Oregon City staff outline compliance plan for state 'climate‑friendly, equitable communities' rules; commissioners raise parking, EV and topography concerns

Oregon City staff and consultant Brian Davis presented a conceptual compliance plan for Oregon’s Climate‑Friendly and Equitable Communities (CFEC) rules during the March 11 commission work session, laying out mandatory changes and local options for implementing the state's requirements.

Davis, the consultant engaged by the city, summarized the state’s mandatory elements and the practical choices Oregon City must make. He described an "option 3" approach the city can adopt that removes parking minimums within a defined transit buffer and the downtown climate‑friendly area while keeping other code provisions. "By eliminating minimum require parking requirements as you are required to do within half a mile of the Line 33 route and within a quarter mile of the climate friendly area that's Downtown Oregon City, That is not the same thing as saying no parking, is going to be built. It's just saying that no parking is required to be built," Davis said.

Key elements Davis and staff identified:

- Remove parking minimums within the state‑defined transit buffer (the presentation showed an area that covers a large portion of the city). - Adopt parking maximums and adjust multifamily maximums to comply with CFEC; staff recommended modest tweaks (for example changes to multifamily maximums based on unit size). - Require conduit for Level‑2 EV charging for up to 40% of spaces in new residential developments (the rule requires conduit sized for later installation of chargers rather than immediate hard‑installed chargers). - Add bicycle parking requirements and consider on‑street bike/scooter corral locations; some items can be deferred to the next Transportation System Plan (TSP) update. - Implement vegetated or solar options for parking lots; staff recommended a tree‑canopy approach with a 40% canopy‑at‑maturity standard and a list of species and well sizes to avoid future pavement damage.

Commission discussion focused on local fit and implementation. Commissioners asked whether the state transit buffer (roughly a half‑mile) made sense for Oregon City's steep topography and limited transit service; several said the buffer as drawn covers much of the city and would create challenges for residents who rely on cars. Commissioner Mitchell said topography and current transit frequency make the half‑mile buffer unrealistic in many neighborhoods. Commissioners also questioned the practical effect of requiring conduit for EV chargers if property owners do not install chargers, and expressed concern about potential costs imposed on affordable housing projects.

Davis and staff responded that the state's rules are prescriptive in some aspects and that the city has limited latitude in others; they recommended adopting the required changes inside the buffer while pursuing incentives and minor local refinements. Staff said the city intends to bring code language to the Planning Commission (public hearing tentatively scheduled) and then return to the commission for legislative adoption; staff noted a June adoption deadline for the city to meet CFEC timelines.

Why it matters: CFEC changes alter how Oregon City regulates parking, EV readiness, bike parking and landscaping in areas the state defines as climate‑friendly and near transit routes. The choices will affect development costs, parking supply, public‑parking demand and tree planting requirements.

Next steps: Staff plans to present draft code language at the Planning Commission public hearing (tentatively mid‑April), then return to the commission for first and second readings; commissioners asked staff to explore grant funding and incentives for public EV infrastructure and to craft tree well and species lists that reduce future damage to sidewalks and pavement.