91视频

Oregon has been active in the effort to meet the need for housing and has undertaken numerous state and local changes to do so. Most recently, public attention has been fixed on the changes required of the zoning regulations of medium cities (i.e., those with a population of 10,000 to 25,000) and large cities (i.e., those within the Portland Metro area or having a population of 25,000 or more).

As of June 30, 2021, medium cities must allow a duplex wherever a low-density residential zone allows a detached single-family home. As of June 30, 2022, large cities must allow 鈥渕iddle housing鈥� in much of the same land within that same single-family category. Middle housing includes duplexes, triplexes, quadplexes, cottage clusters and townhouses. Most cities have either made those zoning code changes, are on target to do so, or are allowing a default state code that makes those changes automatically to come into effect.

These are the significant changes in Oregon land use law mandated by HB 2001 in 2019. However, there was another piece of 2019 legislation not as well known, HB 2003, that may prove to be as important as the changes required of the zoning codes of medium and large cities. This legislation requires submission to, and approval by, the Oregon Legislature of a uniform, statewide methodology of assessing housing needs on a regional basis and allocating those needs to individual urban areas. Combined with a state process to review city responses to these assessments and consequent allocations (together called 鈥渉ousing production strategies鈥�), there will likely be a more robust state role in assuring that housing needs will not be blocked by local land use regulations.

Such a role is the latest iteration in an on-again, off-again approach to state involvement in housing, as the state originally set some broad planning standards. Local governments were largely left alone, only to become involved in certain aspects of housing 鈥� manufactured homes, negating certain local housing restrictions, requiring 鈥渃lear and objective鈥� housing standards, and making publicly-assisted housing easier. But until relatively recently, that trajectory was uneven. With the two house bills, it appears the state is returning to the original idea of Goal 10, which was: 鈥淏uildable lands for residential use shall be inventoried and plans shall encourage the availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levels which are commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households and allow for flexibility of housing location, type and density.鈥�

Here鈥檚 how the proposed new system, called the Oregon Housing Needs Analysis (OHNA), would work. The legislation required the Oregon Department of Housing and Community Services (OHCS) to devise a uniform methodology to set out regional housing needs in terms of existing units and units needed within the next 20 years period by housing type and affordability for owners and renters. This methodology would obviate the many disparate methodologies now used by local governments and would 鈥渃ount鈥� the houseless, which generally had not been done. Further, many local governments used straight-line projections, so more affluent communities were less likely to plan for housing for lower socio-economic classes. Moreover, because the calculations were undertaken on a regional basis, they avoid disputes among adjacent jurisdictions over housing obligations. Following the regional analysis, the state would then allocate future housing needs among the urban areas of the region.

That proposed OHNA methodology divided the state into seven regions, each having a housing allocation of over a 20-year period. In offering comment on the proposed methodology, the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) commented: 鈥淭he current (land use) system chronically underestimates housing need, especially for lower-income households, does not enforce responsibilities of local governments to comprehensively address housing need, and perpetuates geographic patterns of racial and economic segregation, exclusion, and inequity.鈥�

The 2021 Legislature gave the go-ahead for finalization and completion of the new methodology that will be considered by the 2023 Legislature. This new system would supersede local housing need projections, but, more importantly, be the basis for determining the housing obligations for individual cities in the future.

The Housing Production Strategy (HPS) process would require adoption of local strategies to address housing needs. The HPS process also moves beyond the obligation to provide sufficient lands for housing to actual identification of means to ensuring that such housing is built. DLCD would review those strategies every six years for cities within the Metro region and eight years for other large cities.

The law provides for graduated state involvement in city planning and regulatory activity if the city does not take action to implement its identified strategies, ranging from providing state resources and enhanced review to the use of an enforcement order, which could result in direct state control of these activities or withholding of state-shared revenues until compliance is achieved. If the state follows through, these measures will be significant incentives to compliance with state expectations.

The OHNA was originally modeled after California鈥檚 Regional Housing Needs Analysis, under which the state undertook the analysis of projected needs and then allocated them to regions. However, there was local resistance and no effective and immediate enforcement, so Oregon chose the OHNA model, to align with the HPS process, which expressly includes enforcement authority.

The OHNA demonstrated the immediacy of a revised housing production system when it calculated a shortfall of 140,000 housing units at present and a projected shortage of 584,000 units over the next 20 years. By requiring OHCS to be involved in housing planning, along with DLCD, public elements of housing financing are joined with land use planning to provide a coordinated approach to addressing Oregon鈥檚 housing shortfall.

These agencies propose to focus their efforts along three main lines: increasing total housing unit production, increasing publicly funded and affordable unit production, and supporting the development of inclusive and integrated communities. The goals are worthy and the proposed program is likely to occur unless the Legislature gets 鈥渃old feet鈥� from political fallout in an election year. If it does occur, Oregon will easily be the nation鈥檚 most involved state in the financing and planning for housing.

Edward Sullivan is a retired practitioner of land use and municipal law with more than 50 years of experience. Contact him at [email protected].

Carrie Richter is an attorney specializing in land use and municipal law at Bateman Seidel. Contact her at 503-972-9903 or [email protected].

The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the preceding commentary are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the Daily Journal of Commerce or its editors. Neither of the authors nor the 91视频 guarantees the accuracy or completeness of any information published herein.