Portland’s latest code amendment package to improve land use regulations received the City Council‘s approval on Thursday. The Regulatory Improvement Code Amendment Package (RICAP) 11 is intended to streamline zoning across the city. The changes will take effect Nov. 1.

“RICAP projects are intended to identify technical corrections, clarify existing regulations, remove unnecessary barriers and improve the overall functionality of our code,” Housing and Permitting Committee Chair Candace Avalos said during a committee meeting in June. “The package includes dozens of relatively small amendments, but together they create a more predictable, efficient and user-friendly system.”

RICAP 11 is part of an ongoing series of code amendment projects. The previous one, RICAP 10, was adopted by the city council in June 2024 and took effect that October. Its amendments focused on housing production, economic development and regulatory reduction.

In the next year or so, other projects will be presented to the committee and the City Council, Bureau of Planning and Sustainability Director Eric Engstrom said. They include possible reform of the design review process, a Central City-focused package, and the Code Alignment Project (CAP) 2.

“Collectively, we’ll be looking at things like parking and frontage issues, repurposing existing buildings, elements of the tree code, continued work on middle housing codes and a lot more,” Engstrom said during the June committee meeting.

Thursday’s direction amends Title 32 (signs and related regulations) and Title 33 (planning and zoning). RICAP 11 includes 56 zoning code amendments focused on minor parking updates including access to bike parking areas, rules for setbacks and screening for mechanical equipment, regulations for outdoor shelters to align with what the city has allowed through its housing emergency, and allowances for larger signs in parks and open spaces, among others.

The council passed several amendments to the package late last month. These include allowing residential use in the Campus Institutional 1 zone and removing screening requirements for detached mechanical equipment.

The post Portland code changes to take effect in November appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Washington County and the city of Tualatin on Friday announced a proposed agreement with semiconductor equipment manufacturer Lam Research for it to invest up to $1.7 billion in Tualatin through 2041.

Negotiations took place via Oregon’s Strategic Investment Program (SIP), according to a press release. The SIP, a private-public partnership that provides property tax exemptions, was authorized by the 1993 Legislature to increase Oregon’s ability to attract and retain capital-intensive industry and high-wage jobs.

Lam Research, headquartered in Fremont, California, designs and builds products for semiconductor manufacturing, including equipment for wafer fabrication, thin film deposition and plasma etch systems.

The proposed SIP agreement would support Lam Research’s expansion of its operations in Tualatin. Plans call for creating a large, state-of-the-art research and development facility spread over multiple buildings. Previously, the company’s 120,000-square-foot Building G was completed in September 2025.

The property tax abatement would help support the company’s investment in the community and regional job creation. As with previous SIP agreements, property taxes would be partially abated for investments in the advanced facility, the press release states.

Lam Research would be required to make payments under two categories: those required by state law and those negotiated locally. Based on current models, the required payments would total an estimated $84 million in property taxes and fees over the life of the agreement, but actual amounts would vary based on finalized assessed values, timing of the company investments, and inflation. Additional fees are expected to total $27 million over the same period.

The Washington County Board of Commissioners and the Tualatin City Council will gather public comments on the proposed SIP agreement. The board of commissioners is set to meet at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, when it will receive public testimony and vote on the proposal. The city council will consider the proposal when it meets at 7 p.m. on Aug. 10.

State law would then require the Business Oregon Commission to approve the agreement before it could take effect. The group’s next meeting is scheduled for Sept. 24.

The post Lam Research planning $1.7 billion investment in Tualatin appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Portland design commissioners are girding for battle as they begin to confront a push to suspend the city’s mandatory design review process for two years.

The procedure is advancing quickly, and city staff anticipate the City Council will consider legislation to suspend design review as soon as December.

The Portland Planning Commission will weigh a suspension of design review on Aug. 25 as a prelude to council action. Design commissioners said Thursday they plan to write letters and perhaps testify in person at that meeting.

The time has come for design commissioners to make their case, said Tim Heron, a senior city planner who works with the Design Commission.

“So, it’s go time,” he said after laying out the calendar during a brief Design Commission work session on Thursday.

Two bureau directors, Eric Engstrom of Planning and Sustainability and Eric Kutch of Permitting and Development, sent councilors Angelita Morillo and Eric Zimmerman a letter May 7 outlining a potential two-year suspension of design review. That was prompted by councilors ordering a report on design review this past December.

Design review has attracted criticism for adding delays and expense while elected officials — including Gov. Tina Kotek and Mayor Keith Wilson — have made housing production a priority, to little effect. Other cities, including Seattle, have suspended design review.

Policy efforts have shown little progress to date. In 2025, the city of Portland approved only 22 new construction permits for multifamily projects.

The proposed suspension would affect only mandatory design review. Developers still could opt in if they prefer design review to a standards-based approval process.

Several Permitting and Development staffers who work on design review would be reassigned and integrated into a Planning and Sustainability project team, according to the directors’ memo. The directors also requested additional funding for the staffing during the two-year period to make up for reduced design review revenue.

The two bureaus, prompted by the December directive from the City Council, published a joint report on design review in April. The 119-page report painted a picture of a broad economic pullback. “… Development activity has steadily declined and, in 2025, experienced an even more precipitous decline. This multiyear decline has not been limited to projects in the Design and Historic Resource Overlay Zones but has been reflected citywide for almost all types of housing and commercial development.”

Design review proponents say the process benefits projects, often making buildings better and giving the public a voice.

“Design review is a time when the public is able to come provide testimony,” Design Commission Chairwoman Chandra Robinson said in February. “It’s the time when they’re able to get their voices on the record, and I think it’s an important part of the process that they’re able to share their thoughts on proposals in their neighborhood.”

They also say design review unfairly takes flack when national and regional macroeconomic conditions — interest rates, development cycles, construction costs — matter far more. The April joint bureau report also cast blame on larger factors.

“Development within the city remains at historic lows due to various factors including high interest rates, high apartment vacancy combined with stagnating rents and an aversion by institutional capital to investing in Portland due to real and perceived safety, taxation, regulation and market factors,” the report states.

On Thursday, Robinson said she would draft a letter to the City Council, either on behalf of the Design Commission or individually.

Commissioner Joe Swank said the Design Commission may want to write a different type of letter than one with typical dry, technical language, as it’s fighting for its life.

“I agree with a different approach,” he said.

The Historic Landmarks Commission is also expected to weigh in with its own concerns.

Design commissioners are expected to consider their response during an Aug. 6 meeting before transmitting it to the Planning Commission and City Council.

The post Fight over Portland design review process looms appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

It’s early, but the city of Portland’s moratorium on development fees appears to be moving some multifamily developers off the sidelines and into building, according to permitting data and interviews.

In fact, it led one developer to propose a new project. Joe Westerman on May 1 requested early assistance from Portland Permitting & Development for a four- to five-story mixed-use building with 158 apartments in 213,644 square feet at Northeast Sandy Boulevard and 52nd Avenue.

If the project were to advance, it would represent a rare boost of supply to Portland’s tight housing market.

“I’ve been building apartments in Porland for 30 years, and I kind of got away from it when working with the city got so unruly,” Westerman said.

So, what changed?

“Portland is incentivizing developers with not having to pay the system development charges,” he added. “It’s probably going to be $3 million that you don’t have to pay. That’s – that’s nice.”

System development charges fund city infrastructure through various city bureaus, but the fees have drawn blame for discouraging housing proposals by increasing costs.

SDCs average about $20,000 per unit; they can range from $15,000 to $35,000 per unit, according to a City Council document.

Only 818 market-rate housing units were produced in Portland in 2024 — the lowest rate in more than a decade. In response, the City Council last summer approved a moratorium on SDCs that will last until Sept. 30, 2028.

The development fee moratorium is helping keep projects alive, said Ezra Hammer, a land-use attorney at Ballard Spahr.

“For a pro forma that has seen compression over an entitlement period, the SDC waivers are helping with that compression,” he said.

Hammer said he’s also fielded increased interest from “out-of-town folks who are pleasantly surprised about the tonal shift we’re hearing.” That’s after Portland’s reputation soured amid pandemic shutdowns, protests and regulatory obstacles.

“The city appears to want to attract investment in multifamily housing,” Hammer said. “I haven’t seen those projects materialize yet, but it’s a big shift from the world we were in before where capital had absolutely no interest in Portland.”

Portland Permitting & Development is tracking an uptick in building permits issued since the fee moratorium began in August 2025. Some projects that had apparently stalled were given building permits.

As of Jan. 15, 265 new housing units complied with the program for a total of $6.68 million in SDC exemptions — an average of $25,221 per unit. An additional 207 units have had their permits issued and are on track to receive $4.17 million in development fee exemptions but have not yet completed compliance in the program, according to the agency. The city ordinance that created the exemptions requires new housing projects to pour a concrete foundation within 12 months of permits being issued.

PP&D is expected to present a full report on the program to the City Council after Aug. 15, when the exemptions will have been in place for a year.

“We see indicators that the SDC exemption is helping new housing units get developed,” PP&D spokesman Ken Ray stated in an email. “It is early in the program, and we expect we’ll have a clearer picture this fall after we’ve had a year’s worth of activity to review.”

The moratorium and builder-friendly vibes could even be enough to get someone like Westerman — a longtime Portland investor — off the sidelines. His JMW Properties owns four multifamily properties in Portland, one in Vancouver, Washington, and one in Medford. Westerman has brought on board Koble Creative to design the Sandy Boulevard project, which is named Rose City Mixed-Use in early planning documents.

“This could be a really amazing project,” Westerman said. “It has a beautiful southern exposure. You could have on the second floor an atrium, and … units on the inside. You could have fresh air in there; you could have skylights in there.”

Westerman said he wants to build relatively roomy studios and apartments with one or two bedrooms rather than the micro-units that some developers have built to boost rental rates per square foot.

Westerman owns the entire block, including the building at 5137 N.E. Sandy Blvd. that hosts the discount store Friday Deals. The larger building at 5201-5223 N.E. Sandy Blvd. includes G.O.A.T. Bar and Hollywood Fitness, a longtime neighborhood gym owned by George Camalli.

Westerman said he hopes Hollywood Fitness will be the anchor tenant in the new building, in a 10,000-square-foot storefront space. “I like that — having to deal with one tenant,” he said.

The project could also affect the Rose City Food Park. But the food carts may be able to move to the block’s west end, Westerman said.

Koble Creative previously designed Westerman’s Cedar Commons development in Medford.

“They’re a good local architect,” he said.

Westerman, a contractor, expects to perform the construction in-house.

A new outlook in the city government gained Westerman’s attention, he said, in contrast to what he considered an anti-developer stance when the permitting agency was overseen by former city commissioner Chloe Eudaly.

“The permits center became an area of ‘no,’ and I think that’s changing,” he said. “We are going to early assistance to find out all of the issues if there are issues, and then we’ll do a cost model and a pro forma model. And we’ll see if it papers out.”

Westerman also owns a large swath of land in Gateway that he’s so far been unable to redevelop. He also suggested he’d be happy to take on investors for the Sandy Boulevard development.

“Anyone who would like a partnership, give me a call,” he said.

Portland needs more housing, and it also needs some good news, Westerman said.

“It’s easy for me not to be happy with Portland,” he said. “But the bottom line: I would like to be part of the solution.”

The post Portland’s suspension of fees spurs mixed-use development appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Each year, the Portland Design Commission produces a report that details development in the city and highlights major projects.

This year’s State of the City report does that and a little more: It defends the design review process itself.

The report, prepared by commissioners led by Chairwoman Chandra Robinson, an architect, was adopted by the commission on March 19. It comes as the City Council has requested a separate report on design review with an eye toward reform — including a possible temporary suspension of design review requirements.

The report to the City Council, by staff of Portland Permitting and Development as well as Planning and Sustainability, is due on April 9.

Robinson emphasized the Design Commission’s flexibility, in presenting the State of the City on March 19. In recent years, the commission has adjusted to design overlay zone amendments in 2021, revamped historic resource codes in 2022, streamlined design review and neighborhood contact procedures in 2024, and implemented code changes to design and development standards in 2025.

“These are all intended to improve outcomes for development, right?” Robinson said. “We want to encourage it, and we want to make things simpler when we can.”

Robinson backed discretionary review, whereby commissioners are guided by design review standards but not limited to them.

“When we have discretionary review, we’re able to allow modifications that are not strictly allowed by the zoning code and by standards,” Robinson said. “So, it is helpful to come through the Design Commission if there are things in your project that do not fit standards.”

Commissioners pointed to their approvals of major projects including Hollywood HUB, a 222-unit affordable housing building under construction on Northeast Halsey Street; the Lloyd Center concert venue, and Portland State University’s 80,000-square-foot Schnitzer School of Art + Art History + Design.

Production of market-rate housing has plunged in recent years, and design review has come under fire for adding costly delays. Other cities have curtailed design review; in September 2025, the Seattle City Council suspended design review requirements.

But Portland design commissioners laid the blame for declining construction on market forces and not regulatory obstacles.

“Because of economic conditions and the cost of borrowing money, the cost of construction has been a real difficult obstacle over the last few years, and we’re seeing diminishing projects coming through and not very many cranes on the skyline,” Commissioner Brian McCarter said during the March 19 meeting.

“However, I think Design Commission always remembers that we are that body who is approving real projects that are going to be built out there, and they’re going to be basically the implementation of our vision of the city we want to be,” McCarter added.

In previous years, design commissioners have presented the report to the City Council in person during a public council meeting. No such presentation is scheduled this year amid the reform push.

“We don’t have dates scheduled for a presentation of the State of the Cities reports (for both the Design Commission and the Historic Landmarks Commission) to the City Council or one of its committees,” Permitting & Development spokesman Ken Ray stated in an email. “I do not know if a presentation will be scheduled or if the reports will be provided to the City Council by other means.”

Elliott Kozuch, spokesman for the city’s Community and Economic Development departments, noted that the State of the City report is not finalized.

“It is within council’s purview to determine whether they would like the information presented at an upcoming council or committee meeting,” Kozuch wrote in an email.

The post Portland Design Commission defends design review process appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

CORPUS CHRISTI, Texas — The board that oversees the special property tax fund for downtown Corpus Christi has given a preliminary nod to using as much as $2 million to tear down the 1914 Nueces County Courthouse — but not without several city officials first expressing displeasure over the approach that was employed to push the issue.

The Nueces County Commissioners Court had vowed to exit an economic development program that relies on downtown property tax values, should the board deny the funding.

Corpus Christi City Councilman Gil Hernandez, also a board member, said during the Jan. 13 meeting that although he supported financing the teardown, he didn’t appreciate the county’s “methods that are being used for it.”

He initially used the word “extortion” and later described it in the subsequent City Council meeting as “coercion.”

“Ultimately, I agree that we can participate with tearing down the old courthouse — I know it’s been an odyssey for the county for many, many years,” Hernandez said. “I’m in support of the funding, but again, this could have been handled a little bit differently.”

Nueces County Commissioner Mike Pusley, also a board member, took exception to the county’s position being referenced as extortion. There is a partnership in improving downtown, and demolishing the old courthouse would serve as a benefit to the area, he said.

“Extortion is a terrible thing to say, and I’m just really disappointed in that,” Pusley said. “What I’m trying to do is salvage our partnership.”

The board that oversees the economic development program — known as a tax increment reinvestment zone (TIRZ) — approved amending a project and financing plan that outlines the uses of funding. The 11-1 vote was for the plan to include among allowable uses as much as $2 million for the demolition of government buildings.

The approval by the TIRZ board, and subsequently the Corpus Christi City Council, was not specific to the 1914 Nueces County Courthouse. A contract specific to the proposed demolition of the historic courthouse is expected to be brought to the board and the City Council for consideration on Jan. 27.

A TIRZ functions by taxing entities contributing to the program a portion of new or increased property taxes from a certain area, which would otherwise go to their respective budgets. The TIRZ revenue is then steered back into the area where it was collected for improvements.

TIRZ revenue cannot be used for purposes other than improving the area from which it was drawn. The idea is that reinvesting the funding will spur more economic development and thus increase property values.

The county, which joined the TIRZ in 2009, has contributed about $5.5 million during that span, said Arlene Medrano, executive director of the Downtown Management District.

The city has contributed about $12 million, she said.

Should the county withdraw from the program, the downtown TIRZ would stand to lose about $370,000 annually, Medrano said. Without renewal of a 20-year contract, the loss would total about $8.7 million, she added.

Some county commissioners have criticized how TIRZ funding has been used, contending that city projects, not county ones, are the primary beneficiaries.

Conversely, several City Council members have disagreed with the county’s assessment, instead suggesting that all projects provide a benefit to all participating taxing entities.

Funding to raze the crumbling, 112-year-old courthouse has been the only ask since the county joined the TIRZ, according to Pusley.

The courthouse was added to the National Register of Historic Places in 1976 but abandoned a year later when the county moved operations to a new building. Last year, the Texas Historical Commission removed the historical preservation easement from the old courthouse, allowing potential demolition.

While some observers have lamented the anticipated demolition of the courthouse, several commissioners have said it’s the only reasonable conclusion due to long vacancy and corresponding deterioration. Attempts over the years to rescue the building through sale and redevelopment have been unsuccessful and, at this point, infeasible due to the structure’s state, some officials have said.

Tearing down the building will mitigate blight in the downtown area, Medrano told the board.

“This has been an eyesore in the downtown, in our city, for 48 years,” she said. “This is the gateway into downtown, and so we receive millions of cars and traffic every year and that’s the first thing that they see.”

Several City Council members, all of whom serve on the TIRZ board, raised concerns about the future of the property and the lack of plans for immediate redevelopment.

The county intends to sell what Pusley believes will be valuable property, he said. However, a buyer has not been identified.

It’s unclear how much it will cost to raze the building. Pusley said contractors have estimated demolition to cost between $1.5 million and $2 million; however, that price doesn’t consider asbestos remediation that is being evaluated.

Under the county’s proposal, requested funding would be a reimbursement of as much as $2 million over a three-year period. Any additional costs for the demolition would be covered by the county, Pusley said. One potential source would be proceeds from a recent sale of property to the Port of Corpus Christi, he added.

There is a bigger picture to be considered for the area, Mayor Paulette Guajardo said.

“At the end of the day, this is a partnership … that maybe the communication kind of went astray,” she said.

Editor’s note: This article first appeared in the Corpus Christi Caller-Times and then was distributed on the USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect.

The post Project in Texas may advance despite municipal spat appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.