HomeMy WebLinkAbout2020 04 21 PC Communication Memorandum for Code Update 4_21_20COMMUNICATION MEMORANDUM Meeting Date: 4/21/2020 Staff Contact/Dept.: Mark Rust/DPW Staff Phone No: 541-726-3654 S P R I N G F I E L D PLANNING COMMISSION Council Goals: Encourage Economic Development and Revitalization through Community Partnerships INFORMATION SHARE: The Planning Commission received an update on the Development Code Update Project at their regular March 17, 2020. Since that update a lot has changed. The continually emerging COVID 19 situation has created a need to reevaluate public outreach methods as well as public meetings in general. This has impacted the previously planned community open house for Phase 1, Housing, of the project as part of the Community Engagement Plan. It has also impacted the plan to have in person meetings for the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for phase 2, Employment lands. Moving forward we plan to modify tasks for phase 1 to allow additional time to gather community input. We are exploring the option with Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) to create and host an online open house rather than an in person open house. Additionally, we plan to extend the public outreach timeline of
the Housing updates. We anticipate delaying the adoption process initially by 3 months to accommodate the extended public outreach timeline. Depending on how events continue to transpire, it may make sense to combine the adoption process for Phase 1, Housing with the adoption process for Phase 2, Employment
lands. This would be a delay of 9 months. Without knowing when and how efforts to combat COVID 19 will change, we will continually evaluate the situation and make adjustments as necessary. For continuing to move forward with the beginning steps of Phase 2, Employment lands, since the (TAC) was just appointed by the Planning Commission, acting as the Committee for Citizen Involvement, on March 17, 2020, we have not convened a first meeting of the TAC at this point. We are working on the logistics of holding completely virtual meetings. This will allow us to move forward with the code audit and drafting revisions to the employment lands sections of the code. Lastly, we want to provide a quick update to the progress at the state level on the Middle Housing legislation, House Bills 2001 and 2003 (2019). The Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD, “the Department”) recently updated their Frequently Asked Questions for HB 2001/2003. The FAQ’s are attached. Staff continues to participate remotely in the Technical Advisory Committees and Rules Advisory Committee for this legislation.
One of the larger topics to be discussed recently related to middle housing is the requirements around parking, The Department will likely be recommending to the Land Conservation and Development
Commission (LCDC, “the Commission”) for rule making that jurisdictions not be allowed to require more than two off street parking spaces for a duplex (one per unit). The City of Springfield Development Code, as recently adopted as part of the Transportation System Plan (TSP) Implementation Project, requires: 1 space for each dwelling when paved on street parking is available directly abutting the property and there are no adopted plans to remove the on-street parking; or 2 spaces for each dwelling when no paved on street parking in available directly abutting the property or when the existing on street parking is planned to be removed as part of an adopted plan. The current requirement in Springfield requires more parking than the likely DLCD recommended requirement. With the city’s draft housing development code changes that are out for public review currently, no changes were proposed to be made to the parking requirements. The discussion related to parking for other middle housing types (triplex, fourplex, townhomes, and
cottage clusters) has not occurred yet at the state level. Much of the discussion around minimizing parking requirements is being justified based on required parking being a barrier to development, increasing cost of housing, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The Department studied costs and usage of parking and concluded that “…allowing jurisdictions to impose more than a two space minimum parking mandate
for duplexes would be contrary to the Department’s statutory obligations under HB 2001 and EO 20-04.” Executive Order (EO) 20-04 is the order recently signed by the Governor that directs the Department to “exercise any and all authority and discretion vested in them by law to help facilitate Oregon’s achievement of the GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions reduction goals set forth in paragraph 2 of this Executive Order”. The Department further finds that “There is a robust correlation with minimum parking
standards and increased automobile mode share, and compelling evidence that greater minimum parking standards are a cause rather than a symptom of increased automobile mode share.”
The project team is working together and will keep the Planning Commision informed as things progress related to progress and changes on the Code Update Project.
For project questions please contact Mark Rust, mrust@springfield-or.gov
HB 2001 and HB 2003 Frequently Asked Questions
Updated on March 25, 2020
House Bill 2001
Requirements for Duplexes
Which jurisdictions will be required to allow duplexes?
All Oregon cities with a population of 10,000 or more, unincorporated areas within the
Portland Metro boundary that are served by sufficient urban services, and all cities within
the Portland Metro boundary with a population of more than 1,000. A list is here:
<https://www.oregon.gov/lcd/UP/Documents/2019-11-
20_CityList_HB2001_HB2003.pdf>
Where will they be allowed?
Duplexes must be allowed “on each lot or parcel zoned for residential use that allows for
the development of detached single family dwellings.”
What is meant by “a duplex on each lot or parcel zoned for residential use that
allows for the development of detached single-family dwellings”?
A local government that allows single-family dwellings in a residentially zoned lot or
parcel must also allow for the development of a duplex. The local government may
regulate the siting and design of the duplex so long as the regulations do not, individually
or cumulatively, deter the development of duplexes through unreasonable cost and
delay. More definitive guidance on this phrase will be provided with the adoption of
administrative rules by the Land Conservation and Development Commission.
How will these requirements affect the development standards in my city/county?
Currently, the Department of Land Conservation and Development is only developing
rules for duplex requirements. Once administrative rules are adopted, cities outside
Portland Metro with populations between 10,000 and 25,000 (referred to as “Medium
Cities”) will be required to adopt compliant development codes by June 30, 2021. Final
guidance will be provided with the adoption of administrative rules.
What happens if a jurisdiction does not adopt a compliant development code by
the statutory deadline?
If a jurisdiction does not adopt a compliant development code by the statutory deadline,
a model ordinance adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission
(LCDC) will apply directly and will pre-empt any existing local standards regulating
duplex development. This model ordinance is under development and expected to be
adopted by LCDC by August 2020.
Requirements for other middle housing types
Which jurisdictions will be required to permit other middle housing types (i.e.
triplexes, quadplexes, townhouses, and cottage clusters)?
Attachment 1, Page 1 of 10
All Oregon cities with a population of more than 25,000, unincorporated areas within the
Portland Metro boundary that are served by sufficient urban services, and all cities within
the Portland Metro boundary with a population of more than 1,000 (referred to as “Large
Cities”). A list of these jurisdictions is here: <
https://www.oregon.gov/lcd/UP/Documents/2019-11-20_CityList_HB2001_HB2003.pdf>
Where will they be permitted?
Middle housing types listed in HB 2001 other than duplexes must be allowed “in areas
zoned for residential use that allow for the development of detached single family
dwellings.”
What is meant by “in areas zoned for residential use that allow for the
development of detached single-family dwellings”?
The Department of Land Conservation and Development has only just begun developing
rules for “Large City” middle housing requirements. The exact interpretation of ”in areas”
is pending development through rulemaking. More definitive guidance on this phrase will
be provided with the adoption of administrative rules.
What is meant by “Local governments may regulate siting and design of middle
housing required to be permitted under this section, provided that the regulations
do not, individually or cumulatively, discourage the development of all middle
housing types permitted in the area through unreasonable costs or delay”?
The intent of HB 2001 is make the development of middle housing types equally as
feasible as single-family dwellings. As such, standards, approval criteria, or processes
that impose additional burden on the development of middle housing types above the
burden placed upon single family dwellings in the same zone are considered
unreasonable - and therefore not in compliance with the intent of HB 2001.
How will local governments know their regulations would not be determined to
result in “unreasonable cost or delay”?
The administrative rules and model code adopted through this rulemaking process by
the Land Conservation and Development Commission will provide a set of development
standards that are considered to be reasonable. Additionally, the rules will define certain
parameters for development regulations which will provide jurisdictions with clear
guidance as to what is considered unreasonable cost or delay. More definitive guidance
on this phrase will be provided with the adoption of administrative rules.
How will these requirements affect development standards related to:
Density
Dimensional Standards (e.g. setbacks, lot coverage, height)
Design and Solar Access
Infrastructure and Public Facilities
Parking
The Department of Land Conservation and Development has only just begun developing
rules for “Large City” middle housing requirements. Once administrative rules are
adopted, these cities will be required to adopt a development code compliant with the
Attachment 1, Page 2 of 10
HB 2001 law and rules by June 30, 2022. More definitive guidance on how the bill will
affect development standards for large cities will be provided with the adoption of
administrative rules.
What happens if a jurisdiction does not adopt a compliant development code by
the statutory deadline?
If a jurisdiction does not adopt a compliant development code by the statutory deadline,
a model ordinance adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission
(LCDC) will apply directly and will pre-empt any existing local standards regulating
duplex development. This model ordinance is under development and expected to be
adopted by LCDC by mid-November of 2020.
Infrastructure-Based Time Extension Request (IBTER)
What if infrastructure is unable to accommodate middle housing types?
A local government may request an extension of time to enact the required regulations
based on an application identifying an infrastructure constraint (water, sewer, storm
drainage, or transportation) to accommodating middle housing development in a specific
geographic area. In order for this extension request to be approved by the Department,
the local government must also provide a plan of actions to remedy the infrastructure
deficiency.
When must an Infrastructure-Based Time Extension Request be submitted?
A “Medium City” must submit an extension request by December 31, 2020. A “Large
City” must submit an extension request by June 30, 2021.
What is considered “significantly deficient” infrastructure?
HB 2001 states that local governments may request an infrastructure-based time
extension if infrastructure is currently significantly deficient, or is expected to be by
December 31, 2023. Of course, the level of deficiency is dependent upon the
infrastructure system. The Rulemaking Advisory Committee and the DLCD project team
are working with technical experts to determine this criteria. The exact interpretation of
this section of the bill is currently under development in rulemaking. More definitive
guidance on this phrase will be provided with the adoption of administrative rules.
How much development/redevelopment can be anticipated or assumed for an
extension request?
HB 2001 provides at least some guidance as to how much redevelopment a jurisdiction
could reasonably anticipate as a result of adopting middle housing development
standards. The bill states that a local government may not assume an increase in
residential capacity above achieved density by more than 3% for the purposes of
accommodating needed housing over a 20-year planning period. For the purposes of
calculating if existing infrastructure can accommodate this growth by December 31,
2023, draft administrative rules currently under development have simplified this
redevelopment rate to a growth rate of 1% in infill development situations and 3% in
greenfield development situations.
Attachment 1, Page 3 of 10
How long of an extension can be granted?
A local government is expected to make good faith action to remedy an infrastructure
deficiency in a timely manner. The proposed length of the initial time extension is five
years, with the opportunity for a one-time additional five year extension.
How does a jurisdiction prepare an IBTER for an area where they do not have
ownership or authority over a type of infrastructure such as a State highway or
service provider district?
Parameters for ensuring coordination between local governments and service providers
is currently in development as part of rulemaking. More definitive guidance on this will be
provided with the adoption of administrative rules.
Requirements for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
How will HB 2001 change how ADUs are regulated?
The new law prohibits jurisdictions from requiring owner-occupancy or off-street parking
for ADUs. However, such regulations may be applied if the ADU is used for vacation
occupancy.
What is the difference between an ADU and a duplex?
There may be rare situations where a proposed development could meet the definition of
both a duplex and a single-family dwelling with an internal ADU. In these situations, the
property owner will be allowed to elect which definition they wish to apply to their
proposed development. The property owner is not allowed to define their proposed
development as both or change their election.
Will HB 2001 require jurisdictions to allow both an ADU and duplex on a single
lot?
We are currently exploring this legal question as part of rulemaking. More definitive
guidance on this will be provided with the adoption of administrative rules.
General Questions
What is the Model Code? How will it be applied?
If a jurisdiction does not adopt a compliant development code by the statutory deadline
outlined in the bill, then a model ordinance developed by the Land Conservation and
Development Commission (LCDC) will apply directly. Currently, there are two model
ordinances under development – one applicable to “Medium” cities and another
applicable to “Large” Cities.
What is the difference between the Model Code and Administrative Rules?
The purpose of the Model Code is three-fold. Firstly, it provides an ordinance that can
apply directly in the event a jurisdiction does not adopt an ordinance that complies with
HB 2001. Secondly, local governments can choose to adopt the model code “wholesale”
and be assured that the standards are HB 2001-compliant. Thirdly, it defines standards
Attachment 1, Page 4 of 10
for minimum compliance to provide guidance to jurisdictions that seek to develop their
own middle housing standards.
The administrative rules outline the process and criteria by which the Department of
Land Conservation and Development will evaluate middle housing ordinances adopted
by local jurisdictions to determine whether they comply with the intent of HB 2001.
If a jurisdiction reaches a statutorily-defined population threshold, when will they
be required to comply with HB 2001?
The required timeline for compliance with HB 2001 is currently under development as a
part of rulemaking. More definitive guidance on this will be provided with the adoption of
administrative rules.
How will existing and future Codes, Covenants, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) be
affected by HB 2001?
HB 2001 prohibits the establishment of new Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions or
similar instruments that would prohibit middle housing or ADUs in a residential
neighborhood. However, existing CC&Rs will remain in place.
What is meant by “clear and objective” standards? Will discretionary review
processes for middle housing be allowed under HB 2001?
OAR 660-008-0015 establishes that local governments may adopt and apply only clear
and objective standards, conditions and procedures regulating the development of
needed housing on buildable land. The standards, conditions and procedures may not
have the effect, either in themselves or cumulatively, of discouraging needed housing
through unreasonable cost or delay.
Local governments may adopt and apply an optional alternative approval process based
on approval criteria regulating appearance or aesthetics that are not clear and objective
if the applicant retains the option of proceeding under the approval process that is clear
and objective, the alternative process complies with applicable statewide land use
planning goals and rules, and the alternative approval process authorizes a density at or
above the density level authorized in the zone under the clear and objective approval
process.
In other words, local governments will be able to adopt and apply a discretionary review
process for middle housing, but all middle housing development applications must have
the option of a clear and objective review path that does not have the effect of
unreasonable cost or delay.
How will HB 2001 affect the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) expansion process?
At periodic review or at any other legislative review of the comprehensive plan or
regional framework plan that concerns the urban growth boundary and requires the
application of a statewide planning goal relating to buildable lands for residential use, a
local government must demonstrate that its comprehensive plan or regional framework
plan provides sufficient buildable lands within the urban growth boundary established
pursuant to statewide planning goals to accommodate estimated housing needs for 20
years.
Attachment 1, Page 5 of 10
HB 2001 allows jurisdictions to adopt density expectations assumed to result from the
provision of middle housing, but this expectation may not project an increase in
residential capacity above achieved density by more than three percent without
quantifiable validation of such departures.
For jurisdictions located outside of a metropolitan service district (i.e. Metro), a
quantifiable validation must demonstrate that the assumed housing capacity has been
achieved in areas that are zoned to allow no greater than the same authorized density
level within the local jurisdiction or a jurisdiction in the same region. For a metropolitan
service district, a quantifiable validation must demonstrate that the assumed housing
capacity has been achieved in areas that are zoned to allow no greater than the same
authorized density level within the metropolitan service district.
How will HB 2001 affect historic properties and districts?
Parameters for historic properties and districts in the model code and administrative
rules are currently in development as part of rulemaking. More definitive guidance on
this will be provided with the adoption of administrative rules.
Will HB 2001 affect the application of System Development Charges (SDCs),
property tax exemptions/freezes, or construction taxes?
As part of the comprehensive plan and development code amendment process, HB
2001 requires local governments to consider ordinances and policies to increase the
affordability of middle housing including:
1. Waiving or deferring system development charges
2. Adopting or amending criteria for property tax exemptions or freezes
3. Assessing a construction tax
House Bill 2003
Regional Housing Needs Analysis (RHNA)
What is the Regional Housing Needs Analysis?
The Regional Housing Needs Analysis (RHNA; pronounced “ree-na”) is a statewide
needs analysis by region to analyze and quantify the housing shortage and future needs
in our state. The methodology for this analysis is currently under development by
Oregon Housing and Community Services. HB 2003 requires that this analysis
determine housing needs of a region and of each city and Metro for a 20-year period.
Additionally, the RNHA will include analysis related to the equitable distribution of
publicly supported housing within a region and a housing shortage analysis for each city
and Metro.
This is a feasibility study of how to conduct a regional housing needs analysis in Oregon,
and the results and recommendations will be returned to the legislature for further
consideration related to how this analysis might continue to be conducted in the future.
HB 2003 requires that the methodology be completed and run by September 1, 2020,
with a report due to the Oregon Legislature by March 1, 2021.
Attachment 1, Page 6 of 10
What data will be used in this analysis? Will it provide an accurate assessment of
regional housing needs?
There is limited availability of statewide data sets that can provide sufficient level of
detail to conduct the required analysis. To ensure the analysis provides as accurate of
an assessment of regional housing needs as practical, the RHNA will utilize Census
American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) 5-year data, and
the shortage analysis will utilize Census Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy
(CHAS) data.
Will there be opportunities to include qualitative data in the RHNA? Or is it solely
quantitative?
Given the timeline and resource constraints associated with conducting a robust
qualitative methodology, the RHNA as required by HB 2003 will be conducted using
quantitative data. Recommendations in the legislative report due March 1, 2021 will
include considerations of how to improve the process, which may include the
incorporation of a qualitative component.
How are the regions defined?
Census American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS) divides
Oregon counties into discrete geographies. While it is possible to combine PUMS
regions, it is not advisable to break these regions into smaller subsregions.
Unfortunately, this means that regional boundaries are limited by the boundaries utilized
by PUMS data.
While final regions have not yet been defined, it is clear that boundaries in this first
iteration of the RHNA may not fully correspond to what may be perceived as a regional
housing market. The legislative report due March 1, 2021 will discuss the limitations of
this approach and provide recommendations on creating regions that better reflect
regional housing markets throughout the state.
What does “affordability” mean in context of the RHNA?
HB 2003 requires that the analysis must classify housing by “Affordability” which is
housing that is affordable to households with:
1. Very low income - income at or below 50 percent of the area median income
2. Low income - income above 50 percent and at or below 80 percent of the area
median income
3. Moderate income - income above 80 percent and at or below 120 percent of the area
median income
4. High income – income above 120 percent of the area median income
“Area median income” is defined in the bill as the median income for households
established by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development.
OHCS defines affordability as a household spending no more than 30% of their gross
income on housing costs.
How will this analysis be used?
Attachment 1, Page 7 of 10
The purpose of the RHNA as prescribed in HB 2003 is to conduct a one-time feasibility
study of how to conduct a regional housing needs analysis in Oregon, and the results
and recommendations will be returned to the legislature for further consideration. The
analysis will summarize the findings of the regional housing needs analysis, estimate of
housing stock, housing shortage analysis and estimate of housing necessary to
accommodate growth.
The legislative report provided by the Department of Land Conservation and
Development will evaluate the methodology and assessment produced by Oregon
Housing and Community Services. You can read about the specific requirements of this
report in Section 2 of the bill.
Housing Needs Analysis (HNA)
Which jurisdictions are required to conduct a Housing Needs Analysis?
HB 2003 requires adoption of a statewide schedule for cities with a population greater
than 10,000 to update a local Housing Needs Analysis (HNA).
When will they need to complete a Housing Needs Analysis?
Cities within Metro will be required to update HNAs every six years, cities outside Metro
must update every eight years. You can find a completed Housing Needs Analysis
Update Schedule here: <
https://www.oregon.gov/lcd/UP/Documents/Final_HNA_Schedule_20191220.pdf>
Housing Production Strategy (HPS)
What is a Housing Production Strategy? Which jurisdictions are required to
produce a Housing Production Strategy?
HB 2003 requires cities with a population greater than 10,000 to prepare and adopt a
housing production strategy, in accordance with rules adopted by DLCD. A Housing
Production Strategy (HPS) is an extension of a Housing Needs Analysis and must
include a list of specific actions that the city shall undertake to promote development
within the city to address housing needs identified in their HNA.
When will they need to produce a Housing Production Strategy?
A city is required to adopt a Housing Production Strategy within one year of the adoption
of their six or eight year Housing Needs Analysis.
What strategies will a jurisdiction need to incorporate in their HPS?
A housing production strategy (HPS) must include a list of specific actions that the city
shall undertake to promote development within the city to address housing needs
identified in their HNA. This may include:
1. The reduction of financial and regulatory impediments to developing needed
housing, including removing or easing approval standards or procedures for needed
housing at higher densities or that is affordable.
Attachment 1, Page 8 of 10
2. The creation of financial and regulatory incentives for development of needed
housing, including creating incentives for needed housing at higher densities or that
is affordable.
3. The development of a plan to access resources available at local, regional, state and
national levels to increase the availability and affordability of needed housing.
Currently, the Department of Land Conservation and Development is developing rules
that will provide further guidance on specific actions that a jurisdiction can incorporate
into Housing Production Strategies they develop and adopt.
Will there be enforcement for jurisdictions to implement strategies identified in
their HPS?
Section 6 of HB 2003 establishes Land Conservation and Development Commission
(LCDC) enforcement authority to ensure Housing Production Strategy implementation
and progress. Specific parameters for enforcement is currently under development as
part of rulemaking. More definitive guidance on this will be provided with the adoption of
administrative rules.
General Questions
If a jurisdiction reaches a statutorily-defined population threshold, when will they
be required to comply with HB 2003?
The required timeline for compliance with HB 2003 is currently under development as a
part of rulemaking. More definitive guidance on this will be provided with the adoption of
administrative rules.
Implementation
Rulemaking
What rules will be adopted for HB 2001 and HB 2003?
In response to HB 2001 and HB 2003, the Land Conservation and Development
Commission has initiated rulemaking to begin implementation of the 'middle housing'
and housing production strategy requirements. These include administrative rules for
the following elements of HB 2001 and HB 2003:
- Infrastructure Based Time Extension Request
- Middle Housing in “Medium” Cities
- Middle Housing in “Large” Cities
- Housing Production Strategy
To advise on this rulemaking, the commission directed DLCD to establish a rulemaking
advisory committee. The purpose of the committee is to ensure that both the
commission and DLCD hear from a broad group of stakeholders and interested persons
during the rulemaking process. You can find out more information about committee
meetings on the Housing Rulemaking page.
When will Administrative Rules be adopted?
Attachment 1, Page 9 of 10
Each set of Administrative Rules has its own timeline for adoption based on statutory
deadlines and priorities of LCDC. They are listed below.
Infrastructure Based Time Extension Request – To provide local governments sufficient
time to develop an IBTER, LCDC aims to adopt administrative rules by early August
2020.
Middle Housing in “Medium” Cities – The statutory required adoption date for
administrative rules is December 31, 2020, but to provide local governments sufficient
time to develop and adopt middle housing code, LCDC aims to adopt a model code and
administrative rules by early August 2020.
Middle Housing in “Large” Cities – The statutory required adoption date for
administrative rules is December 31, 2020. The anticipated date of LCDC rule adoption
is November 12-13, 2020.
Housing Production Strategy – There is no statutory deadline for Housing Production
Strategy rule adoption. The anticipated date of LCDC rule adoption is November 12-13,
2020.
How do I provide comments to DLCD, the Land Conservation and Development
Commission, the Rulemaking Advisory Committee, or the Technical Advisory
Committee during the rulemaking process?
You are welcome to submit comments electronically or in-person during the rulemaking
process. If you would like to submit comments electronically, please submit them to
housing.dlcd@state.or.us. If you would like to attend a Rulemaking or Technical
Advisory Committee meeting and submit comments in-person, please visit the Housing
Rulemaking page for additional information on time and location of these meetings.
Attachment 1, Page 10 of 10