Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transportation Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors adopt updates to pedestrian/bicycle code after legal review, add exemptions
Summary
Board of Supervisors adopted amendments to zoning section 24‑35 to add exemptions for pedestrian and bicycle requirements where constitutional takings or rough-proportionality concerns apply.
The Board of Supervisors unanimously adopted an amendment to zoning ordinance section 24-35 that adds limited exemptions to pedestrian and bicycle dedication and construction requirements, after staff warned certain mandatory exactions could raise constitutional issues.
Deputy county attorney Liz Parman told the board the code section requires developers to dedicate and build pedestrian and bicycle facilities for projects requiring site plan or major subdivision review, but that the county must ensure any exactions meet Supreme Court tests including essential nexus and rough proportionality.
“Any requirement for land dedication must be reviewed under Supreme Court decisions relating to takings and exactions,” Parman said, explaining the three new exemptions staff proposed: outdoor operations/outdoor storage uses (with exceptions), projects more than 500 feet from the road, and where no existing sidewalk is within one mile of the proposed development. The exemptions are intended to prevent the county from imposing dedications that are unrelated to a development’s impacts.
The planning commission reviewed the proposal and voted 7-0 to recommend approval. Planning commission staff confirmed the ordinance applies to the road adjacent to the proposed development.
At the board meeting, supervisors adopted the ordinance amendment on a unanimous roll call and gave staff direction to implement the exemptions and incorporate the legal standards into permitting practice.
The ordinance change does not eliminate the county’s ability to require pedestrian or bicycle facilities where they are proportional to the development’s impacts; it clarifies limited situations where the county will not impose land dedication as a condition of approval.
The vote passed unanimously.
