Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission postpones Unity Partners housing text amendment amid safety and compliance questions
Summary
The planning commission continued a proposed high‑density housing text amendment by Unity Partners to Dec. 18 after staff and residents flagged code alignment, fire‑safety, and state rule issues; applicant Hardeep Singh said the project aims to provide smaller, affordably priced lots and homes.
The Boardman Planning Commission voted to continue a proposed text amendment (LND25‑5) that would add high‑density residential options to the city’s development code, after public safety officials and staff urged more work before a recommendation to council.
Planning staff summarized gaps between the city’s existing 2001 development code and recent state statutes and model code guidance, and recommended pausing to fold a broader residential rewrite into the decision. Hardeep Singh, who identified himself as the applicant and property owner, said the proposal would create lots roughly 3,500 square feet with manufactured homes for sale, and estimated target prices between $200,000 and $250,000 to improve affordability. “If we can make this thing work, we can definitely have about 30, 40 units at an affordable price for people,” Singh said.
Fire Chief Michael Hughes testified that smaller lots can create life‑safety access challenges for larger apparatus and said the department should be closely involved in design standards. Police Chief Rick Stocco said he opposed reducing minimum lot size and worried about long‑term impacts on emergency response and property values. Commissioners and staff said they supported addressing affordability but needed clearer guidance from the state model code, the Department of Land Conservation and Development, and the housing capacity analysis; they voted unanimously to continue the amendment to the Dec. 18 meeting so staff can provide a draft residential chapter and address life‑safety concerns.
The continuation gives staff and the applicant time to reconcile the proposal with DLCD comments, incorporate the consultant’s audit memo and table of required code changes, and consult fire and police on access and lot configuration standards.
