County delays decision on employee-housing impact fee appeal for Placerville home

San Miguel County commissioners on Aug. 6 agreed to continue an appeal by Jesse and Leah Lam over an employee-housing impact fee assessed for a new house at 28 Village Lane in Placerville, giving the appellants 60 days to submit an alternative employee-generation calculation.

The Lams had paid an employee-housing mitigation fee of $19,159 after a building permit was issued for a proposed 2,225-square-foot house. The planning department applied the county's Land Use Code provisions for employee-housing mitigation, which exempt single-family residential improvements of 2,000 square feet or less, allow deed-restricted units to be exempt, and permit the board to waive fees where special circumstances and community benefits exist.

Appellant Jesse Lam said the couple is trying to build an affordable home for their family and that the 2,000-square-foot threshold and notice about the fee produced unintended consequences for local residents. "My wife, Leah, and myself are in attempts to build a home for our family at 20 Eighth Village Lane," Lam told the board, adding that he had redesigned the house and paid redesign fees to reduce square footage to get closer to the exemption.

The planning director, Kaye Simonson, summarized the code and the department's calculation: the application was reviewed under Land Use Code section 5-13(o)(3), the planning office computed an employee-generation factor of about 0.388, applied the county's multiplier and mitigation rate for the home's floor area, and produced the $19,159 fee. The code also allows a developer to present alternate employee-generation calculations for board review.

Why it matters

The appeal highlights how the county's mitigation rules interact with small, owner-built homes and how administrative notice and thresholds can affect affordability for residents who work locally. Commissioners repeatedly raised concerns about setting precedent and how to define and protect "local" occupancy without creating legal vulnerability.

Board action

Commissioners moved to continue the appeal for up to 60 days to allow the appellants to work with planning staff on an alternative employee-generation calculation. The board asked the Lams to agree to extend the timing required under the land-use appeal provisions while the alternative calculation is prepared; the appellants consented. Staff will bring any revised calculation and supporting materials back to the board for a final written decision.

What was said

Commissioner Lance Waring said he sympathized with the family but described the difficulty of making exceptions based on locality: "If I say yes to you, someone's going to come and say, 'I've lived here 10 years and I'm local.'" Commissioner Brown and others said the code already contains measures intended to protect locals, including the 2,000-square-foot threshold, the deed-restriction exemption, and the sliding mitigation scale for larger homes.

Ending

The board continued the appeal and directed staff to work with the appellants on an alternate employee-generation calculation and related documentation; the commissioners will consider any revised calculation at a future meeting and then issue a written decision consistent with the land-use code.