Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek has established a new state office to support housing production and enforce housing production laws.

The Housing Accountability and Production Office (HAPO) stems from legislation enacted in 2024. The office will bolster housing production by creating a more predictable regulatory environment and providing resources to local governments, the governor’s office stated in a news release on Tuesday.

HAPO can be a “missing catalyst” to boost housing production, Kotek stated.

“My North Star is for every Oregonian to be able to afford a home,” she stated. “Our economic prosperity depends on it. I believe that we can get this done. And, it is still a monumental task. Many counties, cities, and builders have leaned in to tackle this generational crisis, and the state should do everything possible to make it easier.”

HAPO is a joint office of the Department of Land Conservation and Development and the Building Codes Division, which is part of the Department of Consumer and Business Services.

The office will offer technical assistance but also enforce state housing production laws by investigating noncompliance and working with local governments to address issues. The office will also work to identify state resources for developers and local governments, and conduct research on housing production.

HAPO is jointly managed by Joel Madsen and Tony Rocco. The new office was created by Senate Bill 1537 in 2024.

“The Housing Accountability and Production Office will serve as a bridge between our local government partners and our housing developers and builders across the state,” Rocco stated. “We have the tools to support collaboration on the foundational goal we all share of building more safe, efficient and cost-effective housing for all Oregonians.”

The post Oregon housing production office opens appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

PORTLAND — Oregon lawmakers have voted to repeal the state’s contentious wildfire hazard map, which subjected homeowners in certain areas at high risk of wildfires to stricter building codes and requirements to reduce vegetation on their properties.

The measure passed the state House with just one vote against on Tuesday, after passing the state Senate unanimously in April. Republicans had called for the map’s repeal throughout the legislative session and accused Democrats of stalling it. The bill now heads to Gov. Tina Kotek for her signature.

“Despite an incredibly frustrating political process, we appreciate the members who have chosen to do the right thing in repealing these maps,” Republican House Minority Leader Christine Drazan stated.

She added in her statement that the maps had created “chaos” in rural areas.

An updated version of the state-developed maps released earlier this year created new rules for people living in the most fire-prone areas that also border wildlands such as forests or grasslands. The building and so-called defensible space provisions impacted 6 percent of the state’s roughly 1.9 million tax lots, a reduction from an earlier version developed in 2022 but retracted after homeowners raised concerns that it would increase insurance premiums.

The building codes were set to require new construction in high hazard areas in the so-called wildland-urban interface to have fire-resistant features, and to apply to existing homes if certain upgrades were made.

The bill passed by the Legislature revokes those defensible space and building code requirements, instead directing state agencies to create model codes that local governments can choose to adopt.

The two maps showing wildfire hazard levels and the wildland-urban interface were released by the Oregon Department of Forestry and developed by Oregon State University scientists.

Under a state law passed in 2023, insurers cannot use a wildfire hazard map produced by a state agency to cancel or decline to renew a homeowner insurance policy, or to increase premiums. But many opponents of the maps said they were flawed and placed burdens on homeowners.

Experts who worked on the maps said they were an important step in identifying and protecting fire-prone areas as the state continues to contend with record-breaking wildfires. Oregon’s wildfire season last year was a record in terms of cost and acres burned, and wind-fueled blazes over Labor Day weekend in 2020 killed nine people and destroyed thousands of homes.

California, Arizona and New Mexico have had wildfire hazard maps for years. Last year, lawmakers in Washington state ordered the creation of a statewide wildfire risk map.

The post Oregon lawmakers repeal wildfire hazard map appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Matt Rozzell has been selected to serve as the city of Portland’s new building official, beginning Dec. 22.

The building official is responsible for administration and enforcement of the city’s building permitting, plan review and inspection programs. This person acts as the city’s building code expert and serves the final authority for all building code interpretations and rulings in the city. At the Bureau of Development Services, the building official delegates authority to bureau employees for the intake, review, issuance and inspection of permits and other functions required to administer and enforce state and national building codes.

Rozzell has more than 15 years of local government experience overseeing the review of development plans and implementation of building codes. For the past four years, he served as the building codes administrator for Clackamas County, where he managed a team of 50 professionals in plan review, permitting and inspections.

Rozzell also previously served as the development services manager and building official for the city of Happy Valley, where he managed the building division and oversaw enforcement of building codes. In 2015 and 2016 with BDS, he managed a team of 26 life safety plan reviewers.

Rozzell holds numerous certifications from the International Code Council and the Oregon Building Codes Division. He is a journeyman plumber and an experienced inspector of building, fire, plumbing and mechanical plans. He is a past president of the Oregon Building Officials Association and was its Building Official of the Year in 2018. He has a bachelor’s degree in business management from Marylhurst University and an associate’s degree in industrial technology from Clackamas Community College.

In his new role, Rozzell will lead a team that manages the process through which permit applicants may appeal decisions of city plan reviewers and request alternative ways to meet the intent of a code provision. The building official is empowered to provide an official interpretation of applicable codes, and decisions may be appealed to one of the appeals boards that the building official’s team supports. The building official also works closely with the fire marshal and other city permitting bureaus to ensure consistent implementation of applicable building codes.

Rozzell replaces Terry Whitehill, who is preparing to retire after serving as the city’s building official since 2006. Whitehill has agreed to assist the transition over the next few months.

The post New Portland building official on the way appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The city of Portland on Oct. 1 will adopt the new statewide Oregon Structural Specialty Code, which comes with new regulations regarding mass timber and much more.

There will be a phase-in period from Oct. 1-Dec. 31, 2019, when applicants will have the option of submitting documents for permits using either the current OSSC adopted in 2014 or the new OSSC. After Jan. 1, 2020, all permits must meet the requirements of the new OSSC.

The Portland Bureau of Development Services recommends submission of development applications no later than Dec. 16 to ensure the project is vested under the 2014 OSSC.

For projects in the city’s phased permitting process, at a minimum, foundation or structural partial permits must be submitted by Dec. 31 in order to be vested under the 2014 OSSC. An excavation and shoring partial permit will not be sufficient to vest a building under the 2014 code, according to BDS.

“Oregon is adopting the 2018 International Building Code, which will become the 2019 OSSC,” said Terry Whitehill, the city’s Building Official. “That’s the base model code. We’re also adopting the 2019 Oregon Mechanical Specialty Code, and they both will go into effect on October 1.”

If land use review is required, it must be substantially complete before an applicant may submit an application for a building permit.

There are many changes in the new code.

“One of the big things we’ve incorporated in this code cycle are a bunch of changes for mass-timber construction,” Whitehill said.

The regulations, including three separate categories of mass timber construction, were already in place as interim rules set to take effect in the 2021 International Building Code, he added.

Also, Oregon is adopting new energy code requirements that will be mirrored by the city.

“Those are probably the two biggest things, but there are plenty of other changes and clarifications,” Whitehill said.

The post New building code scheduled to take effect in Portland appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

The International Code Council is on track to approve a series of code changes that could help spread the use of mass timber in high-rises.

Unofficial voting results on proposed code changes were released this week and, according to the Construction Specifier, all 14 involving tall mass timber passed. The proposals would create three new types of allowable mass-timber construction, set new fire-safety regulations, and redefine allowable heights and number of allowable stories for mass-timber buildings. The changes are expected to be incorporated into the 2021 International Building Code.

The three new types of construction are: Type IV-A, which would allow mass-timber buildings up to 18 stories with gypsum wallboard on all mass-timber elements; Type IV-B, which would allow buildings up to 12 stories with limited area of exposed mass-timber walls and ceilings; and Type IV-C, which would allow buildings up to nine stories with all exposed mass-timber elements designed with at least two hours of fire resistance.

The 2021 code development cycle will continue throughout 2019, with additional structural requirements for mass-timber buildings to be considered. Final approval is expected to come in October. Release of the 2021 International Building Code is expected by late 2020 and will include a full set of codes.

The post Tall timber code changes nearing final approval appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Oregon has issued new building codes for mass-timber construction, becoming the first state in the nation to provide an alternate path to regulating tall wood buildings.

The new rules come as more developers consider building with cross-laminated timber (CLT). State officials and timber advocates have strongly backed the material in an effort to support Oregon’s multibillion-dollar timber industry.

The , as the new code is formally known, was finalized Aug. 8. The code is drawn from the 2021 International Building Code, said Richard Rogers, chief building official with the Oregon Building Codes Division.

For the first time, the new code allows construction of tall wood structures in the state. Previously, wood buildings could not be more than six stories tall.

“You can take this to any jurisdiction in the state, and (they) have to accept it,” Rogers said. “Subject to these limitations, everybody can build using mass timber.”

The code includes requirements for sprinklers and fire resistance. Building proposals are still subject to local zoning and design requirements.

The Statewide Alternate Method still requires a concrete masonry steel core to take up lateral loads.

“We thought it was a good, measured step allowing the use of the product,” Rogers said.

A number of projects in the Portland-metro area are using CLT. They include the First Tech Credit Union building in Hillsboro and the District Office project from Beam Development and Urban Development + Partners in Portland’s Central Eastside.

Several CLT buildings have already opened in Portland, including Carbon 12 and Albina Yard.

But CLT has also run into serious problems. A number of CLT panels at Oregon State University’s Peavy Hall project were found to have construction defects, forcing delays. The defects were found after a subfloor collapsed during construction.

Those panels were manufactured by D.R. Johnson, a manufacturer in southern Oregon.

“D.R. Johnson acknowledged the problem,” said Ken Bland, vice president for codes and regulations for the American Wood Council, a trade group of wood products manufacturers. “They identified the place in their manufacturing process that was improper. They fixed it. I think it does underscore the need for the strict quality control standards that are in place.”

The CLT subfloor collapse in Corvallis didn’t influence the state codes, Rogers said.

“We haven’t changed anything in direct response to that incident,” he said.

CLT’s momentum hit another bump in the road when development of Framework – a planned 12-story CLT building in the Pearl District – halted suddenly. The developer, Project^, announced in July the project was being put on hold indefinitely. Project^ blamed escalating construction costs, fluctuating tax-credit markets and inflation. The project was heavily subsidized with various grants.

The new approval process should clear the path for future proposals, Bland said.

“Like any new technology that’s coming online, it’s a matter of volume, and hopefully the Statewide Alternate Method will open the door for more projects, which will increase production and all of that,” he said.

The post Oregon building codes now cover mass timber appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

While Oregon developers seem to be taking more direct action when it comes to mass-timber building techniques, Washington lawmakers are also trying to leave their mark on the industry.

According to a recent report in industry publication The Architect’s Newspaper, Washington Gov. Jay Inslee just signed into law. The legislation directs the state’s building code council to “adopt rules for the use of mass-timber products for residential and commercial building construction.”

This would allow state and local jurisdictions to work mass timber into local building and zoning codes, which is a necessary step toward the wider adoption of wood and mass-timber technology.

Industry figures are voicing support for the legislation, saying it is just one more means of addressing a shortage of skilled workers that has affected contractors on both the residential and commercial fronts.

“Washington state is currently experiencing a construction boom, which is great for our industry and our state’s economy,” said Andrea Smith, marketing and communications manager for the Southwestern Washington Contractors Association. “However, it is no secret that the construction industry is facing a workforce shortage as well … Cross-laminated timber represents an improvement in construction technology that has the potential to accelerate construction timelines while simultaneously reducing building costs.”

Oregon is also a pioneer in adopting cross-laminated timber (CLT) technology.

Riddle-based manufacturer D.R. Johnson was the first in the country to become certified to produce CLT panels for use in wood-framed tall-building construction.

Freres, a company from Lyons, Oregon, recently introduced cross-laminated plywood panels that functionally serve the same purpose as CLT, while Oregon State University runs the National Center for Advanced Wood Products Manufacturing and Design and is currently building a brand new $79 million college of forestry building made from CLT.

In Washington, the state building code council will use applicable national and international standards as set forth by the International Building Code to guide CLT regulation. The IBC, meanwhile, is in the process of analyzing new guidelines for mass-timber structures up to 18 stories tall. An IBC ad hoc committee will begin hearing public testimony next month on possible revisions to the code, which already allows for CLT use in buildings up to six stories tall.

This is not the first move in favor of mass timber made by Washington legislators. Lawmakers also introduced , which would require all public buildings of 12 or fewer stories to be constructed using CLT. While the bill did not pass out of committee during the 2018 legislative session, timber proponents are still encouraged, pointing out it is the first such bill in the country to be put forward at the state level.

Oregon, by contrast, does not actually have legislation mandating the use of mass timber in public construction, while in other parts of the country there still are questions about the structural and fire safety of the technology when used in tall buildings.

Those concerns were heightened recently when the new OSU College of Forestry building experienced the collapse last month of a 20-foot-long and four-foot-wide CLT subfloor. No one was injured in the incident, which also did little to dent university officials’ faith in mass timber as a viable construction technology.

“We’re committed to CLT, and we believe it’s been demonstrated across Europe and Canada as a safe construction method,” OSU spokesman Steve Clark told the 91��Ƶ. “This university has helped bring CLT to testing and documentation and been a champion of it, so we’re completely in support of it.”

Other developers are moving quickly to take advantage of the new legislation. An article in The Columbian earlier this week showed off to build a 12-story CLT commercial building at The Waterfront Vancouver development.

“This has the potential to allow for more widespread usage of CLT in our great state of Washington,” Smith said with regard to SB 5450. “That is why you see its proposed use in the Timberhouse building on Block 3 of the Vancouver Waterfront development project.”

The post Washington state to develop building codes for mass-timber construction appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

President Barack Obama has unveiled a package of building codes intended to safeguard against natural disasters, particularly those related to climate change.

The United States doesn’t have a national building code, as some nations do. U.S. states and local jurisdictions tend to adopt codes supported by the International Code Council.

The building code changes incorporate “principles of resilience.” The need for seismic resiliency in the West was discussed at a recent conference. Resilient codes could make an area more likely to receive federal disaster relief funds.

Obama declared May National Building Safety Month and publicized a number of actions taken at various government agencies. For instance, FEMA – the Federal Emergency Management Agency – committed to exploring an incentive program involving a disaster deductible requirement for the Public Assistance Program. The plan would allow states to earn credits toward their deductible requirement through adoption and enforcement of building codes, according to a White House fact sheet.

Other programs include new maps and standards for tornado resilience, a website by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to promote more resilient communities and a report by the Environmental Protection Agency for communities to use when addressing climate change.

The public agencies were joined by a number of educational and professional organizations, including the American Institute of Architects, U.S. Green Building Council, Urban Land Institute and Associated General Contractors.

The AGC “by and large” supports the Obama initiatives, national spokesman Brian Turmail said.

“I think we’re in a very hopeful situation,” he said. “We think this is a reasonable and commonsense measure.”
Given that the U.S. is so large and geographically diverse, Turmail praised the measures for not taking a one-size-fits-all approach.

“Obviously, the codes should be different in a place that’s more likely to get hit by a hurricane than somewhere where you’re more worried about shifts in seismic activity,” he said.

The post Natural disasters are targets of federal code changes appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

One month before it’s due to take effect, the first statewide solar code is going back to the drawing board.

A code developed by the Oregon Building Codes Division will establish requirements for installing photovoltaic systems. But the code would limit which parts a solar installer could use to attach solar panels to roofs. That doesn’t sit well with solar installers, solar manufacturers or the people in charge of writing the code.

Solar racking is the structural system that attaches photovoltaic panels to roofs. In Oregon, any electrical component on a solar photovoltaic system needs to be certified to a . It was created and vetted by Underwriters Laboratories, an organization that researches new products and writes safety standards.

Racking is a structural system, and not an electrical system. Racking on a metal roof, however, could act as a ground, or a return path for electric currents from photovoltaic systems, said Aeron Teverbaugh, policy analyst for the Building Codes Division. That’s why the committee developing the code decided to require UL1703. That decision, however, needs some rethinking, Teverbaugh said.

Only Portland manufacturer SolarWorld offers racking with such a certification – as part of a solar kit. A solar kit packages all of the components needed to wire a home for solar, but installers say these kits are less efficient. In addition, securing electrical certification for other racking systems is an expensive proposition for manufacturers.

“We found we were putting a constraint on installations,” Teverbaugh said. “If you put up a SolarWorld kit, that’s 99 percent going to have a UL certification. If you buy separate components from Sanyo and someone else’s racking system, those may not be.”

Many solar installers choose components from different manufacturers to offer the best price and most efficiency for their customers, said Andrew Koyaanisqatsi, president of Solar Energy Solutions. Oftentimes, buying a solar kit is about 10 percent more expensive than buying individual parts, he said.

While racking should be thoroughly reviewed by an engineer to be sure it can handle snow weight, and torque from inclement weather, Koyaanisqatsi said certifying a structural component for electrical safety just doesn’t make sense.

“Requiring a racking system to be UL certified is crazy and absurd,” Koyaanisqatsi said. “A racking system is grounded to the photovoltaics, but it’s also grounded to the house.”

Requiring racking to be UL1703 certified would also give unfair advantage to companies that have the certified equipment, said John Patterson, president of Mr. Sun Solar. Larger solar manufacturers may be able to pay for workers to certify their equipment, but others would be cut out of the market, Patterson said.

“All that’s necessary for your racking to be safe is to have a structural engineer with the city approve any racking being used,” Patterson said. “Requiring UL certification for racking would be a big mistake.”

The state’s Construction Industry Energy Board will meet on Sept. 28 to make recommendations on how a less restrictive safety requirement can be put into place. The code is scheduled to take effect Oct. 1.

“We want to make sure the prescriptive path (for solar installations) isn’t so narrow it doesn’t get used,” Teverbaugh said.

The post Oregon solar code needs tweaking appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Living buildings are being constructed from Seattle to Portland. But in between the two cities, in Clark County, no one is building net-zero-energy projects. The reason, according to county sustainability coordinator Pete Dubois, is that local building codes won’t allow it.

For the next five years, however, Clark County will be testing to see if changes should be made to building and development codes to allow for more advanced green building construction. The county will relax certain building codes to allow six pilot living buildings to be built in the area, but it remains to be seen whether those changes will become permanent.

“It’s a little scary for us because our job is to enforce and write code,” Debois said. “The goal of this is to see how we can maintain the intent of code while creating a more fluid process that allows builders to the do right thing.”

The Living Building Challenge, which requires all of a building’s energy to be produced on-site, is widely considered the most stringent green building program.

A recent study by the Cascadia Green Building Council found that the 2006 international building, mechanical and fire codes used in Clark County contained 50 possible obstacles to constructing living buildings.

In Portland, when building codes conflict with the Living Building Challenge, city staffers review building designs and hand out special approvals on a case-by-case basis. Portland also has altered some of its codes to make it easier for builders to install solar panels and treat storm water on-site.

Katie Spataro, research director for the Cascadia Green Building Council, would like to see something similar happen in Clark County.

“In some instances, the regulatory agencies in (Clark County) weren’t open-minded enough to look at these projects and support them through the approval process,” Spataro said. “With this ordinance, those agencies can start to see how they can institutionally support innovative projects.”

A major barrier to constructing living building projects in Clark County is that codes there require all potable and non-potable water to be connected to the public water system. In order to meet Living Building Challenge requirements, however, a building’s water must be completely treated and reused on-site, Spataro said. In addition, land-use and development codes include height restrictions that increase the difficulty of installing solar photovoltaic systems and wind turbines that allow living buildings to produce their own energy.

Many architects and builders in Clark County want to work on more sustainable projects, according to Vancouver-based architect Timothy Buckley. Constructing a net-zero or energy-efficient home can be more expensive. But energy efficiency is attractive to buyers, who often are willing to pay more up front in exchange for utility savings later, Buckley said.

“There are a lot of savvy builders and architects who understand that this helps their business,” Buckley said. “Originally, home-buyer demand was about granite countertops. Now it’s about how much a house will cost in the long run.”

Buckley will be working with the county in the coming months to construct a living building for Evergreen Habitat for Humanity. Executive Director Kristina Aitchison hopes the project will allow her organization to build more energy-efficient homes in the future.

“It’s our goal to provide affordable homes, and also homes that are affordable to operate,” Aitchison said. “I don’t think every house can be built this way, but in the future it will be easier for us to go to that next level after this pilot.”

Promoting living buildings and other sustainable building projects is important for the county economically, Dubois said, especially as cities in Clark County compete with Seattle and Portland to attract sustainable businesses. With the county’s pilot ordinance in effect, he hopes to discover that living buildings can be built as safely as any other. The county is accepting applications for other living building projects for the pilot.

“It will all come back to incentivizing what you want and disincentivizing what you don’t want,” Dubois said. “We want affordable houses and new businesses that support green. Hopefully we will discover a triple bottom line of equity, environmental consciousness and economic benefit with this ordinance.”

The post Living buildings get a test run in Clark County appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.