[{"_1":2,"_87":-5,"_88":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6081007,"mediaKeyId","2944406-713bded74c3b3ca254ef70d23ee15e7c","parentId",2944406,"title","Planning commission leans toward eliminating citywide parking minimums under CFEC rules","audioSeconds",4614,"startMs",3711000,"endMs",8325000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2944406-713bded74c3b3ca254ef70d23ee15e7c&start=3711&end=8325","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2944406-713bded74c3b3ca254ef70d23ee15e7c/thumbnail_3711000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6081007/Wilsonville/Clackamas-County/Oregon/Planning-commission-leans-toward-eliminating-citywide-parking-minimums-under-CFEC-rules","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6081007-ac0f6de668c22eb8c91c9fe7beabcee7/orig.mp4?Expires=1771149421&Signature=FdvQHpxdzW2DtBoDeXGG7UIQhCSVNoipJXlE0a0fgS4BNe3cePi5n8nOPkbBDSQXYyVSMF7C6XtrCRIglyG-iX0J9hDkDMLgsH7YLij28PNyx1NUIUQ0ihqElpOea61E921bv5p3D9zRbxcMGPp-3wjpuG5SKUJalCSSdzehh-KrUu~cU7MkpluY4A3ryfBwvPmKOJHcdq820HpQnyuOzvrOJcXU97WcJvT8phR1D3q235HjprI9FC--criNnPmQs3w-RTEhJOhA9~Rv6OJxwZ~efHI-aGEGN36f388NmnGzy0nlRxVCqnrkY-mk~YCbepG5t3C4~rT40kCRXgYSew__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Wilsonville, OR","date","2025-04-10T13:16:22.75Z","article","Wilsonville planning staff returned to the Planning Commission on April 9, 2025, for a third work session on parking changes required by the state's Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities (CFEC) program. Staff reviewed draft development code amendments and three compliance options for the parking B phase of CFEC; commissioners responded that their prevailing preference was Option 1 — eliminating parking minimums citywide for the areas covered by the rule — while requesting additional analysis and visual examples of lot‑level design impacts.

Daniel Polley, planning manager for the city, described the three compliance paths under Parking B that staff reviewed: (1) remove parking minimums citywide (Option 1); (2) retain minimums in some areas but add a menu of programs (Option 2) — such as unbundled parking, a mandatory flexible commute benefit for large employers, limits on multifamily parking ratios and a commercial parking tax — and choose at least two menu items; or (3) map‑based approaches that exempt certain areas from minimums and keep them elsewhere (Option 3). Staff recommended Option 1 for Wilsonville and presented draft code edits consistent with that approach.

Commissioners agreed that Option 1 has the lowest implementation cost and is unlikely to change the amount of parking supplied in the city over the next two decades, given the limited areas where CFEC would apply. Several commissioners, however, asked for more detail on the CFEC design requirements that apply to larger parking areas, and on how staff would implement and enforce the menu‑style programs under Option 2 if the city chose that path.

Key technical points discussed

- Scope and timing: Parking A (already in place) includes the transit proximity rule and EV‑ready requirements. Parking B adds further options for reducing minimums and addressing climate mitigation on larger lots. Staff stressed that the code changes discussed are a work session draft and that public hearings will follow.

- Menu programs and enforcement costs: The Option 2 menu includes unbundled parking (separating the cost of parking from residential or commercial leases), a flexible commute benefit that would be mandatory for employers above a threshold (staff discussed an employer size of 50 or more employees), a cap on multifamily parking (for example, 0.5 spaces per unit), and a potential tax on commercial parking. Staff warned that unbundling and a mandatory employer commute benefit would create significant new administrative and enforcement needs; enforcing lease‑level changes could require a new full‑time equivalent (FTE) or an equivalent monitoring program.

- Climate mitigation and lot design: CFEC requires climate mitigation measures on parking lots over a threshold (staff cited a half‑acre as the practical size trigger, and noted some cities apply the enhanced standards at larger thresholds). The rule offers three mitigation options: increased tree canopy (staff cited a 40% canopy target at maturity for the “full enhanced” standard), solar canopy generation sized to the lot, or a fee in lieu (staff cited a $1,500 per space minimum for a fee in lieu). In addition the rule requires a 30% tree canopy over new parking areas, which applies independently. Commissioners raised practical questions: how the canopy percentage is calculated (trees along aisles vs. interior canopy), how solar arrays would coexist with canopy targets, and whether fees in lieu would return to the city or be remitted to a regional/state fund.

Commissioner discussion and guidance

Several commissioners said Option 1 best balances cost and effect for Wilsonville given the limited geographic scope in the city where CFEC applies. Commissioner Andrew Carr said Option 1 “has the lowest implementation cost” and would not likely result in significant changes to parking on the ground. Commissioner Rob Heuerlein and others urged caution about Option 2 because its enforcement needs would be substantial relative to the likely changes in built parking supply.

Some commissioners asked staff to return with concrete visual examples (satellite imagery or parcel‑level diagrams) showing how 30% or 40% tree canopy and the other enhanced standards would affect typical Wilsonville parking lots (half‑acre to two‑acre examples). Commissioners also asked staff to clarify whether solar arrays used to meet the climate mitigation option must be located over the parking area or could be placed elsewhere on the property, and how the city would treat situations where large rooftop or off‑site solar could be proposed instead of on‑lot canopy.

Staff said the draft code removes citywide parking minimums in the primary development code table, edits Village‑zone minimums, updates bicycle parking requirements and carries forward Parking A EV‑ready requirements into the code. Staff also flagged that some portions of the CFEC requirements address right‑of‑way items that will be handled in separate transportation planning updates.

Public comment

One resident who attended both the open house and the commission meeting praised the open house format and urged clear public messaging about what removing parking minimums does and does not do. The speaker said market forces, lenders and underwriting will still affect developers’ choices about how much parking to build.

Next steps

Commissioners asked staff to refine the materials and return with: parcel‑level visuals showing the tree canopy and solar options on representative parking lots, a clearer comparison of the middle “enhanced” standards versus the large‑lot thresholds, and an implementation assessment that quantifies staffing or administrative needs (FTE estimates) for enforcing menu items such as unbundled parking or a mandatory employer commute benefit. Staff will carry the Planning Commission’s preference for Option 1 forward when briefing City Council, while providing the additional analysis requested.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Planning Commission Meeting, April 9, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","Staff explained options under the state's Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities (CFEC) parking rules, including three compliance paths. Commissioners signaled a preference for Option 1 (no parking minimums citywide), while asking for more detail on tree‑canopy, solar and design requirements for larger lots.","taxTitle","Wilsonville, Clackamas County, Oregon","taxId",70310,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6081012,"Wilsonville planners review draft 'Housing Our Future' strategy, set hearings next month",2960,788000,3748000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2944406-713bded74c3b3ca254ef70d23ee15e7c&start=788&end=3748","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2944406-713bded74c3b3ca254ef70d23ee15e7c/thumbnail_788000.jpg","/articles/6081012/Wilsonville/Clackamas-County/Oregon/Wilsonville-planners-review-draft-Housing-Our-Future-strategy-set-hearings-next-month","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6081012-98905c77635227a7073d664b105c9ced/orig.mp4?Expires=1771149421&Signature=INyRsMDtZ4AfOsr8gGpSDd5mWvri8AqluHO2GA8wwj~hXuAgr5TfwJ~F7BteZs2gUj4xea74XqW9ScswsEbHXfa0hxdK7inz8e-mBhdbBXkHBFvaWy9yixUfo~YcA344736WMm~7wRjAbfLrUTw1EjVmGXldHw4y5Pkl~g2BPVezpZ-ZrbM-vqbpXeRM-G4ZJDeLAvs2VGi5DHzzF5wMaZAcGTOfAOG-y~R9GM0-AvGEAjbbFol9i3fgBSB862U1kJNrQ38fByHkbtpx0E4pc9ddcbquIrAnkxPvf59L-tVozSVVA8m2WvjYHKwjnDP0FXF63a~amjS~QWZ5jSNwCA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Wilsonville planning staff presented a draft housing needs and capacity analysis (HNCA) and a draft Housing Production Strategy (HPS) at a work session of the Planning Commission on April 9, 2025, asking commissioners for feedback before public hearings next month.

The presentation laid out the technical HNCA, which staff said shows Wilsonville has sufficient buildable residential land to meet expected growth, and a housing production strategy that focuses on unmet needs — especially for households at or below 120% of area median family income (about $140,000 for a family of four) — and a set of seven actions the city believes it can implement over the next six years.

The HNCA and the HPS together form a framework for changes to zoning, development review and future programs intended to increase housing production and affordability in Wilsonville. Staff noted the HPS is not being adopted into the comprehensive plan; the HNCA will be adopted as a subelement of the comprehensive plan. Both documents will go to City Council after the public hearings, with the HNCA adopted by ordinance and the HPS considered as a standalone strategy by resolution.

Kim, senior planner for the city of Wilsonville, told the commission the project team and city leadership had narrowed the package to “a set of actions, that 7 actions that we believe are feasible to implement during the next 6 years.” Consultant Beth Goodman said the HNCA answers the question “Does Wilsonville have sufficient buildable residential land to accommodate expected growth,” and added, “And the answer is yes.”

What the draft proposes

Staff described a mix of planning and non‑regulatory actions intended to address different facets of housing need. Planning and code actions include rezoning or map changes to convert underused sites (including nonperforming industrial land) to residential use where appropriate; incentives and standards to increase housing variety and accessibility (drawn in part from the Frog Pond East and South examples); and an administrative review pathway for residential projects that meet clear-and-objective standards to shorten entitlement time. The HPS also recommends targeted measures to preserve income‑restricted units that were developed with expiring Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, and a set of “foundations for future actions,” notably creation of a housing specialist position and establishment of a dedicated funding source to support housing programs.

The HPS lists examples of future housing program actions that could be implemented if staffing and funding allow: a rental housing inspection program, partnership options such as a community land trust, homebuyer assistance, and land disposition for publicly owned parcels.

Forecasts, monitoring and flexibility

Commissioners pressed staff on the forecast and on how the city will track progress. Commissioner Rob Heuerlein asked whether a local historical growth rate would change the numbers; staff replied that state rules require cities to use the official regional forecast (Metro) for this HPS cycle. Staff emphasized the HPS contains a three‑year midpoint check to allow swapping actions in or out if circumstances — funding availability, staffing, or state law — change.

Commissioner Jennifer Willard raised a specific concern about timing: “My concern is that is that overly ambitious? Is town center actually gonna provide the multifamily housing that we need in the next 20 years? And if it doesn't, if it's not on pace to do that, what is our backup plan?” Staff and other commissioners noted that redevelopment timing can be uncertain, which is why the HPS includes actions (such as rezoning or code changes) that could provide additional options outside Town Center, and why monitoring and midpoint checks are important.

Staffing and funding questions

Commissioner Andrew Carr asked whether planning‑work‑program actions would be completed with existing staff or would require hiring the proposed housing specialist. Staff said many planning actions could proceed with current staff and outside technical assistance, but specialized programs — for example, a rental inspection program — would likely need dedicated staff expertise. Staff and commissioners discussed funding sources; the draft lists options including a construction excise tax (CET) among other potential revenues. Staff cautioned that if other funding options are not pursued, the general fund would be the default source for city expenditures.

Process and next steps

Staff reiterated the work session is an informational, pre‑hearing discussion and not a decision meeting. A public hearing package will come to the Planning Commission next month; the HNCA will be adopted as a comprehensive‑plan subelement by ordinance and the Housing Production Strategy will be considered by resolution. The HPS implementation period in this draft is six years, with a year‑by‑year monitoring and an evaluation checkpoint at year three.

No formal vote was taken at the work session. Commissioners generally endorsed the direction of the drafts while asking for clarification and edits on implementation details, staffing, monitoring language and the relationship between Town Center build‑out and near‑term multifamily supply.

The Planning Commission asked staff to bring the revised, hearings‑ready package back next month and to include additional clarity on implementation timelines, staffing implications and funding options.

Where to find documents

The HNCA and draft Housing Production Strategy are available in the meeting packet and on the city website; hearings are scheduled next month before the Planning Commission and then will proceed to City Council for final action.","City staff presented a draft housing needs and capacity analysis and a housing production strategy that identifies seven near-term actions and a six-year implementation window. Commissioners pressed staff on forecasts, Town Center delivery, and staffing and funding for implementation.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning commission leans toward eliminating citywide parking minimums under CFEC rules

Wilsonville planners review draft 'Housing Our Future' strategy, set hearings next month