I approval process regulating, in whole or in part, appearance or aesthetics that <br />2 are not clear and objective, if the applicant retains the option of proceeding <br />3 under clear and objective standards. <br />4 Generally, approval standards are clear and objective if they do not <br />5 impose "subjective, value-laden analyses that are designed to balance or <br />6 mitigate impacts[.]" Rogue Valley Assoc. of Realtors v. City of Ashland, 35 Or <br />7 LUBA 139, 158 (1998), aff'd 158 Or App 1, 970 P2d 685 (1999). Relatedly, <br />8 ORS 227.173(2) provides that: <br />9 "When an ordinance establishing approval standards is required <br />10 under ORS 197.307 to provide only clear and objective standards, <br />11 the standards must be clear and objective on the face of the <br />12 ordinance." <br />13 Further, ORS 197.831 places the burden on the local government to <br />14 demonstrate, before LUBA, that standards and conditions imposed on needed <br />15 housing that are required to be clear and objective "are capable of being <br />16 imposed only in a clear and objective manner."' <br />"(a) Set approval standards under which a particular <br />housing type is permitted outright; <br />"(b) Impose special conditions upon approval of a specific <br />development proposal; or <br />"(c) Establish approval procedures." <br />' ORS 197.831 provides: <br />"In a proceeding before [LUBA] or an appellate court that <br />involves an ordinance required to contain clear and objective <br />approval standards, conditions and procedures for needed housing, <br />the local government imposing the provisions of the ordinance <br />shall demonstrate that the approval standards, conditions and <br />Page 7 <br />