Planning Commission recommends approval of residential clear-and-objective Land Development Code amendments

The Corvallis Planning Commission on Feb. 5 unanimously recommended the City Council approve a package of Land Development Code text amendments aimed at bringing residential development rules into compliance with state law and reducing procedural barriers to housing.

Planning staff presented the amendments as the Phase 3 work of a multi‑year Code Audit project that began in 2018. Planning staff said the changes respond to the state requirement that local jurisdictions ‘‘adopt and apply only clear and objective standards, conditions, and procedures regulating the development of housing’’ and must avoid rules that ‘‘discourage needed housing through unreasonable cost or delay.’' Planning staff described the package as largely regulatory cleanup plus changes to remove discretionary review where state law requires a nondiscretionary path.

The package removes discretionary review for residential use types in most residential zones and in the PAO (planned office) zone, staff said. Among the specific changes in the staff presentation and staff report: eliminating conditional (discretionary) review for group residential and residential care facilities that previously required conditional development review in RS6 and RS9; removing the Plan Compatibility Review requirement in the PAO zone while retaining the zone’s design standards; deleting development standards that scale by number of dwelling units (a practice not allowed for middle housing under state rules); removing residential as a permitted use in the city’s sole mixed‑use transitional (MUT) heavy industrial location; aligning PAO and MUE (mixed‑use employment) zones with the city’s pedestrian‑oriented design standards; and reconciling private and common outdoor‑space requirements in RS12, RS20 and MUR zones to match RMU12 and RMU20 standards.

Planning staff said many items in the amendment list were already addressed by earlier code projects (mixed‑use zones update, middle‑housing implementation, land division changes), and that this phase primarily cleans up remaining nonconforming code language and procedures. The staff presentation cited a range of state laws and administrative rules discussed during the hearing that drove the work, including the clear‑and‑objective requirements added in 2017 and subsequent housing bills such as HB 2001, the Climate Friendly and Equitable Communities rules, and other state actions that changed allowable local regulation.

Commissioner Osterczyk moved to recommend approval of the amendments described in attachments PCA and PCB of the staff report; Commissioner Smith seconded. Commissioner Osterczyk said the package ‘‘brings us into compliance with state law, as well as, meets community needs towards improving the ease of building housing, taking down barriers to doing so, and is therefore in the public interest and the best interest of the city.’' The commission conducted a voice vote; the chair announced the motion passed unanimously.

The Planning Commission’s recommendation is advisory; a subsequent, noticed City Council public hearing will consider the ordinance. Planning staff recommended decision makers find the amendments consistent with the city comprehensive plan policies cited in the staff report (including housing, land use, transportation and economic development policies) and with applicable statewide planning goals.

The commission did not receive requests to keep the record open or for continuances. Staff noted several housekeeping items remain (cross‑reference updates and formatting) and that additional, minor citations cleanup will continue as the package proceeds to council.

Votes and formal action

- Motion: ‘‘That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of the Land Development Code text amendment application, amending LDC Chapters 1.2, 1.41, 0.62, 0.123, 0.03, 0.13, 0.23, 0.33, 0.53, 0.63, 0.103, 0.213, 0.223, 0.233, 0.243, 0.253, 0.27, and 3.3 as described in attachments PCA and PCB to the staff report.’' (motion text as read into the record) - Mover: Commissioner Osterczyk - Second: Commissioner Smith - Outcome: Recommendation forwarded to City Council (motion passed unanimously by voice vote). The record does not list each individual roll call vote; staff announced the motion passed unanimous.

Context and next steps

Planning staff characterized the amendments as necessary to remove discretionary processes that state law prohibits for housing, to eliminate standards that scale by number of units (which HB 2001 and subsequent guidance prohibit for middle housing types) and to align overlapping or inconsistent standards across residential and mixed use zones. The Planning Commission’s recommendation will be transmitted to the City Council; staff said the council hearing had not yet been scheduled at the time of the Feb. 5 meeting.