Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Urban Growth Boundary topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultant: Molalla needs about 182 acres of housing land; UGB study will prioritize subareas and test southern exception lands
Summary
Consultant Violet Brown told the Molalla City Council that rezoning increased in‑UGB capacity but the city still needs roughly 928 single‑family units (about 182 acres). Brown outlined a statutory study area process, parcel prioritization, and next steps including detailed subarea SWOTs and public input to decide where to expand the urban growth boundary.
Violet Brown, a consultant with 3J Consulting, told the Molalla City Council on May 14 that the city’s buildable‑lands and housing analyses show remaining residential need that cannot be met inside the current urban growth boundary (UGB).
Brown said the city’s Housing Needs Analysis baseline was about 1,996 units between now and 2042; taking recently completed pipeline units (287) and adding capacity gained from council‑approved rezoning (about 42 acres of higher‑density residential), staff and consultants calculate there remains roughly 928 single‑family units to accommodate — roughly 182 acres once typical single‑family densities are applied.
The consultant explained the multi‑step statutory process for any UGB amendment: demonstrating a land need, showing that efficiency measures were exhausted, drawing a one‑mile study buffer (with limited 1.5‑mile exceptions), and then excluding lands that are impractical or constrained (rivers, slopes, wetlands, and prime soils). Brown said the team has mapped hydric soils, historic sites, floodways and other constraints and will use those layers to produce a final study area.
Brown described parcel‑prioritization rules under Goal 14. “First priority” lands are already urban or exception lands and are the places the city must consider first; “second” and “third” priority lands follow, with “fourth” priority reserved for prime and unique soils. She said the city currently has about 580 acres of first‑priority (exception) land to the south and that, in many cases, developability or parcelization will determine how much housing those acres can actually supply.
Brown said the project team divided the study area into subareas (1–7 as primary study clusters, with additional areas 8–19 examined for industrial needs) to run a goal‑14 location‑factor analysis: efficient accommodation, orderly/economic provision of public facilities, environmental/economic/social/energy consequences, and land‑use compatibility with agriculture and forest operations. She said the maps and spreadsheets allow the team to calculate net developable acreage for each parcel after removing constraints.
Councilors and staff asked how infrastructure costs (pumping, sewer, roads) and parcelization would affect whether first‑priority southern lands should be used. Brown said suitability and cost are part of the goal‑14 balancing; if first‑priority lands are technically unsuitable or would yield low capacity because of parcelization or wetlands, the city may be allowed to look beyond them. “If a parcel already has a house on one acre, we assume it is not developable in our 20‑year horizon,” she said; “that lowers the effective capacity of that subarea and can open the pathway to consider other lands.”
Brown asked for continued local participation and ground‑truthing: farm owners and residents can submit site‑specific evidence (photo, agricultural use, crop records) that will be included in the formal record and may change suitability scoring. She said outreach included a public meeting (about 100 attendees) and an online survey; the consultant reported roughly 30 online responses so far and said the survey is closed while staff compiles responses for the June report.
Next steps: Brown said the consultant will deliver two reports to the city in June — one documenting sufficiency of the existing UGB and another applying the Goal‑14 location‑factors and parcel‑level SWOTs for the subareas — and will return to council with that analysis and recommended study parcels. The council directed staff to continue work and encouraged outreach to farmers and property owners so the record contains localized information about soils, wetlands and infrastructure costs.
If the council proceeds with an amendment after the study, Brown said the city will still need concept planning and zoning steps before development can occur. “Expanding the boundary is about where the city permits urban uses in the future; it does not force property owners to annex or build,” she said. The consultant added that certain statutory processes and possible state review (DLCD/appeal pathways) will still apply once a proposal is submitted.
