Council reduces new home fees

The commission has held more than 20 meetings to review the process and requirements involved in residential development.

“We are trying to address the unfairness of the past,” explained Councilor Tim McGlothlin at a Jan. 26 hearing.

“It’s been a long road and it’s been contentious but we want to promote growth.”

The following changes have recently emerged from discussions that began in the fall of 2013:

• Elimination of more than 120 Waivers of Remonstrance and Delayed Development Agreements that property owners had to sign in order to obtain a building permit.

Attorney Gene Parker has until Feb. 26 to get the waiver and DDA obligations removed from property titles and they will not be required with future projects.

• City payment of storm sewer and curb installation, as well as engineering work, to reduce development costs. Property owners will be responsible for sidewalk expenses.

• Streets identified as important for pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular traffic given top priority for improvements. Other residential streets to be upgraded in the immediate future only if property owners initiate that work.

• A three-year moratorium has been placed on city construction of new streets to catch up on a backlog of maintenance and repairs.

It has been standard practice in The Dalles for property owners to pay for infrastructure upgrades at the time development occurs.

In lieu of that payment, they have been required to contribute to a fund for future work or sign an agreement obligating them for the costs.

These policies came under scrutiny in 2013 when a group of landowners went to the Oregon Legislature to seek help in reducing the costs associated with a minor lot partition. At that time the city was charging fees that ranged from $50,000 to more than $150,000 to cover the expenses of infrastructure upgrades.

The waivers have been the source of heated discussions between Mayor Steve Lawrence and city staffers.

Lawrence and Councilor Linda Miller advocated to get rid of the waivers that prohibit people from protesting formation of a local improvement district to tax street frontage for street and utility work.

Dave Hunnicutt, executive director of Oregonians in Action, a property rights advocacy group, argued in 2013 that the waivers strip away a landowner’s right to oppose a district that might be formed decades later at much higher cost.

Hunnicutt authored the bill that became law and changed the way The Dalles did business.

The waivers could no longer be required for lot partitions and Lawrence began to advocate that they be eliminated for land-use planning.

Nolan Young, city manager, urged the council to replace waivers with DDAs, which obligate the landowner to pay for road and utility upgrades when a building permit is sought.

He said that created financial certainty for the city as development occurred.

Lawrence and Miller objected to the DDAs, which they described as a “waiver by another name.” When city staff began calling them Delayed Improvement Agreements, Lawrence and Miller said changing the name did not change the intent.

They said the agreements were attached to the property title and obligated new buyers to unspecified expenses for improvements that might not occur for years, if ever.

At a Jan. 26 public hearing on residential development, Gary Peterson, who is building a house on Old Dufur Road, expressed the same opinion.

“You’re held hostage — if you want to build, that’s what you have to do – you don’t have a choice,” he said.

Peterson also objected to installing sidewalks, curbs and storm water drains in an area where most lots did not have these amenities.

After touring city streets and working with the commission to look at ways to pare down development costs to encourage economic development, the council decided to shoulder some of the expenses.

In addition to curbs and storm water systems, officials decided the city should pay for engineering work.

Officials are unclear how the extra costs will be absorbed but Lawrence believes extra money can be found in the operating budget.

“I think more people will be willing to build and that will help bring in money,” said Councilor Taner Elliott of the changes.

Still on the work table is the city’s annexation policy for properties on the urban fringe.

Resident Randy Hager has objected to the city’s definition of “urbanization,” which he says “makes no sense.”

Hager’s property on East 10th Street is slated to be annexed but he is not hooked up to city water and the sewer line stops 500 feet from his property.

At the Feb. 9 meeting, Hager questioned why he would be required to pay higher taxes for services he did not receive.

In addition, he said none of the neighboring parcels, mostly orchards, will be annexed for decades so there is no real justification for the city to tie annexation to construction of an additional house on his one-acre property.

“It sounds like you’re just against annexation,” said Lawrence.

Hager reminded the mayor and council that a measure to gain annexation of Urban Growth Boundary properties failed in 2006. He said voters in that area weighed in by a 77 percent margin against annexation, due primarily to the higher taxes involved.

In 2006, the council set a goal to annex all properties in the UGB — the area intended to meet growth needs for the next 20 years – at the first opportunity.

As of September 2014, the city had annexed 973 acres, with almost 242 acres still to be incorporated.

Young reiterated Monday that annexation has been triggered in recent years by development applications.

The council has been struggling to define the word “urbanization,” to further define the annexation policy.

“Urbanization can’t just be used as a tool to just take in anything that’s out there,” said Hager.

McGlothlin expressed concern about Hager’s statement that citizens of the UGB lived under county jurisdiction but had land-use decisions managed by the city so they had no representative voice.

“I think we need to bridge the gap between the city and these citizens,” said McGlothlin.

Dick Gassman, city planning director, said the city needed to be actively annexing property in order to qualify for an expansion of the UGB into the Scenic Area that would accommodate more growth. “The only way to give them that voice directly is by annexation,” he said.

Councilor Dan Spatz was concerned that delaying annexation further would impede economic development opportunities by limiting growth potential.

“I think we should have processes in place and approved,” he said.

Councilor Russ Brown said the slow rate of growth in The Dalles probably meant the city already had a 20-year supply of buildable land.

“If I knew that services would be provided then I might be more supportive,” he said. “Otherwise, we are just doing a land grab and waiting to see what happens.”

Young said state law required the city to annex as soon as possible. He gained agreement from the council to continue commercial and industrial annexations by existing policy while issues involving residential properties were being addressed.