Taylor council introduces special-use permit requirement for multifamily, mixed‑use and RV parks

The Taylor City Council on May 22 held a public hearing and introduced Ordinance 2025‑15, an amendment to the city’s land development code that would require a special‑use permit for multifamily developments, mixed‑use projects that include multifamily housing, and recreational vehicle (RV) parks.

City planning staff presented the proposal as a targeted measure to give local officials and residents notice and an opportunity to evaluate fiscal and service impacts when certain financing mechanisms could make multifamily developments tax‑exempt. Planner Carly Pearson told the council the SUP is not a moratorium on multifamily development: “This is not a moratorium because y’all are pro multifamily,” Pearson said, adding applicants would submit the SUP concurrently with required site‑plan and neighborhood plan reviews so she expects little to no added time or cost for developers.

The ordinance is framed primarily as a response to what staff described as out‑of‑jurisdiction financing structures—commonly referenced in the discussion as housing finance corporations (HFCs) and similar entities—that can, under certain circumstances, remove properties from local tax rolls. Pearson said the SUP would allow council to require fiscal‑impact analysis and ensure the city, county and school district can assess long‑term costs to taxpayers before large parcels are removed from the tax base.

Pearson also explained implementation details the council discussed: the proposed process would require notification of property owners within 200 feet of a proposed project and would apply to what the code defines as “small apartments” and “large apartments” (the code’s categories for apartment complexes). She clarified that duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes and currently entitled multifamily projects would not be affected by this change. “If you haven’t built but you already have the entitlements, this doesn’t touch them at all,” she said.

Council members and staff repeatedly emphasized the proposal is intended to preserve the city’s ability to allow multifamily housing while protecting taxpayers. Council members asked whether the ordinance would permit arbitrary denial of compliant proposals; Pearson and other staff answered that denials must not be arbitrary and capricious and would still be governed by existing zoning and code standards.

One resident who spoke during the item, William Cantwell, said he supported the amendment and urged the council to preserve representation for existing residents. No other public commenters spoke during the hearing on this item.

The city attorney read Ordinance 2025‑15 into the record during the meeting. The item was introduced; no final adoption vote on the ordinance occurred at the May 22 meeting and the ordinance will return to the council for further consideration per the city’s normal ordinance process.

Why it matters: city staff said the change is intended to give Taylor officials and neighbors a formal opportunity to assess the fiscal consequences when nontraditional financing or tax‑exempt structures are used to develop multifamily housing. Staff and several council members warned the issue could continue to be shaped by pending state legislation and litigation.

Next steps: the ordinance has been introduced and will come back to the council for subsequent readings and a final vote in a later meeting.