance with the schedules
adopted in POMC 20.182.070 (1), except that pursuant to RCW 36.70A.681 (1) (a), the City
may not assess impact fees on the construction of accessory dwelling units that are greater
than 50 percent of the impact fees that would be imposed on the principal unit. If the impact fee
resulting from the use of the rates established in POMC 20.182.070 (1) result in an impact fee
on an accessory dwelling unit that is in excess of 50% of the fee that would be imposed on the
principal unit, then the City shall reduce the amount of impact fee owed on the accessory
dwelling unit to 50% of the amount that would be owed on the principal dwelling were it to be
constructed at the current rate.
(2) Applicants seeking approval for the construction or creation of (an) accessory dwelling
unit(s) shall provide the following information with their application for the construction or
creation of (an) accessory dwelling unit(s):
(a) The estimated trip generation pursuant to the currently adopted version of the ITE
manual for both the accessory dwelling unit and the principal dwelling unit on the site.
(b) The number of bedrooms in the proposed accessory dwelling unit and the principal
dwelling unit on the site. If the principal unit is existing, this shall be the number of
bedrooms as reported by the Kitsap County Assessor's office for the existing structure.
If the principal unit (either new or modified) is being proposed concurrent with the
accessory dwelling unit(s), then the proposed number of bedrooms for the principal unit
shall be provided consistent with the submitted plans for the principal dwelling.
(c) The total finished square footage in the proposed accessory dwelling unit and the
principal dwelling unit on the site. If the principal unit is existing, this shall be the finished
square footage as reported by the Kitsap County Assessor's office for the existing
structure. If the principal unit (either new or modified) is being proposed concurrent with
the accessory dwelling unit(s), then the proposed square footage for the principal unit
shall be provided consistent with the submitted plans for the principal dwelling.
(3) An applicant for the construction or creation of an accessory dwelling unit may request a
variation from the impact fee schedule in accordance with POMC 20.182.090.
(4) Unless a variation to the impact fee schedule is granted in accordance with POMC
20.182.090, the City shall determine the amount of impact fees owed for the creation or
construction of accessory dwelling units based on the information supplied by the applicant
pursuant to section (2). This information shall be verified by the city by reviewing the currently
adopted ITE trip generation estimates for the proposed uses, the number of bedrooms and/or
square footage either reported by the Kitsap County Assessor or as shown on plans for the
accessory dwelling unit and principal structure. Where inconsistencies are found between the
applicant -supplied information and the ITE manual or Kitsap County Assessor records, the
application shall be returned to the applicant for correction. Required corrective action may
include, but is not limited to, the following:
(a) Correcting the supplied information to match County Assessor Records or submitted
construction plans; and/or
10990168.1 - 366922 - 0001
26
(b) Requesting amendment to property records or appealing assessments to the Kitsap
County Assessor office; and/or
(c) Submitting an impact fee variation request in accordance with POMC 20.182.090.
(5) The conversion of an ADU to a principal unit or the enlargement of a principal unit shall be
considered new development subject to impact fee charges which may apply.
10990168.1 - 366922 - 0001
4A