20D.210.10 Transportation Management Code.

20D.210.10-010 Overview: Transportation Concurrency and Impact Fees.

Prior to submitting a development application, the developer of a project subject to this division may submit a request for a certificate of concurrency to the Department of Planning and Community Development. The request shall be on a prescribed transportation certificate of concurrency request form developed by the Administrator, and shall contain questions concerning the nature of the development, including a description, location, uses, intensities, and trip generation characteristics.

The Administrator shall, with the assistance of other City departments, use the information to determine the net trips, person miles of travel (PMT) and the mobility unit (MU) demand generated by the proposed development. The Administrator will consider the design, density, diversity of the development, including commute-trip reduction strategies, internal, diverted, and pass-by trips from existing traffic in evaluating the MU demand. This information will be used to determine compliance with this division, and whether enough MUs from the six-year program and the Transportation Facility Plan (TFP) can be supplied to meet travel demand from the development at the time of opening, or within six years. If the MU supply is available to serve the MU demand from the development, the Administrator shall issue a certificate of concurrency that shall expire if a complete application for the development for which concurrency is reserved is not applied for within 120 days of issuance of the certificate of concurrency. The City shall only approve a development application that has a certificate of concurrency meeting the requirements of this division.

If the proposed development does not pass the concurrency test, the developer may provide supplemental mitigation to meet concurrency requirements. The cost of supplemental mitigation may be credited towards a portion of the developer’s impact fee obligation, subject to certain limitations.

The Administrator shall determine the transportation impact fee for the proposed development based on information provided pursuant to RCDG 20D.210.10-090 through 20D.210.10-210, after the developer submits a complete development application. Requests for an impact fee exemption or credit against payment of the impact fee shall be reviewed pursuant to RCDG 20D.210.10-180 and 20D.210.10-190, respectively.

Impact fees shall be used to pay for transportation improvements identified in the City’s TFP, and shall not duplicate any mitigation provided under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).

The developer may appeal the Administrator’s decision on concurrency and/or impact fees according to the process described in RCDG 20D.210.10-220, Administration and Appeals.

For the administration of this division only, the Administrator shall be the Directors of the Department of Planning and Community Development and the Department of Public Works, the Directors’ authorized representative(s), or any representative authorized by the Mayor. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.010))

Transportation Concurrency

20D.210.10-020 Plan-Based Concurrency: Purpose and Intent.

RCDG 20D.210.10-020 through 20D.210.10-080 set forth specific standards providing for City compliance with the concurrency requirements of the State Growth Management Act (GMA) and for consistency between City and County-wide planning policies under the GMA. The GMA requires that the City of Redmond:

must adopt and enforce ordinances which prohibit development approval if the development causes the level-of-service on a transportation facility to decline below the standards adopted in the transportation element of the Comprehensive Plan, unless transportation improvements or strategies to accommodate the impacts of development are made concurrent with the development.

In response to the mandates of the GMA, the City of Redmond has established a transportation level-of-service (LOS) standard that seeks to balance mobility, circulation and access¹ demands from existing and future development, with the City’s future vision, framework policies and policies in the various elements of the Comprehensive Plan. Transportation Element Policy TR-4 is the City’s transportation LOS standard², establishing the specific relationship between implementation of the Transportation Facility Plan (TFP) and future development.

To examine development impacts and determine whether a proposed development meets the requirements of RCDG 20D.210.10-020 through 20D.210.10-080, concurrency “testing” should occur prior to the submittal of a development application, consistent with the requirements of this division. If a proposed development passes the concurrency test, the City shall issue a certificate of concurrency, which shall expire if a complete application for the development for which concurrency is reserved is not applied for within 120 days of the issuance of the certificate of concurrency. The requirements contained in RCDG 20D.210.10 shall apply to all development applications as specified below.

If a proposed development does not pass the concurrency test, RCDG 20D.210.10-080 lists available options for consideration by the developer and the City. The Administrator shall have final approval authority over any options proposed by the developer. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.030(10)))

20D.210.10-030 Application.

This section applies to:

(1) All development approval applications filed after its effective date that generate demand for more than 25 mobility units (MU).

(2) Phased Development. A phased development is any development involving multiple buildings where issuance of building permits could occur for individual buildings. The requirements of this section shall be applied at the time of approval of the initial phase and may be adjusted for each subsequent phase based on the cumulative impact of all the phases.

(3) Single Projects. All development applications which have been submitted by the same developer on the same or contiguous parcel of land as a single project within the one-year period immediately prior to a current application will be considered along with the current application as being a single application for purposes of determining, under subsection (1) of this section, whether this section applies.

(4) Change in Occupancy. This section will apply to applications for tenant improvements if a proposed new use or an expanded existing use will generate demand for more than 25 additional MU.

(5) Concomitant Agreements. Unless the agreement specifically provides otherwise, this section applies to any development application that is subject to an existing concomitant agreement.

(6) Reconstruction of Destroyed Buildings. If a building is destroyed by fire, explosion or act of God or war, or is demolished and is reconstructed in accordance with the RCDG, it will not be required to comply with this section unless the reconstructed building generates demand for more than 25 MU in excess of those produced by the destroyed building prior to its destruction.

(7) Development Agreements. A development agreement may include a provision whereby the City may grant a certificate of concurrency for a proposed development that meets the requirements of this division. In the development agreement, the City may also specify the length of time for which a certificate of concurrency is valid. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.030(20)))

20D.210.10-040 Relationship to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA).

This division establishes minimum requirements applicable to all developments and is not intended to eliminate the use of the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). An analysis of development specific impacts, particularly transportation safety and operational issues, will occur, with mitigation identified as allowed under the authority of SEPA. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.030(40)). Formerly 20D.210.10-050)

20D.210.10-050 Administration.

The Administrator shall be responsible for the administration of this division and may adopt rules for its implementation, provided the Administrator shall first hold a public hearing. The Administrator shall publish notice of intent to adopt any rule and the date, time and place of the public hearing thereon in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least 20 days prior to the hearing date. Any person may submit written comment to the Administrator in response to such notice, and/or may speak at the public hearing. Following the public hearing the Administrator shall adopt, adopt with modifications, or reject the proposed rules. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.030(50)). Formerly 20D.210.10-060)

20D.210.10-060 Concurrency and the Transportation Level-of-Service (LOS) Standard.

The City shall issue a certificate of concurrency only if the City is able to determine that the unallocated mobility unit (MU) supply necessary to provide for the MU demand from a proposed development is available at the time of opening or within six years, consistent with the City’s transportation level-of-service (LOS) standard.

To calculate the MU supply available to serve proposed development, the City shall include complete and fully committed Transportation Facility Plan (TFP) or six-year program improvements. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.030(60)). Formerly 20D.210.10-070)

20D.210.10-070 Review of Development Proposals – Concurrency Testing.

The Administrator will use the Comprehensive Plan’s land use growth target and Transportation Facility Plan (TFP) to determine the mobility unit (MU) demand expected from the growth target and MU supply provided by the TFP. The MU demand shall be determined by calculating the person miles of travel (PMT) generated by development, and shall consider the design, density, diversity of the development, including commute-trip reduction strategies, internal, diverted, and pass-by trips from existing traffic in evaluating the MU demand. The PMT shall be translated into MU demand such that one unit of PMT is equal to one unit of MU demand.

The MU supply provided by the TFP will be implemented through the six-year program. The Administrator shall calculate the MU supply available in each year of the six-year program and determine transportation concurrency for each new development by ensuring that the MU demand from a development does not exceed the MU supply that the City is able to provide for that development under the six-year plan. This analysis of the MU demand and MU supply relationship is a concurrency testing requirement to maintain the City’s transportation level-of-service (LOS) standard under the plan-based concurrency system.

The concurrency testing process is divided into the following steps:

(1) Application. Any proposed development which is subject to this division shall be tested for transportation concurrency by the Administrator to determine compliance with the City’s transportation concurrency policies and regulations;

(2) Certificate of Concurrency. A proposed development passes the transportation concurrency test if the mobility unit (MU) demand from the proposed development is less than or equal to the unallocated MU supply from TFP. The Administrator shall issue a certificate of concurrency to a proposed development that passes the concurrency test. A valid certificate of concurrency is necessary for development approval.

A certificate of concurrency shall include an adequate description of the development proposal to which the certificate applies, and any further information necessary to administer this division. The certificate may not be transferred to another proposed development unless approved by the Administrator.

A certificate of concurrency shall be valid for 120 days. The certificate of concurrency will remain valid if a complete development application is received by the City within 120 days of the certificate being issued and subsequently for the duration that development application is under review by the City. A certificate of concurrency will continue to be valid for the same period of time as the development approval granted by the City. If the development approval does not have an expiration date, the certificate of concurrency shall be valid for one year, and then up to two one- year extensions upon approval by the Administrator.

(3) Certificate of Concurrency Denial. A certificate of concurrency will be denied if the unallocated MU supply is less than the MU demand from the proposed development.

(4) Administrator’s Decision and Appeal Process. Decisions made by the Administrator pursuant to this division may be appealed as specified in RCDG 20D.210.10-220.

(5) Expiration. A certificate of concurrency shall expire:

(a) If a complete application for the development for which concurrency is reserved is not made within 120 days of issuance of the concurrency certificate. If a certificate of concurrency expires before a complete development application is submitted to the City, the developer must wait 14 days before submitting another concurrency application request for the same development; or

(b) If either the related development application expires or is denied, or if the related development approval expires or is revoked by the City. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.030(70)). Formerly 20D.210.10-080)

20D.210.10-080 Available Options When the Mobility Unit (MU) Supply Is Insufficient to Serve a Proposed Development.

(1) If a development is tested for transportation concurrency, and does not pass, the developer may:

(a) Reduce the size of the proposed development until the MU demand is equal to or less than the MU supply that is available;

(b) Delay the proposed development until the City or others increase the MU supply;

(d) Upon approval by the Administrator, a developer may implement TDM strategies as supplemental mitigation, provided that the MU demand from a proposed development is reduced due to the elimination of trips, and the TDM strategies become a legal project approval condition of the development. The Administrator will determine, consistent with accepted engineering and planning practice, the appropriate reduction in trips and mode split to be applied to the proposed development, and shall review and approve the TDM strategies proposed by the developer, provided that:

(i) These strategies shall be prenegotiated and approved by the Administrator;

(ii) There shall be methods to monitor and enforce TDM performance, and a fallback plan which would be implemented if the development fails to achieve TDM goals within two years;

(iii) The TDM strategies become a condition tied to all future owners of the development and property; and

(iv) The TDM strategies meet the criteria of subsection (3) of this section.

(2) Payment for and Timing of Supplemental Mitigation. If allowed by the Administrator, a developer may provide funding in an amount equal to the City’s estimated cost of the necessary MUs. The cost per MU supplied shall be indexed for inflation using the same method used to update transportation impact fees. The Administrator, with the concurrence of other affected City departments, may provide for latecomer agreements as provided by state law or for other reimbursement from properties benefited by the improvements unless the City Council finds reimbursement to be inappropriate. The Administrator may require that a developer build or implement a transportation improvement, rather than provide funding.

Funds for transportation improvements must be paid by the developer to the City prior to issuance of a building permit, final plat approval or other approval requiring improvements under this section, provided that the developer may, at the Administrator’s option, submit an assurance device in a form approved by the Administrator.

A developer providing supplemental mitigation may receive credit towards payment of required transportation impact fees. Credit determination shall be made according to RCDG 20D.210.10-190, Credits Against Payment of Transportation Impact Fees.

(3) Supplemental Mitigation Decision Criteria. Acceptable supplemental mitigation requires a finding by the Administrator that:

(a) The supplemental mitigation meets the definition outlined in Chapter 20A.20 RCDG; or if a developer proposes as supplemental mitigation a transportation improvement that is not identified in the City’s Transportation Facility Plan (TFP), the transportation improvement must first be considered and approved as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan before the supplemental mitigation is approved.

(b) The MU supply is available concurrent with the development or that a financial commitment is in place to complete the improvement that provides the MU supply within six years.

(c) The effect of the improvement would not result in a reduction or the loss of another transportation objective, including but not limited to maintaining high occupancy vehicle lanes, sidewalks, paths, trails, or bicycle lanes.

(d) Any adverse environmental impacts of the proposed transportation improvement can be reasonably mitigated.

(e) The improvement is consistent with accepted engineering and planning standards and practices.

(f) Where practical, transportation improvements required as part of supplemental mitigation should be made at locations most impacted by the development.

(g) A developer proposing TDM strategies demonstrates that the MU demand is reduced. The developer must have additional strategies to address a situation where the reduction in MU demand is not met by the developer’s initial TDM strategies.

(h) Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Administrator has the authority to require correction of a documented safety-related deficiency.

(4) Supplemental Mitigation Denial Process. If the Administrator determines that the proposed supplemental mitigation does not meet the requirements of this section, the Administrator may deny the issuance of a certificate of concurrency. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.030(80)). Formerly 20D.210.10-090)

Transportation Impact Fees

20D.210.10-090 Purpose and Intent.

This section is intended to assist in the implementation of the Comprehensive Plan consistent with the requirements of the GMA, and:

(1) To regulate the use and development of land so as to assure that new development bears a proportionate share of the cost of transportation improvements that are necessary to support planned land uses and to comply with the City’s transportation level-of-service (LOS) standard;

(2) To allow the City the option to impose transportation impact fees to pay for previously incurred transportation improvement costs, to the extent that new growth and development will be served by these improvements. Such fees shall not be imposed to make up for any transportation deficiencies. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.040(10)). Formerly 20D.210.10-100)

20D.210.10-100 Imposition of the Transportation Impact Fee.

(1) Any person who seeks City approval for a development that will generate additional travel demand is hereby required to pay a transportation impact fee in the manner and amount set forth in this section.

(2) No new development permit for any activity requiring payment of an impact fee pursuant to RCDG 20D.210.10-110 through 20D.210.10-130 shall be issued unless and until the transportation impact fee hereby required has been paid.

(3) No extension of a development permit issued prior to the effective date of the ordinance codified in this section, for any activity requiring payment of an impact fee pursuant to RCDG 20D.210.10-110 through 20D.210.10-130, shall be granted unless and until the transportation impact fee hereby required has been paid. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.040(20)). Formerly 20D.210.10-110)

20D.210.10-110 Computation of the Transportation Impact Fee.

The City uses transportation impact fees from new development to fund part of the Transportation Facility Plan (TFP) consistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. The transportation improvements in the TFP are intended to maintain, provide and improve mobility in Redmond.

Credit for future transportation-related taxes has been applied to the cost of the TFP to determine the net amount which is funded through impact fees. The method to be used to calculate the impact fee for a particular development is described in subsection (1) of this section. The impact fee determination shall be issued by letter from the Administrator to the applicant for a development permit.

(1) The amount of the transportation impact fee is calculated by using the Transportation Impact Fees – Fee Schedule in RCDG 20D.210.10-120. The fee schedule includes credit for future specifically dedicated transportation taxes imposed for the purpose of improving the transportation system.

(a) If a development permit is requested for a mixed-use development, the fee shall be determined by apportioning the space committed to uses specified on the applicable schedule.

(b) For applications for a development permit approval extension:

The amount of the fee is the net positive difference between the fee currently applicable, and the fee applicable at the time of original permit application, pursuant to this section. If the extension is for a development permit originally issued prior to the effective date of this section, the fee currently applicable shall be collected.

(c) For applications for a change of use, redevelopment, or modification of an existing development where there is no increase in building or developed area (i.e., no increase in the gross floor area or gross leasable area as applicable), and which requires the issuance of a development permit, the City shall not charge a transportation impact fee.

(d) For applications for a change of use, redevelopment, or modification of an existing development, that add building and/or developed area (i.e., increasing the gross floor area or gross leasable area as applicable), and which requires the issuance of a development permit, the amount of the fee is the net positive difference between the fee currently applicable for the use after redevelopment, expansion, or modification, compared to the fee that is currently applicable for the use prior to redevelopment, expansion, or modification, pursuant to RCDG 20D.210.10-110 through 20D.210.10-130. The same fee calculation shall apply if an application was originally issued prior to the effective date of these regulations.

In determining the transportation impact fee, the Administrator shall be guided by appropriate technical analysis and information contained in the Transportation Master Plan (TMP), other City technical reports and functional plans, and the most recent edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers.

(e) If the type of development activity proposed in a development application is not specified on the applicable fee schedule, the Administrator shall use the fee applicable to the most nearly comparable type(s) of land use on the fee schedule. The Administrator shall be guided in this selection by the most appropriate technical and professional data. If the Administrator determines that there is no comparable type of land use on the applicable fee schedule, the Administrator shall determine the fee by:

(i) Using person trip generation data provided by City staff, the developer and data contained in the most recent edition of Trip Generation, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers; and

(ii) Applying the formula set forth in subsection (2) of this section.

(2) A fee payer may prepare and submit an independent transportation impact fee study to the Administrator, with documentation as specified in subsections (2)(a), (b), and (c) of this section, following the prescribed methodologies and formats established as an appendix to the Redmond Community Development Guide. Along with the study, the developer shall submit an administrative processing fee in an amount specified by separate ordinance. Based upon the documentation provided by the fee payer in the impact fee study, the cost per person mile of travel (PMT) shall be determined by the Administrator. Documentation by the fee payer shall include:

(a) Documentation of person trip generation rate(s) appropriate for the proposed land development activity.

(b) Documentation of average trip length appropriate for the proposed land development activity.

Independent documentation, including any studies, shall be prepared and presented by professionals qualified in their respective fields. The Administrator shall consider the documentation submitted by the fee payer, but is not required to accept such documentation as he/she shall reasonably deem to be inaccurate or not reliable, in the Administrator’s determination of the impact fee. The Administrator may, in the alternative, require the fee payer to submit additional or different documentation for consideration. If acceptable independent documentation is not presented, the fee payer shall pay transportation impact fees based upon the schedules shown in RCDG 20D.210.10-120.

Upon acceptance of independent documentation, the following formula shall be used by the Administrator to determine the impact fee per unit of development:


New Person Miles Traveled	=	Person Trip Generation Rate	X	% New Trips	X	Average Trip Length


Impact Fee	=	New Person Miles Traveled	X	Cost per Person Mile of Travel (PMT) (from RCDG 20D.210.10-120, City of Redmond Adopted Transportation Impact Fees – Fee Schedule, or its successor)

(Ord. 2518; Ord. 2482; Ord. 2016; Ord. 1954; Ord. 1940; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.040(30)); Ord. 1907. Formerly 20D.210.10-120)

20D.210.10-120 City of Redmond Adopted Transportation Impact Fees – Fee Schedule.


Fee Schedule		Cost per Unit
Land Uses	Standard of Measure1,2,3	Citywide4
Cost per Person Mile of Travel (PMT)		$2,506.73
Residential
Single-Family	dwelling	$6,912.22
Multiple-Family	dwelling	$4,242.82
Retirement Community	dwelling	$1,533.38
Nursing Home	bed	$1,204.08
Congregate Care/Assisted Living	dwelling	$930.84
Hotel/Motel	room	$4,614.15
Commercial – Institutional
Elementary School	student	$875.79
High School	student	$527.47
Church	sq. ft./GFA	$4.77
Hospital	sq. ft./GFA	$9.81
Commercial – Retail Shopping Center
Up to 99,999 sq. ft.	sq. ft./GLA	$12.10
100,000 – 199,999 sq. ft.	sq. ft./GLA	$11.29
200,000 – 299,999 sq. ft.	sq. ft./GLA	$10.18
300,000 sq. ft. and over	sq. ft./GLA	$11.96
Commercial – Retail Freestanding Uses
Bank/Savings and Loan	sq. ft./GFA	$67.08
Car Sales – New/Used	sq. ft./GFA	$18.99
Carwash	stall	$11,266.13
Convenience Market	sq. ft./GFA	$59.95
Day Care	sq. ft./GFA	$38.65
Discount Store	sq. ft./GFA	$13.02
Fast Food Restaurant	sq. ft./GFA	$67.73
Furniture Store	sq. ft./GFA	$0.92
Health Club/Racquet Club	sq. ft./GFA	$18.41
Library	sq. ft./GFA	$17.68
Miscellaneous Retail	sq. ft./GFA	$9.35
Movie Theater	seat	$267.24
Post Office	sq. ft./GFA	$27.14
Restaurant	sq. ft./GFA	$39.84
Service Station	fuel position	$18,428.57
Service Station/Minimart	fuel position	$13,343.00
Supermarket	sq. ft./GFA	$32.18
Commercial – Administrative Office
Up to 99,999 sq. ft.	sq. ft./GFA	$17.95
100,000 – 199,999 sq. ft.	sq. ft./GFA	$14.98
200,000 – 299,999 sq. ft.	sq. ft./GFA	$13.10
300,000 sq. ft. and over	sq. ft./GFA	$11.58
Medical Office/Clinic	sq. ft./GFA	$26.18
Industrial
Light Industry/Manufacturing	sq. ft./GFA	$8.80
Industrial Park	sq. ft./GFA	$7.73
Warehousing/Storage	sq. ft./GFA	$4.21
Mini Warehouse	sq. ft./GFA	$2.09

Notes:

1 For uses with standard of measure in square feet, trip rate is given as trips per 1,000 square feet, and impact fee is dollars per square foot.

2 GLA = Gross Leasable Area

3 GFA = Gross Floor Area

4 The portion of the impact fee charged to Redmond developments other than for single- and multiple-family dwellings is for mitigation of impacts on unincorporated King County transportation facilities, and shall be calculated based on a project-specific traffic model run using the King County Mitigation Payment System (MPS). See RCDG 20D.210.10-130, Impacts to King County Transportation Facilities.

Note 1: Land uses are defined in Chapter 20A.20 RCDG. (See Impact Fee – Transportation – Land Uses.) Amendments to this fee schedule which are changes in policy, such as changes in the methodology, growth assumptions, or funding percentages, shall be processed as a Redmond Community Development Guide amendment. Nonpolicy changes to the fee schedule, such as changes to reflect fluctuations in the cost indices, or changes to the cost of a project, shall be adopted by the City Council by ordinance and shall not require a Development Guide amendment review process.

Note 2: Transportation impact fees shall be indexed to allow for a fee adjustment beginning on January 1, 2010, and subsequently each January 1. Changes in the Construction Cost Index (published by the Engineering News Record) over the three consecutive 12-month September 1 to August 31 time periods, or the closest three consecutive 12-month time periods immediately prior to January 1, 2010, will be used to determine the first adjustment to the transportation impact fees on January 1, 2010. In subsequent years, the January 1st adjustment to the transportation impact fees shall be determined in the same way by calculating changes in the Construction Cost Index over the three consecutive 12-month September 1st to August 31st time periods, or the closest three consecutive 12-month time periods immediately prior to January 1.

(Ord. 2568; Ord. 2518; Ord. 2482; Ord. 2367; Ord. 2343; Ord. 2298; Ord. 2297; Ord. 2056; Ord. 2016. Formerly 20D.210.10-125)

20D.210.10-130 Impacts to King County Transportation Facilities.

(1) Collection of Fees. In addition to the transportation impact fees established under RCDG 20D.210.10-110 and 20D.210.10-120, the City shall collect impact fees for those King County transportation facilities identified in the most current list of County growth-related projects adopted by the City, provided that such fees shall be collected only during the term of any interlocal agreement between the City and the County providing for the reciprocal collection of each other’s impact fees.

(2) Fee Imposed.

(a) Any person who, after the effective date of this section, seeks to develop land within the City of Redmond, by applying for development approval for a development which will generate additional travel demand, is hereby required to pay, in addition to the impact fee provided in RCDG 20D.210.10-110 or 20D.210.10-120, a fee for impacts to King County transportation facilities as set forth in this section.

(b) No new development permit for any activity requiring payment of any impact fee under this section shall be issued unless and until the transportation impact fee hereby required has been paid.

(c) No extension of a development permit issued prior to the effective date of this section, for any activity requiring payment of an impact fee under this section, shall be granted unless the transportation impact fee hereby required has been paid.

(3) Computation of Fees – Fee Schedule. The City will calculate impact fees for County transportation facilities in accordance with the County methodology described in King County Code Chapters 14.65 and 14.75 (“the County MPS System”), as the same now exist or as the same may be amended or superseded, and development impact data supplied by the County and City. The impact fee so calculated shall be referred to as the County MPS Fee for purposes of this section.

(4) Payment of Fees. The fee payer shall pay the County MPS Fee required by this section to the Administrator, or the Administrator’s designee, prior to the issuance of a building permit consistent with a development approval.

(5) County MPS Fee Account. There is hereby established a separate County MPS Fee account into which all fees collected pursuant to this section shall be deposited. The account shall be interest bearing, and the funds deposited in the account shall be disbursed only as provided in this section.

(6) Use of Funds – Transfer to County.

(a) The City will transfer the principal amount of all County MPS Fees collected by the City to the County at such intervals as may be provided in the interlocal agreement. The City will retain all interest earned on the funds collected for the County MPS Fees while the same remain in the City’s accounts in order to compensate the City for its handling of the funds. The City will not pay interest to the County on such fees.

(b) All funds transferred to the County under this section shall be expended or encumbered by the County within six years after the date of collection and may only be so expended or encumbered for County transportation facilities which reasonably benefit the new development which paid said fees. In the event that the County does not so expend or encumber the fees within the six-year period, the County will return such fees to the City, unless the County Council makes a written finding pursuant to RCW 82.02.070(3) that there exists an extraordinary or compelling reason for the fees to be held longer than six years.

(7) Refund of Fees Paid. Fee payers may apply for refunds of County MPS Fees collected pursuant to this section in the same manner and for the same reasons as are set forth in RCDG 20D.210.10-170 with respect to impact fees related to City transportation facilities.

(8) Exemptions. Those development activities which are exempt from the payment of transportation impact fees under the County’s MPS system shall be exempt from the payment of impact fees under this section.

(9) Adjustments. Pursuant to RCW 82.02.060(4) and (5), the County MPS Fees collected under this section may be adjusted based upon unusual circumstances or based upon studies and data provided by developers of individual projects. Such adjustments shall be made utilizing the process and criteria described in RCDG 20D.210.10-110.

(10) Credits. Those fee payers who are entitled to credits against impact fees under the County’s MPS System shall be entitled to credits against the County MPS Fees imposed under this section.

(11) Payments Under Protest and Appeals. Impact fees paid under this section may be paid under protest in order to obtain a building permit or other approval or permit. Determinations made by the Administrator pursuant to this section may be appealed as specified in RCDG 20D.210.10-200 and 20D.210.10-220. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 2057. Formerly 20D.210.10-126)

20D.210.10-140 Adopted Impact Fees to Mitigate Impacts on Transportation Facilities in Unincorporated King County.


Land Uses	Standard of Measure	Impact Fee
Land Uses	Standard of Measure	Area 1 Downtown	Area 2 Ed Hill	Area 3 Willows/SV	Area 4 Grass Lawn	Area 5 Overlake	Area 6 Idylwood	Area 7 SE Redmond
Single-Family King County	Dwelling	$757.00	$1,400.00	$601.00	$123.00	$425.00	$254.00	$1,086.00
Multiple-Family King County	Dwelling	$454.20	$786.51	$360.00	$73.80	$255.00	$152.40	$651.60
Note: The transportation impact fee charged to Redmond developments other than single- and multiple-family dwellings for mitigation of impacts on unincorporated King County transportation facilities shall be calculated based on a project-specific model run using the King County Mitigation Payment System (MPS). See RCDG 20D.210.10-130, Impacts to King County Transportation Facilities.

(Ord. 2538; Ord. 2482; Ord. 2056. Formerly 20D.210.10-127)

20D.210.10-150 Transportation Impact Fees.

(1) The fee payer shall pay the transportation impact fee required by this section to the Administrator, or the Administrator’s designee. Transportation impact fees for individually permitted single-family attached or detached residential construction shall be paid prior to drywall or sheetrock inspection consistent with a building permit approval. After November 28, 2011, transportation impact fees for individually permitted single-family attached or detached residential construction shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance. Transportation impact fees for all other development types shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit consistent with a development approval. The provisions of this section shall govern the timing of payment of all transportation impact fees established by this chapter.

(2) All funds collected shall be promptly transferred for deposit in the appropriate transportation impact fee accounts as determined in RCDG 20D.210.10-150, and used solely for the purposes specified in this chapter. (Ord. 2544; Ord. 2501; Ord. 2482; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.040(40)). Formerly 20D.210.10-130)

20D.210.10-160 Use of Funds.

(1) Transportation impact fee receipts shall be earmarked specifically and retained in special interest-bearing accounts. All interest shall be retained in the account and expended for the purpose or purposes for which the impact fees were imposed. The Administrator shall annually provide a report to the Mayor and City Council on each impact fee account showing the source and amount of all moneys collected, earned, or received and transportation system improvements that were financed in whole or in part by transportation impact fees.

(2) Impact fees for transportation system improvements shall be expended only in conformance with the Transportation Facility Plan (TFP).

(3) Impact fees shall be expended or encumbered for a permissible use within six years of receipt, unless there exists an extraordinary and compelling reason for fees to be held longer than six years. Such extraordinary or compelling reasons shall be identified in written findings by the City Council as provided in RCDG 20D.210.10-170.

(4) Impact fees may be paid under protest in order to obtain a permit or other development approval of development activity. Protest must be submitted in writing to the City within 30 days of payment of the fee.

(5) Funds may be used to provide refunds as described in RCDG 20D.210.10-170.

(6) The City shall be entitled to retain not more than three-tenths percent of the funds collected as compensation for the expense of collecting the fee and administering this section. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.040(70)))

20D.210.10-170 Refund of Fees Paid.

(1) The owner of the property on which the impact fee was paid may receive a refund of such fees if the City fails to expend or encumber the impact fees within six years of when the fees were paid or such other period of time established pursuant to RCW 82.02.070(3), on transportation facilities intended to benefit the development for which the transportation impact fees were paid, unless the City Council finds that there exists an extraordinary and compelling reason for fees to be held longer than six years.

The request for a refund must be submitted by the applicant to the City in writing within one year of the date the right to claim the refund arises. Any transportation impact fees that are not expended or encumbered within six years, and for which no application for a refund has been made within one year of the date the right to claim refund arises, shall be retained and expended on projects identified in the adopted TFP. Refunds of transportation impact fees under this subsection shall include interest earned on the impact fees.

(2) Should the City terminate any or all impact fee requirements, all unexpended or unencumbered funds, including interest earned, shall be refunded pursuant to this section. Upon the finding that any or all fee requirements are to be terminated, the City shall place notice of such termination and the availability of refunds in a newspaper of general circulation at least two times and shall notify all potential claimants by first class mail to the last known address of claimants. All funds available for refund shall be retained for a period of one year. At the end of one year, any remaining funds shall be retained by the City, but must be expended for projects identified in the adopted TFP. This notice requirement shall not apply if there are no unexpended or unencumbered balances within an account or accounts being terminated.

(3) A developer may request and shall receive a refund, including interest earned on the transportation impact fees, when the developer does not proceed with the development activity and no impact has resulted. The City shall be entitled to retain not more than three-tenths percent of the funds collected as compensation for the expense of collecting the fee and administering this section. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 2130; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.040(80)))

20D.210.10-180 Exemptions from Payment of Transportation Impact Fees.

See RCDG 20D.60.10-040, Exemptions to the Requirement to Pay Impact Fees, or its successor, and 20D.60.10-050, Exemptions to the Requirement to Pay Impact Fees for Low- and Moderate-Income Housing, or its successor, for the transportation impact fee exemptions. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 2072; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.040(90)))

20D.210.10-190 Credits Against Payment of Transportation Impact Fees.

(1) No credit shall be given for project improvements and/or right-of-way dedications classified as project improvements.

(2) Credit shall be given by the Administrator for supplemental mitigation provided by a developer when the following conditions are met:

(a) To avoid the duplicate collection of money for a particular transportation improvement, credit given to a fee payer for payment or construction of supplemental mitigation shall be equal to the cost of the improvement or impact fee amount allocated by the City towards that portion of the improvement, whichever is less;

(b) The developer’s supplemental mitigation offer must specifically request a transportation impact fee credit;

(3) After determining the amount of impact fees a developer is required to pay towards particular impact fee projects, the Administrator shall provide the developer with a letter or certificate setting forth the dollar amount of the credit a developer shall receive for dedication and/or construction of a supplemental mitigation project. The Administrator shall further state the reason for the credit, and the legal description or other adequate description of the project or development to which the credit may be applied. The developer must sign and date a duplicate copy of such letter or certificate indicating his agreement to the terms of the letter or certificate and return such signed document to the Administrator before credit will be given. The failure of the applicant to sign, date, and return such document within 60 days shall nullify the credit.

(4) Credit against impact fees otherwise due will not be provided until:

(a) The construction, dedication or implementation is completed and accepted by the City of Redmond, or a jurisdiction which has an interlocal agreement with the City under the terms of this section, or the State, whichever is applicable;

(b) Acceptable financial security is received and approved by the Administrator of the City of Redmond, when applicable; and

(c) All design, construction, inspection, testing, financial security, and acceptance procedures are in strict compliance with the then current City of Redmond design and construction standards, when applicable.

(5) Credit may be provided before completion of specified transportation improvement(s) if adequate assurances are given by the applicant that the standards set out in subsection (4) of this section will be met and if the developer posts security as provided below for the costs of such construction. The Administrator shall determine:

(a) Security amount;

(b) Form of the security, such as a performance bond, irrevocable letter of credit, or escrow agreement.

(6) If the transportation improvement(s) will not be constructed, dedicated or implemented within one year of the acceptance of the offer by the Administrator, the amount of the security shall be increased by 10 percent compounded for each year of the life of the security. The revised security shall be reviewed and approved by the Administrator prior to acceptance of the security by the Administrator. If the transportation improvement(s) is not to be completed or implemented within five years of the date of the fee payer’s offer, the City Council must approve the transportation improvement(s) and its scheduled completion date prior to the acceptance of the offer by the Administrator.

(7) Any claim for credit must be made prior to approval of an application for a development permit. Any claim not so made shall be deemed waived.

(8) Credits shall not be transferable from one development to another without the approval of the Administrator.

(9) The amount of credit granted to a developer shall not exceed the amount of the impact fee the developer is required to pay. (Ord. 2518; Ord. 2482; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.040(100)))

20D.210.10-200 Appeals.

Determinations made by the Administrator pursuant to this division may be appealed as specified in RCDG 20D.210.10-220. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.040(110)))

20D.210.10-210 Review.

(1) The Planning Commission and City Council shall review the fee schedule in RCDG 20D.210.10-120 prior to December 31, 2008. If this review does not occur, the City shall continue to collect impact fees at the rate in effect, but shall not continue to index impact fees for subsequent years until the required impact fee review by the Planning Commission and City Council occurs.

(2) The Administrator shall prepare the following reports to the City Council:

(a) An annual mobility unit (MU) demand forecast and supply estimate;

(b) Quarterly updates once the mobility unit (MU) threshold of 2,500 MU or five percent of the MU supply remains in the Transportation Facility Plan (TFP), whichever is greater. Immediate notice shall be provided when the threshold is initially reached or exceeded;

(c) An evaluation of the plan-based concurrency regulations, including comments from developers. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 2298; Ord. 2297; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.040(120)))

20D.210.10-220 Administration and Appeals.

(1) The Administrator is authorized to prepare documents, forms and guidelines necessary for the implementation of this chapter. These should include a “Transportation Concurrency Certificate Request” and “Concurrency Certificate” forms.

(2) Any appeal of the administration and decisions made pursuant to this chapter shall follow the process specified in RCDG Title 20F. The Administrator’s decisions in this chapter that are subject to appeal are:

(a) Concurrency determination;

(b) Impact fee determination.

(3) An appeal must be filed with the Department of Planning and Community Development within 10 working days of the determination. (Ord. 2482; Ord. 1928; Ord. 1908 (20C.100.050))

The Redmond Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element describes these demands as follows: “To achieve Redmond’s transportation vision, the policies have been developed with a common understanding of the concepts of mobility, circulation, and access. “Mobility” is the ability to travel over distances; “circulation” is the ability to move about within an area, connecting different localized land uses; and “access” is the ability to get to individual destinations.

Redmond Comprehensive Plan, Transportation Element, p. 9-3.