Redmond planning commission backs code amendments on townhouse setbacks, open space and annexations

The Redmond Urban Area Planning Commission voted April 15 to forward a package of development-code amendments to city council that would set a 20-foot setback to ensure a 9‑by‑20‑foot off‑street parking space for townhouses, replace the city's per-unit open‑space formula with a 2.5 percent-of-developable-area standard for larger subdivisions, and add a new Article 5 that codifies annexation procedures now handled under state law.

Planning Director Kyle Roberts told the commission the changes respond to state housing requirements and to feedback from the Housing Accountability and Production Office. "A garage is not a requirement for a townhouse," Roberts said, adding that the proposed 20‑foot setback is intended to provide space for the one off‑street parking space state law allows the city to require. He also summarized other limits: a required off‑street parking space must meet typical dimensions (9 feet by 20 feet) and setbacks for townhouses cannot be more restrictive than those that apply to single‑family dwellings in the same zone.

Senior long‑range planner Corey Murray walked commissioners through the new annexation article, which Murray said is intended to replace the city's reliance on ORS 222 and to make the local process easier to use. "If you were sending an applicant to ORS 222 it is, I would say, convoluted at best," Murray said, calling the previous reliance on statute "Frankenstein code." Murray said annexations will be split into Type 1 (large‑scale) and Type 2 (small‑scale) applications, with Type 1 requiring a pre‑application meeting, an annexation agreement and a master plan or PUD.

On open space, Roberts said the proposal requires that subdivisions of 2.5 gross acres or more set aside 2.5 percent of developable area (excluding rights‑of‑way and steep slopes) as consolidated, contiguous open space intended for active uses; where the resulting figure is greater than 5,000 square feet the consolidated minimum applies. Roberts said he calculated the 2.5 percent target by reviewing the last 10 sizable subdivisions to approximate the city's current effective standard while complying with state law that prohibits scaling design standards by unit count.

Commissioners questioned practical impacts. Commissioner DeWolf, who identified herself as working with Hayden Homes, warned that allowing optional garages and a single required parking space could increase on‑street parking and alley encroachment; she abstained from the final recommendation vote. Several commissioners urged staff to account for phasing and constrained sites, and staff said the requirement applies to a subdivision at large and that the city can consider site constraints and timing of when open space is constructed.

The annexation "city's best interest" approval criterion drew particular scrutiny. Some commissioners said the criterion gives the city leverage to negotiate community benefits (for example, childcare or traffic mitigation) through annexation agreements; others cautioned that a subjective standard could create uncertainty for applicants and risk appeals. Murray and Roberts said any requirement tied to "the city's best interest" would need supporting findings and data and that annexation agreements and council review are public processes.

Commissioner Schultz moved to accept the staff recommendation and forward the package to city council; the motion carried with five ayes and one abstention (Commissioner DeWolf). Chair Tobias Colvin said the council will hold its hearing on the Planning Commission's recommendation on May 26. No written or oral public testimony was received during the planning‑commission hearing.

The Planning Commission record lists the file as 711‑26‑000054‑PLNGTA; staff noted that some items in an earlier package had been withdrawn after HAPO review and were reworked to comply with state housing law before being returned to the commission.