Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tualatin moves to align development code with state 'clear and objective' housing law; council backs limited notice approach
Summary
City planning staff and consultant presented draft code revisions to comply with state clear‑and‑objective requirements, proposing objective multifamily design standards, a limited discretionary "design departure" process, and Planning Commission‑preferred procedure (type 2X) for public notice and review of multifamily projects.
Planning staff and consultant Kate Rogers presented draft amendments to bring Tualatin's development code into alignment with state clear‑and‑objective requirements, including changes to multifamily standards, separation of retirement housing from congregate care, and a new "design departure" process to allow limited, purpose‑based departures while keeping standards measurable.
"Multifamily design standards are updated to be fully clear and objective," Rogers said, describing purpose statements for each standard and a design‑departure path that would allow applicants to request limited discretionary modifications so long as proposals meet the stated purpose of the standard and mitigate negative impacts. She said the design‑departure process will be limited initially to multifamily applications, with up to four departures reviewed administratively and five or more triggering a public hearing.
Rogers and staff explained the constraints imposed by new state legislation affecting clear‑and‑objective processing (referenced in the presentation as House Bill 4037): where applications use a clear‑and‑objective pathway, municipalities may limit public notice and cannot require a public hearing; only the applicant can appeal a decision. The consultant outlined two procedural options for multifamily projects: (A) scale review by unit count (type 1 for under 20 units, type 2X for 20 or more) or (B) apply the type 2X modified administrative process regardless of size. The Planning Commission recommended option B to preserve the maximum notice allowed under state law.
Council discussion focused on transparency and public education about diminished local appeal rights, how the city will notify neighbors (changes to notice letters and website updates were proposed), and where retirement housing and congregate care will be treated differently under the updated code. Several councilors said they supported the Planning Commission's recommendation for option B (type 2X across sizes) to provide consistent notice while complying with state limits on hearings and third‑party appeals.
Staff said adoption is planned in the fall with grant funding from the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) covering consultant work; the goal is adoption by the end of the year.
