Josephine workshop on a Unified Development Code sets public review, residents press for grocery and fewer homeowner rules

City of Josephine officials and residents met at a joint city council and Planning & Zoning Commission workshop to review a draft Unified Development Code and agree a timetable for public review and legal checks.

Consultants from Kimley‑Horn explained the purpose of a UDC — to consolidate zoning, subdivision and development regulations into one consistent document — and said a near‑complete draft could be ready for staff review within roughly two weeks. They recommended a 30‑day public comment period, paired with two open‑house nights and online materials, and proposed returning to a joint council/PNZ session on June 1 to hear public comment and determine next steps.

The discussion highlighted two competing priorities. Some council members and residents said Josephine should preserve a small‑town feel and avoid overburdensome rules. One council member noted the city limits hold roughly 3,300 residents while the larger service area (as measured by water meters in the extraterritorial jurisdiction) approaches 9,000, stressing that growth is occurring beyond the city boundary. Residents called for minimal regulations on private property — for example, one commenter said she should be free to plant preferred trees and sod — but also asked the city to write rules that would encourage desired commercial investment.

Several speakers, including resident April Allrand, urged that the UDC be used to recruit retail: a recurring request was for a local grocery store and other retail, rather than additional gas stations. Allrand also recommended that alcohol sales approvals require a minimum portion of food sales (she cited a 40 percent food threshold in submitted materials) to prevent a proliferation of bar‑type establishments.

Consultants recommended several technical safeguards and implementation tools. They said the UDC should resolve conflicting provisions now scattered across the zoning and subdivision chapters, require traffic impact analyses and performance guarantees from developers when appropriate, and include objective procedures so that applicants and staff understand timelines and notice requirements. The consultants stressed that while some new provisions are optional, many of the UDC’s benefits come from reducing internal conflicts and creating predictable processes for developers and staff.

Council members and commissioners pressed on timing. Consultants outlined a fast track that would deliver a staff‑ready draft within about two weeks, followed by a short staff review, public release in early May, a 30‑day comment window, and a joint meeting June 1. They warned that legal review and statutorily required public notice windows limit how quickly final adoption can occur, and that changes to zoning should be coordinated with the comprehensive plan to avoid inconsistency.

On several policy questions, the workshop flagged items for further work rather than immediate adoption. Those include how the city handles annexation and concurrent zoning requests, whether the city should require limits on rental units in new subdivisions, and how to treat industrial/ETJ districts created under recent state legislation; consultants and staff agreed to involve the city attorney on those topics.

The meeting closed with the council and commission setting dates for staff delivery and public engagement and adjourning at 8:36 p.m.