Based on the update to the TE and the range of possible 2015 transportation impact fee rates, DPW (Department of Public Works) proposes the following strategies.

By following the requirements of chapter 36.70A RCW for comprehensive planning and certain other requirements of chapter 82.02 RCW for impact fees in the adoption of the TE and the TNR, the county meets the requirements for determining reasonable proportionate shares (i.e., GMA-based fees). Through this process and adherence to statutory requirements, the county assures that impact fees imposed on a development are “reasonably related” to the impacts of that development, and that the expenditure of those impact fee revenues by the county “reasonably benefits” the development.

There are two main ways that the County makes sure that fees from particular developments will reasonably benefit those developments. First, revenues from impact fees are only spent on projects needed to support new development (i.e., identified as part of the cost basis). Second, the county makes sure that fees collected from a development are spent only on projects in the same TSA as the development. This is done through the administrative accounting procedures used to transfer funds from impact fee revenue accounts to transportation project expenditure accounts. Annual reports provide summaries and details on the accounts.

For Snohomish County, the TE constitutes the capital facilities plan with respect to transportation. The TE meets all of the requirements for a capital facilities plan as defined in chapter 36.70A RCW.

The specific projects identified in the TE and included in the impact fee cost basis must meet one basic criterion: The identified road improvements must be needed to accommodate growth forecast in the county’s GMA comprehensive plan. More specifically, the planned growth must be forecast to cause LOS problems on a particular arterial, thus requiring capacity improvements to maintain the adopted LOS standard.

The county’s schedule of impact fees is found in Chapter 30.66B SCC and shows various levels based on TSA, type of development, and location with respect to the urban growth boundary.

Cost estimates are initially made in the TE to document the broad estimate of total costs and total revenues. The cost estimates are based on the Cost Estimating Model of the TNR (Appendix B). However, as time passes, some projects change in scope, some projects are annexed, unit costs change, etc. These ongoing changes preclude the ability of the county to update the TE frequently enough to be as accurate as possible to best support impact fees. Therefore, the impact fee cost basis is established in the TNR.

The TNR provides more specific engineering information on the projects identified in the TE. As the county learns new information about specific projects, the cost estimates in the TNR are updated. The use of the TNR helps to ensure that fees are collected and spent on projects that are described and cost-estimated as accurately as possible.

For each TSA, Appendix D of the TNR aggregates the costs of improvements needed to support new development and divides this sum by the number of new trips in each TSA that are forecast to be generated by new developments. These costs per new trips are the maximum fee amounts that could be assessed for each TSA.

Consistent with the applicable state law, the county adjusts the costs of projects in the TNR to provide a credit for taxes that might be paid by new development towards the projects in the impact fee cost basis. The method for doing this is described in Appendix H of the TNR.

The fee levels for each TSA are established by the county council in Chapter 30.66B SCC. The SCC 30.66B impact fees adopted by council reflect a balance between the costs to the transportation system between new developments and existing residents.

Consistent with the state law, the county considers the availability of other sources of public funding in establishing its fee levels. Other means of public funding consists of taxes on existing residents which go towards city, county, state, and federal highway funding programs. In terms of County revenues, the taxes collected are known as the “County Road Fund” and consist primarily of revenues from property taxes, fuel taxes, and vehicle excise taxes. (See TNR Appendix I.)

In some cases the county applies impact fees for improvements already in place, but only so long as capacity remains on the road resulting from the improvement to accommodate future growth, and only for a limited period of time.

Chapter 30.66B SCC establishes the provisions for credits consistent with RCW 82.02.060(4). Through these provisions, credit against a development's road system impact fee is provided for dedication of land for, improvement to, or construction of any capacity improvements that are identified in the TNR as part of the road system impact fee cost basis and are imposed by the county as a condition of approval.

RCW 82.02.050(4)(a) provides that the capital facilities plan must identify “Deficiencies in public facilities serving existing development and the means by which existing deficiencies will be eliminated within a reasonable period of time.” As noted earlier in Chapter II, Section B.4; no county arterial units are identified as being in arrears as of the publication date of this TE and consequently no “existing deficiencies” are identified in this TE.

It is worth noting, that the methodology used by the county to calculate the impact fee cost basis includes an adjustment to the project costs to exclude a portion of the costs associated with any existing deficiency. The calculations used to make this adjustment are contained in Appendix D of the TNR.