HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDC Policy Memo
TO: Deschutes County Board of County Commissioners
FROM: George Kolb, Road Department Interim Director
Peter Russell, Senior Transportation Planner
WORK
SESSION: Sept. 14, 2011
HEARING: Held August 31, 2011, continued until Sept. 26, 2011
SUBJECT: Policies for implementing transportation system development charges
Background
The Board held a hearing on August 31, 2011, regarding a protest of transportation system
development charges (SDC’s) applied to an existing single-family home. The structure was being
relocated from a lot just south of Redmond to a vacant lot in Terrebonne. Both lots are in rural
Deschutes County. The appellant asserts that due to the home’s age and original location it was
already included in the traffic assumptions upon which the transportation SDC is based and thus
SDCs should not be applied. Staff cited language in Resolution 2008-059 that indicates an SDC is
triggered by land development and the parcel the home was being moved to was undeveloped.
The Board continued the SDC protest hearing until 10 a.m. on Sept. 26, 2011, after directing staff to
summarize the major policy implications of this appeal and the application of the SDC resolution in
general.
Major issues
Are SDC’s tied to the land or the structure?
SDC’s are triggered by building permits. Building permits are not generic, but rather are issued for
particular activities on site specific locations. The premise is that these activities are expected to
result in increased traffic from the site. This argues SDC’s are tied to the land and not the structure.
Resolution 2008-059, Section 3, Definitions, provides the following at 3(H): “’Development’ shall
mean a building or other land construction, or making a physical change in the use of structure or
land…” and 3(I) “’Development Permit’ shall mean an official document or certificate, other than a
building permit, authorizing development.”
Under Section 4, Applicability, at 4(A) describes how SDC’s apply when there is an increase
“…compared to the present number of peak hour trips generated by the development or the
property on which the development is located.”
2
Deschutes County Title 18 contains the County’s zoning ordinances and 18.04.020(A) details the
purpose of the code is “…to establish zoning districts and regulations governing the development
and use of land within portions of Deschutes County, Oregon.”
Based on the above, staff feels the clear intent is for SDC’s to be based on the land and not the
structure. Development occurs at a specific place. While SDC’s are tied to building permits, those
permits in turn are for a specific site. Issuance of building permit also provides a clear and objective
triggering event that the Community Development Department can use to assess the SDC.
1A. If SDC’s are tied to structures, how will the SDC’s be tracked?
If the Board decides SDC’s are tied to structures, then staff will need to devise a system to
accomplish two tasks:
a) review the land use assumptions for both the donor and the receiving parcels at the time
the SDC was established in 2008;
b) document the movement of structures from the donating parcel to the receiving parcel
and note SDC’s apply to the donating parcel immediately following the structure’s
removal.
For task a), one option would consist of reviewing assessor’s office records or GIS databases to
establish whether a structure was located on the applicable parcels in 2008. Even if the applicant
provided the information, staff typically reviews such information. In task b), staff can use the
comments section of the existing Land Use Tracking System (LUTS) database to record that the
donor parcel would be subject to SDC’s.
Currently, the SDC amount includes a $45 administrative cost recovery fee. If the Board decides
SDC’s are tied to structures, then staff recommends the administrative cost recovery fee be
reassessed as the fee does not include tasks described in a) and b).
How long can a use be abandoned or extinguished before SDC’s apply?
In the past, staff has approached this on a case-by-case basis. If the use had been abandoned 30
years ago, staff has applied SDC’s. If the use had been abandoned for less than a year, then staff
has not applied SDC’s. The gray area seems to be uses that were lawfully established prior to the
2008 implementation of the SDC, but then abandoned for two years or more.
Under County code for non-conforming uses at 18.120.010, the County sets a one-year timeframe
for abandonment or interruption of a non-conforming use or structure. This timeframe is based on
national case law.
Staff recommends a policy that abandonment of a use for more than one year results in requiring
any future establishment of a use requires payment of SDC’s. A one-year time period would ensure
County consistency in dealing with abandoned or interrupted land uses.
If the use was established illegally, then SDC’s should apply
Infrequently, a land use process is initiated as a result of a code enforcement complaint. The
County’s first option in code enforcement is voluntary compliance, which means the property owner
or his agent applies for the necessary building and/or land use permits.
3
Staff recommends these cases be dealt with as if this was a new use and SDC’s apply, otherwise
the County runs the risk of people building illegal structures to avoid paying SDC’s.
Summary of Staff Recommendations:
SDC’s are tied to the land, not the structure
Abandonment of a use for more than one year means the re-establishment of a use requires
payment of SDC’s
Illegally established uses will be dealt with as a new use and SDC’s apply