McMinnville starts land‑use efficiency review as state deadlines approach

McMINNVILLE, Ore. — City staff and consultants briefed the McMinnville City Council and Planning Commission on the second step of the city’s sequential urban growth boundary (UGB) process and the land‑use efficiency measures the city could adopt to help meet state growth requirements.

The presentation, led by Heather Richards, McMinnville’s community development director, outlined a compressed timetable set by the state and the city’s internal schedule for completing land‑use efficiency work and, if needed, a UGB amendment. Richards said the housing production strategy is due under a grant by June 30, 2025, the city is aiming to complete the land‑use efficiencies by September 2025, and that a formal public‑hearing process on any UGB amendment could begin January 1, 2026. She told the council the work is being done under a sequential UGB work plan and noted the city’s housing needs analysis was remanded on parkland earlier in the review process.

Why it matters: The state requires cities in the UGB amendment sequence to show how they will meet projected housing, employment and public‑land needs. McMinnville’s recent analyses identified a residential land deficit and smaller deficits for industrial and commercial land; staff said some acres previously assigned to parkland have been reallocated and that the city currently shows a surplus of 44 acres of public or institutional land that can be reassigned.

“What you’re going to find is we’ll give you a list of different efficiencies to consider and evaluate. You do not have to do all those land‑use efficiencies. You can decide what’s best for McMinnville,” Richards said.

What staff proposed and examined - Areas of focus: rezoning and framework‑plan changes for land already inside the UGB, up‑zoning to increase housing capacity, adjusting apartment density rules, minimum densities and lot‑size flexibility, and changes to development standards (heights, parking, setbacks and open‑space requirements). - Area plans and maps: staff identified opportunities in the 3‑Mile Lane area, Fox Ridge, the Southwest area plan and a roughly 60‑acre “industrial innovation campus” where higher job density might reduce industrial land need. - Parkland and framework changes: staff said prior actions that amended the parks framework produced about 127 acres that became available for reassignment in the UGB expansion areas and that the Fox Ridge and 3‑Mile Lane area plans adopted more high‑density acreage than the framework minimums. - Code audit: consultant Elizabeth Decker (Jet Planning) described an initial code analysis to identify specific zoning and regulatory standards that most strongly affect how many homes or jobs can be accommodated on existing land. Decker said she would look for clear‑and‑objective wording required by state law, childcare and occupancy rules, and other regulatory obstacles.

Council questions and exchanges Councilors pressed staff for clarifications on several recurring issues. Councilor Laura Chenoweth asked how the code defines “affordable housing” and whether nonconforming existing uses count toward efficiency calculations. Beth Goodman (Echo Northwest) and Richards explained that the buildable lands inventory (BLI) methods account for existing uses and generally assume a portion of a lot will remain with an existing dwelling when projecting future capacity.

Councilor Scott Gary raised concerns about whether the planned‑development (PD) tool has delivered the community outcomes the council wants, noting PDs that permit averaging lot sizes have sometimes produced small, tightly spaced lots that residents object to. Decker said the PD tool allows lot averaging but currently does not include a density bonus tied to community benefits; she suggested the council could consider tying density incentives to outcomes such as open space, varied housing types or affordability.

Other details and options discussed - Apartments: the city removed maximum apartment densities in the R‑4 zone recently; R‑5 still has a maximum (about 29 units per acre under current code). Consultants noted lifting or eliminating some maximums could be an efficiency lever. - Minimum densities and maximum lot sizes: staff suggested minimum densities could be a useful tool in higher‑density zones (R‑4, R‑5) where historic development has not yielded many apartments. - Transfer of density: Richards said the city is developing a transfer‑of‑density approach to protect natural hazards areas while allowing density to be applied elsewhere in the city. - Annexations and development agreements: staff noted the city could use annexation agreements to require a portion of housing to meet specific needs as property annexes into the city.

What staff asked from council Staff asked for council direction on which efficiency levers not to pursue and for examples of site‑specific opportunities (for example, county‑owned properties in the UGB that might rezone). Decker said the team will return with a more detailed set of measures and code change options at a joint work session on July 16, 2025.

What’s next Staff said they will refine the code audit, model how specific changes could alter capacity, and return with draft efficiency measures and ordinance language for council discussion and possible adoption through the public hearing process.

Ending The council did not take action at the work session; staff will return with more detailed recommendations, modeling and draft code language in the coming months.

Speakers cited in this article: Heather Richards, Community Development Director (City of McMinnville); Elizabeth Decker, consultant (Jet Planning); Beth Goodman, consultant (Echo Northwest); David Bernicker, Planning Manager (City of McMinnville); Councilor Laura Chenoweth; Councilor Scott Gary; Council President Sal Peralta.

sections":{"lede":"McMINNVILLE, Ore. — City staff and consultants briefed the McMinnville City Council and Planning Commission on the second step of the city’s sequential urban growth boundary (UGB) process and the land‑use efficiency measures the city could adopt to help meet state growth requirements.","nut_graf":"The presentation outlined deadlines, options for rezoning and code changes, and the way prior planning actions have already freed acreage for reassignment; staff asked councilors for direction on which efficiency tools to prioritize.","ending":"Staff will return with a more detailed code audit and proposed efficiency measures at a joint work session July 16, 2025."},