Item 2: Ordinances on Minor Code Amendments (MiCAP Remand)

Home Browse Search

1has not deferredrezoning to the density called by in the Metro Plan, it has chosen to zone for 2much higher densities, and OAR 660-008-0025 is simply inapplicable. 3Even if OAR 660-008-0025 could be read to preclude new land use regulations that 4might have the indirect effect of making it difficult to achieve the densities called for under 5the Metro Plan, petitioner comes nowhere near showing that is the case here. As we have 6already noted, the existing R-3 and R-4 zoning is unaffected by the challenged amendments, 7and there is at best conflicting evidence in the record concerning whether the amendments 8call into question whether in some circumstances it may not be possible to achieve the 112 9unit per net acre maximum density allowed under the EC in the R-4 zone. There is simply no 10credible evidence in the record that the disputed amendments will make it no longer possible 9 11to achieve the more modest 28.56 units per net acre called for under the Metro Plan. 12The third assignment of error is denied. FOURTH ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR 13 14 ORS 197.307(6) requires that “[a]ny approval standards, special conditions and the 15procedures for approval” that are adopted by the city and applied to needed housing as 16defined by ORS 197.303 must be “clear and objective and may not have the effect, either in 17themselves or cumulatively, of discouraging needed housing through unreasonable cost or 10 18delay.” 9 We recognize that other city zoning districts may allow development at densities that are less than required under Metro Plan Policy A.9 and that the higher densities allowed in the R-3 and R-4 zoning may be necessary to offset those lower densities so that the city as a whole complies with the minimum density required by Metro Plan Policy A.9. However, petitioner does not argue that this consideration is in play here and we do not consider the issue further. 10 The text of ORS 197.307(6) is set out below: “Any approval standards, special conditions and the procedures for approval adopted by a local government shall be clear and objective and may not have the effect, either in themselves or cumulatively, of discouraging needed housing through unreasonable cost or delay.” Page 16