Albany council holds hearing on climate-friendly zoning changes; officials and residents raise traffic and preservation concerns

The Albany City Council on April 9 held a legislative public hearing on proposed amendments to the city’s comprehensive plan, zoning map and development code to adopt “Climate Friendly Areas” and walkability standards required under state statute.

Comprehensive Planning Manager Anne Catlin told the council the package identifies six climate friendly areas located along Albany bus routes, clarifies code language (articles 8, 9 and a new Article 14), and includes a map amendment and some property-specific zone changes. Catlin said the state framework requires the areas to have capacity to accommodate 30% of the city’s projected 2040 housing need — a target she said is 8,861 units (staff used formulaic capacity calculations and included a modest buffer).

The proposal would largely keep existing base zones but add an overlay with design standards and “net density” minimums (Catlin described 15 units per acre in most climate friendly areas and 25 units per acre in the primary area near the Heritage Mall). Catlin also noted limited, targeted zone changes such as a property at 50 Third and 99 in South Albany proposed to change from Commercial General to Village Center, and a few regional- and neighborhood-commercial parcels proposed to become Mixed Use Commercial or Community Commercial. In the Heritage Mall area the staff proposed a change from RM to RMA on small parcels near 16th and Gary Street.

Why it matters

City staff said the designation is intended to encourage mixed-use, walkable and transit-served development so future housing and services concentrate near transit rather than spur sprawl. Supporters say overlay design standards and minimum net densities will guide future redevelopment and help prioritize future transportation projects.

What residents and neighborhood groups told the council

Multiple residents who live in North Albany urged the council to pause or narrow the North Albany designation (referred to in testimony as “Site C” or the Hickory site) because of existing congestion on the bridge and at the Highway 20 intersection. Robert Heinecker, a North Albany resident, described the neighborhood’s circulation as a “funnel” and said: “If you look at the average number of cars per household in The United States right now is about 1.9, so that means we're talking about 3,500 to 5,000 cars added down at the choke point.”

Brad Dennis of the North Albany Neighborhood Association suggested postponing the North Albany designation until identified transportation improvements from a DKS Associates study are in place. Gary Wilford, another North Albany resident, cited rising accident rates and said he opposed Site C, calling for a traffic study before designation or development.

Other testimony focused on historic resources and natural resources along the Willamette River. Former Councilor Matilda Novak urged caution for the downtown historic district and questioned the top-down nature of state requirements — at one point she referred to “Executive Order 02/1940” in her remarks. Anne Catlin and staff repeatedly emphasized that existing overlay protections, including the city’s Article 7 historic-preservation standards, and natural-resource regulations would continue to apply to any development within climate friendly areas.

Council questions and deliberations

Councilors pressed staff on several topics: protections for the downtown historic district; whether townhouses would be allowed downtown; stormwater and tree-canopy requirements; and the anticipated scale of new construction. Catlin said base zone heights in most areas already allow up to 50 feet (with some existing zones higher in the historic downtown), that townhouses are a state-required housing type and would be allowed in some zones, and that the city recently strengthened tree requirements for large parking-area conversions (for parking lots larger than a quarter-acre, more tree canopy is required or solar panels can be used). Catlin also said individual development projects must provide site-specific traffic analyses and pay transportation system development charges when they proceed.

Councilors expressed a mix of views. Councilor Thompson called the package “top down” and urged removing the North Albany (Site C) designation; other councilors welcomed planning ahead for growth while also acknowledging concerns about traffic and historic compatibility. Mayor Johnson framed the package as preparing the city “25 years in the future” and urged the council to adopt a starting framework staff can refine.

Outcome and next steps

The council closed the public hearing but did not adopt the comprehensive-plan and zoning amendments at the April 9 meeting; the mayor indicated the matter will be brought back for further consideration. Staff materials in the council packet included letters from Monteith District resident Suzanne Phillips (supportive) and two letters from Cameron Sedlmeier (opposed). Staff also referenced a market analysis and prior outreach; the city will return with refined findings and any recommended boundary adjustments.

The hearing record and staff presentation remain part of the planning files: CP-01-25, ZC-01-25 and DC-02-25.