Council workshop reviews proposed rewrite of land-use code to meet new housing law

Consultants from the Mustin Group told the City Council in a workshop presentation that a mostly "housekeeping" rewrite of the city's land-use code would simplify permitting, reduce internal contradictions and align local rules with recent state housing laws.

The consultants said their phase-one edits, which cover roughly 600 pages of redlines, are intended to consolidate administrative procedures into a single chapter, create a uniform fee schedule, and standardize enforcement and appeals procedures so the code reflects current staff practice.

"We started with that goal," Auga, a Mustin Group consultant, said. "Ninety-five percent of the changes you're seeing fall into housekeeping, cleanup, really just streamlining language and making it more easily accessible." The consultant said the new Chapter 1 would serve as a road map for permitting, appeals, and fee assessments so applicants and staff can find consistent procedures in one place.

The presentation emphasized changes driven by LD1829, the state's omnibus housing law. Matt of the Mustin Group summarized the implications: increased density allowances in growth areas, smaller minimum lot sizes in many zones, broader accessory-dwelling-unit provisions and new limitations on locally required parking levels.

"LD1829 requires increased density and smaller minimum lot sizes in the growth area," Matt said, noting the draft proposes 5,000-square-foot minimums in many urban zones while preserving larger minimums where lots lack public water and sewer. The consultants flagged several policy choices for the council, including whether to adopt uniform citywide minimums or set different residential and commercial standards by zone.

A central procedural recommendation drew the council's questions: the consultants suggested eliminating an intermediate administrative appeal to the board of appeals for many development-related decisions, directing appeals instead to the superior court in most cases. Consultants argued the local intermediate appeal often adds months without changing the ultimate outcome because appellants frequently proceed to court.

"That intermediate step often creates many months of delay in getting a final judgment," Auga said, adding that variances and certain state-law-required appeals would remain with the local board of appeals and that the council would retain specified appeal responsibilities where state law requires it.

Consultants outlined next steps: staff will continue redlining the draft, the planning board will review land-use components (target date discussed for March), citywide notice would follow, and the council would have April and May available for final consideration. They also noted a "fix-it" bill moving in the Legislature could require later adjustments to the draft.

The workshop at no point produced a formal motion or vote; consultants and staff will return with revised draft language and additional financial and mapping details for council and planning-board review.