Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transfer Of Development Rights topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pierce County revamps transfer‑of‑development‑rights program to boost rural conservation and urban housing options
Summary
The council approved updates to the county's Transfer of Development Rights program to codify Department of Commerce rules, enable regional collaboration, clarify sending/receiving eligibility, and make technical fixes to encourage voluntary participation; the measure passed 6–1 after committee review and a staff amendment.
Pierce County on Dec. 16 adopted ordinance O2025‑576s to modernize its Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) program, a voluntary market mechanism that allows rural landowners to sell development capacity and conserve land while enabling increased density on eligible urban receiving sites.
Planning staff said the update codifies Washington State Department of Commerce guidance, clarifies which zones may serve as sending (typically rural, outside UGAs) and receiving (inside UGAs) sites, updates a zoning eligibility table, and establishes a framework for regional collaboration that could expand potential receiving sites. Senior planner Justin Patterson told the council: "If you are outside of the UGA, you can sell development rights. If you're inside the UGA, you can buy development rights."
Council adopted a technical amendment that converted a prescriptive ‘shall’ into a discretionary ‘may’ for including substandard lots in a sending site, added language that a sending site may not consist exclusively of substandard lots, corrected table references to align with recently updated development regulations, and cleaned numbering inconsistencies.
Supporters described the program as strictly voluntary and an additional tool for landowners who want to preserve farmland or forests while gaining compensation for development potential. Critics on the council and in public comment raised concerns about long‑term effects, potential market distortions, and whether the program shifts value toward urban jurisdictions; one council member described TDRs as potentially creating permanent constraints on future land use and urged caution.
After debate and public comment, council adopted the ordinance by roll call, 6–1. Staff said implementation steps include outreach and education for landowners and coordination with the auditor’s office to record easements; records of TDR transactions and easements will be recorded with the county and are searchable in the auditor’s office.
The council and staff framed the update as an attempt to revive a largely dormant program and make it more usable for property owners and developers, with an aim of expanding conservation outcomes and directing growth into locations targeted for higher density.
