HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Item - 2023-11-13 - Number 06.1 - Staff Memo 11-03-23 PC Mtg w-Attach (PP 22-0005)
503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Erik Olson, Long Range Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Housing Production Strategy (PP 22-0005)
DATE: November 3, 2023 MEETING DATE: November 13, 2023
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY & ACTION REQUESTED
Following the recent adoption of the 2023 Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) to analyze what
housing is needed for current and future residents (Attachment 1), the City is now required to
develop a Housing Production Strategy (HPS) that outlines what actions the City will take to
address those needs. This work is a part of the City Council goal to, “Conserve the community’s
character, sense of place, and quality of life by planning for change and growth,” and the
associated Council initiative to, “Continue work on… the housing production strategy.”
The 2023 HNA was adopted on October 17, 2023 (LU 23-0023), in compliance with the
Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) timeline that requires the City to
adopt an updated HNA by December 31, 2023. The City is now required by ORS 197.2901 to
adopt an HPS prior to December 31, 2024. Per ORS 197.290, an HPS must document the
specific tools, actions, and policies that the City plans to take to address the housing need
identified in the HNA.
This memo provides background for the Commission’s November 13 work session, which will
include a presentation with a summary of state requirements for developing an HPS, as well as
a summary of the following information from the draft Contextualized Housing Needs
Assessment (CHNA):
New data related to underserved or vulnerable populations;
A summary of existing or previous programs the City has implemented to address
housing needs; and
Initial takeaways from recent stakeholder interviews on barriers to developing needed
housing in Lake Oswego.
1 Available at https://oregon.public.law/statutes/ors_197.290.
Page 2 of 9
Staff is also seeking initial direction from the Commission regarding which strategies the HPS
Task Force should analyze in more detail.
BACKGROUND
In 2019, the Oregon Legislature passed House Bill 2003, which aimed to help communities meet
the housing needs of Oregonians. The law required all Oregon cities of more than 10,000
residents to study the future housing needs of their residents (through an HNA) [ORS 197.297
and OAR 660-008-0045] and to develop strategies that encourage the production of the
identified housing needs (through an HPS) [ORS 197.290].
The 2023 HNA found that, despite a very low assumed growth rate over the 20-year planning
horizon, the City has a need for nearly 2,000 new housing units, including over 1,100 multi-
family and middle housing units. According to the HNA, about half of those units are needed to
meet upper income ranges (greater than 120% of the Area Median Income, or AMI), while the
remaining half are needed to meet very low to middle income household needs (see
Attachment 1).
City Council formally adopted the 2023 HNA on October 17, 2023. The Commission must now
develop recommendations for an HPS to identify a set of actions that the City will take to
facilitate housing development that will best meet the needs of the community.
HOUSING PRODUCTION STRATEGY REQUIREMENTS
Per ORS 197.290, an HPS must document the specific tools, actions, and policies that the City
plans to take to address the housing need identified in the HNA. This also includes the City's
plan and timeline for adopting and implementing each strategy. DLCD will review and approve
the HPS based on (1) the adequacy of strategies to meet all identified housing needs, (2) the
appropriateness of strategies to facilitate the production of needed housing, and (3) how well
the strategies, taken as a whole, will achieve fair and equitable housing outcomes [OAR 660-
008-0055(6,7)].
The HPS focuses on how to fill the gap between the City's housing need and supply, particularly
housing available to low- and moderate-income households and low-cost rental housing. The
following basic components are required by OAR 660-008-0050 (1 – 4 and 5(c)) and this
organization is typical of those that have been adopted in other communities to date:
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment;
Community engagement process, including explanation of how the process was used to
identify, evaluate and prioritize strategies;
Strategies to Meet Future Housing Need, including descriptions of the timeline,
responsibilities, actions, and affected households, e.g., benefits and barriers to specific
underserved or vulnerable populations;
How the City will achieve Fair and Equitable Housing Outcomes; and
Page 3 of 9
Process for monitoring progress in meeting identified outcomes.
Going forward, the City will be required in three years to reflect and evaluate the progress and
effectiveness of the HPS at a mid-term checkpoint to see what strategies worked, which ones
did not, and discuss any course corrections being made to ensure all housing needs are
addressed [OAR 660-008-0060(1)].
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment
A key step in the HPS process is developing a Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment (CHNA)
[OAR 660-008-0050(1)], which builds upon previous work conducted for the HNA, to describe
the following:
Demographic, housing, and market conditions;
Housing affordability issues;
Barriers to meeting identified housing needs, including needs of traditionally
underserved and disadvantaged populations; and
Existing or previous programs the City has implemented to address housing needs.
A draft executive summary of the Lake Oswego CHNA can be found in Attachment 2.
Housing Production Strategies for Commission Discussion
City staff and the consultant team have begun to analyze potential housing policies, strategies,
and tools that the City may consider as part of its HPS. Staff and the consultant team reviewed
a master list of Housing Tools, Actions, and Policies assembled by DLCD (see Attachment 3), and
have proposed a shortened list of high-impact strategies for initial Commission consideration.
This shortened list bundles strategies together in groups based on similar concepts or
overlapping programmatic elements to facilitate meaningful Commission dialogue. For
example, while there are 6 different tax abatement strategies listed as options in Attachment 3,
they have all been grouped together under the category of “tax abatement” for the purposes of
the work session.
Additionally, the list is focused on strategies that are expected to make a significant impact on
housing production in the City, as well as strategies that require the creation of a new tax,
bond, or other revenue source to promote housing development. Low-barrier strategies have
been grouped into separate categories for discussion at future meetings. Additionally, some
strategies have been omitted because they were either:
Already being implemented by the City;
Not applicable to Lake Oswego;
Not authorized by state law or not available in Oregon; or
Page 4 of 9
Unlikely to have a meaningful impact on housing production or retention in the city
based on the team’s initial high-level assessment.
The omission of a particular strategy from this list does not mean that it will be omitted from
the HPS discussion altogether; this list is not intended to be exhaustive, but merely a starting
point to guide future discussions.
Strategies for initial Commission consideration include:
1. Floor Area Ratio (FAR), Density, Height, or Other Bonuses for Affordable Housing
The City currently allows a limited height or density bonus for affordable developments
in the WLG-OC and R-DD zones, as well as a limited lot coverage bonus within the Lake
Grove Village Center Overlay (LGVCO) for developments where housing is provided.
Pursuing this strategy would entail increasing the applicability of these bonuses or
expanding them to more zones. The City could also consider other types of zoning
bonuses, such as reduced open space requirements for affordable housing.
2. Code Audit and Amendments
The Council currently has a goal to, “Conduct a comprehensive review of the City's
development codes and processes to make our processes more efficient and predictable
and less expensive to reduce the cost of housing and commercial development.” This
strategy would advance this goal by eliminating barriers specific to housing production
in the development code, potentially addressing:
Siting and design standards that limit the feasibility of Accessory Dwelling Units
(ADUs) and middle housing;
Procedural requirements that add cost and delay to land use approvals;
Open space requirements in high-density zones;
The impact of neighborhood overlays or other regulatory provisions on housing
production;
Exclusion of single-room occupancy dwellings (SROs); and
Regulatory barriers to lot divisions.
3. Minimum Density Requirements for to-be-Annexed Land
This strategy involves requiring that a certain portion of to-be-annexed land includes a
percentage of land zoned for high-density residential use. This strategy could be
especially relevant considering the opportunity presented by the large portions of
unannexed areas within the City’s Urban Services Boundary, as well as the deficit of land
identified in the HNA for all housing types in the city.
Page 5 of 9
4. Rezone Land
This strategy would involve rezoning mixed-use or commercially-zoned properties to
better facilitate multifamily residential development. Given the deficit of residential
land identified in the HNA, there may be a need to review existing residential densities
or consider rezoning nonresidential land for housing to meet the City’s housing need.
However, it will nonetheless be important to ensure there is still adequate land available
for employment and commercial/industrial needs.
5. Infrastructure Planning to Support Housing
Infrastructure can be a significant challenge to developing housing in unannexed areas
or other areas with limited existing infrastructure. This strategy would involve
programming work via Capital Improvements Programming (CIP) so that projects to
support development of middle housing or to open up more land in an Urban Services
Boundary (USB) for the development of middle housing are constructed sooner. This
strategy would coordinate housing planning with CIP work to prioritize projects that
would support housing (e.g. a new water line, sewer pumping station).
This strategy could also involve amending existing water, sewer, and transportation
Public Facility Plans so that costs to develop on land zoned for needed housing can be
further anticipated and supported. Additionally, public utilities planning could also be
used to allow for more unit capacity, especially in areas that are up-zoned for denser
housing.
6. System Development Charges (SDCs)
This strategy involves updating the City’s Systems Development Charge (SDC) fee
schedule to be tied more directly to dwelling size. The intent is to ensure that smaller
dwellings in middle- and multifamily housing are not disproportionately burdened by
fees, and therefore encouraged. The City could consider applying SDC fees based on
square footage rather than a set fee per dwelling. Additionally, if there are appropriate
levels of parks and open space near the project, the City could opt to charge reduced
Parks SDC fees in those locations in order to encourage housing development.
Additionally, the City is in the process of updating the Parks Master Plan, so the impact
of this strategy would need to be evaluated and addressed as part of that plan as well.
7. Construction Excise Tax (CET)
A Construction Excise Tax (CET) is a tax on construction projects that can be imposed
and used to fund affordable housing. The tax may be imposed on improvements to real
property that result in a new structure or additional square footage in an existing
structure [ORS 197.309]. Staff notes that this strategy was supported by the Middle
Housing Code Advisory Committee as a tool to produce affordable middle housing
during our previous efforts to develop code amendments to comply with the middle
housing requirements of House Bill 2001.
Page 6 of 9
8. General Obligation (GO) Bonds
Following the passage of Measure 102 (2018), amending Art. XI, Sec. 9 of the Oregon
Constitution, Oregon cities can now issue voter-approved general obligation (GO) bonds
to provide direct funding for construction and other capital costs associated with the
development and construction of affordable housing. These funds can be loaned or
granted to both public and privately-owned affordable housing projects. “Affordability”
is required to be determined by voters in each jurisdiction, and can be either above or
below minimum affordability levels established for other state and federal programs.
The bonds could be paired with other financing such as Low-Income Housing Tax
Credits, or could be used for homeownership opportunities.
GO bonds are one of the few potential revenue sources for affordable housing. This
strategy would also need to be evaluated in the context of other City and Community
capital projects.
9. Tax Exemption / Abatement
There are a number of tax exemption and abatement programs the City could consider
that are intended to encourage developers to produce housing:
Nonprofit Low-Income Rental Housing Exemptions are a tool that can provide a
simplified way for affordable housing owned and operated by a nonprofit or
Community Land Trust to qualify for a property tax exemption. This is a common
tax exemption for affordable housing used by many cities in Oregon, though
work should be done to make it easier for projects/land to qualify and to
minimize the number of taxing authorities needed to grant an approval [ORS
307.540 - .548.].
Low-Income Rental Housing tax exemptions are a 20-year tax exemption for any
entity that provides regulated affordable housing, including nonprofits and for-
profit developers. Eligible properties must be offered for rent to low-income
persons (at or below 60% AMI) or held for the purpose of developing low-income
rental housing. This program does not require annual renewal and would be
available to more developers than the non-profit low-income rental housing tax
exemption program [ORS 307.515 - .537].
Vertical Housing Development Zone (VHDZ) Tax Abatement is a partial property
tax exemption program on improvements for new mixed-use development. To
qualify, a project must have improved, leasable, non-residential development on
the ground floor and residential development on the floors above. A partial
abatement on land value is allowed for each equalized floor of affordable
housing. City Council conducted a study session on September 19 regarding a
potential VHDZ pilot program to be established at the City-owned North Anchor
properties (PP 23-0006). The Council will hold a public hearing to determine
Page 7 of 9
whether to establish the proposed VHDZ pilot program on December 19, 2023
[ORS 307.841 – 867].
Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE) can be used to incentivize
production of multifamily housing with particular features or at particular price
points by offering qualifying developments a partial property tax exemption over
the course of several years [ORS 307.600 - .637].
The Homebuyer Opportunity Limited Tax Exemption (HOLTE) program provides
single-unit homes with a ten-year property tax exemption on structural
improvements to the home as long as the property and owner remain eligible
per program requirements [ORS 307.651 - .687].
As mentioned above, this list will be a starting point for Commission discussion and further
analysis, as well as recommendations by the consultant team, HPS Task Force, and City Council
in subsequent tasks. It is expected that the list will be refined or consolidated further with
assistance from the HPS Task Force; then, a refined list of strategies will be evaluated in more
detail in the next phase of the project. Please keep in mind that the City will be held
accountable by measures stated in OAR 660-008-0070 (e.g., compliance IGA, loss of DLCD
technical assistance or financial source awards, and enforcement orders) for implementing any
strategies that are eventually adopted as part of the HPS, and will have to document annual
progress towards implementing the strategies and achieving outcomes.
HPS Task Force Update
The HPS Task Force convened for its fourth meeting on October 6, 2023. At this meeting, the
HPS Task Force:
Evaluated existing City housing production measures and policies;
Reviewed new data from the CHNA related to underserved or vulnerable populations;
Received an initial summary of the highlights of stakeholder interviews on the topic of
barriers to housing production conducted to date (also from the CHNA); and
Reviewed an initial menu of housing production strategies for consideration as part of
the City’s HPS.
Due to the large amount of content that needed to be covered at the meeting, some HPS Task
Force members stated that they felt they did not have the opportunity to provide adequate
input on the initial menu of strategies. As a follow-up, staff sent an online form to all HPS Task
Force members via email that allows them to rate the strategies and provide their thoughts
about which ones to pursue in more detail. The results of this engagement are not yet available
but will be summarized at a future meeting.
Project Schedule
A summary of the proposed project schedule and scope of consultant deliverables is included in
Attachment 4, with the project schedule summarized in Table 1 below.
Page 8 of 9
Table 1: HPS Project Schedule
Task Milestone Date
Evaluate existing housing
strategies
[Task 3.1]
Housing Producer Interviews Aug – Sep 2023
HPS Task Force Meeting #4 Oct 6, 2023
Council Study Session #4 Nov 7
Planning Commission (PC) Work Session #4 Nov 13
Outline housing strategy
alternatives
[Task 3.2]
Draft Housing Strategy Alternatives Memo Nov 2023
HPS Task Force Meeting #5 Dec 8
PC Work Session #5 Jan 8, 2024
Council Study Session #5 Jan 16
Refine housing strategy
recommendations
[Task 3.3]
HPS Task Force Meeting #6 Feb 9
HPS Task Force Meeting #7 Mar 22
Community Forum / Public Workshop Apr 4
Council Study Session #6 May 7
PC Work Session #6 May 13
Initial HPS Report Draft
[Task 3.4]
Initial Draft HPS Report May 27
HPS Task Force Meeting #8 Jun 14
Council Study Session #7 Jul 16
PC Work Session #7 Jul 22
Finalize HPS for adoption
[Task 3.5]
Final HPS Report Aug 2
PC Public Hearing Sep 9
Council Public Hearing Oct 15 / Nov 5
ATTACHMENTS
This staff memo and all attachments referenced below can be found by visiting the Planning
Project webpage for the case file. Due to file size, attachments are available in the “Public
Records Folder” using this link:
https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/planning/pp-22-0005-housing-needs-and-production-strategies.
1. City of Lake Oswego 2023 Housing Needs Analysis, 09/21/2023
2. Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment Draft Summary, 10/24/2023
Page 9 of 9
3. HPS Program - List of Tools, Actions, and Policies, 02/01/2022
4. HPS Project Schedule and Scope of Work, 09/06/2023
To view these documents and other documents in the public records file, visit the Planning
Project webpage:
https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/planning/pp-22-0005-housing-needs-and-production-strategies
Source: Lake Oswego Chamber of Commerce CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, OR HOUSING NEEDS ANALYSIS (OREGON STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL 10) 20-YEAR HOUSING NEED2023 - 2043 September 21, 2023PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 1 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 1 Acknowledgments Johnson Economics prepared this report for the City of Lake Oswego. Johnson Economics and the City of Lake Oswego thank the many people who helped to develop this document. City Staff Erik Olson, Long Range Planning Manager Jessica Numanoglu, Interim Community Development Director Lake Oswego Housing Task Force Kasey Adler, Transportation Advisory Board Kyrsten Baumgart, Housing producer Phil Bertrand, Housing producer Joseph M. Buck, City Council Liaison Thea Croman, DLCD Kelly Reid, DLCD Douglas Corder, 50+ Advisory Board Pat Ginn, Resident Diana Howell, Resident Cara Kao-Young , Resident Betty Jung, Resident Yoko Kinoshita, Resident Rebecca Lane, Resident Rosalie Nowalk, Resident John E. Pauley, Resident Bruce Poinsette, Development Review Commission Phillip Stewart, Planning Commission Liaison David Tangvald, Housing producer Kimvi To, D.E.I. Advisory Board John Turchi, Resident Sarah Walker, Housing producer Consultants Brendan Buckley, Johnson Economics Andrew Parish, MIG Matt Hastie, MIG This report was prepared in accordance with the requirements of OAR 660 Division 8: Interpretation of Goal 10 Housing. This project is funded by the State of Oregon through the Department of Land Conservation and Development. The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the State of Oregon. City of Lake Oswego 380 A Ave. Lake Oswego, OR 97034 (503) 635-0270 Johnson Economics 621 SW Alder Street Suite 605 Portland, OR 97205 (503) 295-7832 PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 2 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 3 II. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 4 A. POPULATION GROWTH 5 B. HOUSEHOLD GROWTH & SIZE 5 C. FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS 5 D. GROUP QUARTERS POPULATION 6 E. HOUSING UNITS 6 F. AGE TRENDS 6 G. DIVERSITY TRENDS 8 H. PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY 10 I. INCOME TRENDS 11 J. POVERTY STATISTICS 12 K. EMPLOYMENT LOCATION TRENDS 12 III. CURRENT HOUSING CONDITIONS 14 A. HOUSING TENURE 14 B. HOUSING STOCK 14 C. NUMBER OF BEDROOMS 14 D. UNIT TYPES BY TENURE 15 E. AGE AND CONDITION OF HOUSING STOCK 16 F. HOUSING COSTS VS. LOCAL INCOMES 17 G. PUBLICLY ASSISTED HOUSING 18 IV. CURRENT HOUSING NEEDS (CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO) 20 V. FUTURE HOUSING NEEDS - 2043 (CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO) 26 VI. RECONCILIATION OF FUTURE NEED (2043) & LAND SUPPLY 32 APPENDIX A: BUILDABLE LAND INVENTORY SUMMARY 35 PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 3 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 3 I. INTRODUCTION This analysis outlines a forecast of housing need within the City of Lake Oswego. Housing need and resulting land need are forecast to 2043, consistent with the 20-year need assessment requirements of Oregon Revised Statutes.1 This report presents a housing need analysis (presented in number and types of housing units) and a residential land need analysis, based on those projections. The primary data sources used in generating this forecast were: ▪ Portland State University Population Research Center ▪ Metro ▪ U.S. Census ▪ Claritas2 ▪ Oregon Employment Department ▪ City of Lake Oswego ▪ Clackamas County ▪ Other sources are identified as appropriate. This analysis relies heavily on Census data from both the 2020 Decennial Census and the American Community Survey (ACS). All Census data feature some margin of error but remain the best source of data available on many demographic and housing subjects. One limitation of the 2020 Census is the release schedule of data sets, which takes place over several years following the year of the Census. Thus far, data has been released on: Population; Race; Latino ethnicity; number of Households; number of Housing Units; and Group Quarters population. While these are key baseline data sets utilized in this analysis, any additional nuance on demographics and housing from the 2020 Census are not yet available, with the next data release expected later in 2023. Despite the limitations, the 2020 Census is relied upon here as the best available source for the key indicators listed above in Lake Oswego, as of 2023. For more detailed data sets on demographics and housing, this analysis relies on the American Community Survey (ACS), which features a higher margin of error on all tables than the Decennial Census. The ACS is a survey of a representative sample of households which the Census uses to make estimates generalized to the population of the relevant geography. This analysis relies whenever possible on the most recent 2021 ACS 5-year estimates. The 5-year estimates have a lower margin of error than the ACS 1-year estimates. 1 ORS 197.628; OAR 660-025 2 Claritas is a third-party company providing data on demographics and market segmentation. It licenses data from the Nielson Company which conducts direct market research including surveying of households across the nation. Nielson combines proprietary data with data from the U.S. Census, Postal Service, and other federal sources, as well as local-level sources such as Equifax, Vallassis and the National Association of Realtors. Projections of future growth by demographic segments are based on the continuation of long-term and emergent demographic trends identified through the above sources. PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 4 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 4 II. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE SUMMARY The following table (Figure 2.1) presents a profile of City of Lake Oswego demographics from the 2000 and 2010 Census. It also reflects the estimated population of this area as of 2023 from PSU estimates, forecasted forward to 2023 using the estimated growth rate between 2010 and 2022. ▪ Lake Oswego is a City of over 41,500 people located in Clackamas County in the southern-central area of the Portland metropolitan region. ▪ Based on estimated population, Lake Oswego is the 13th largest city in the state by population, similar in size to Oregon City regionally, or Keizer and Grants Pass statewide. Lake Oswego has about 1.5 times the population of neighboring West Linn or Tualatin, and about 75% of the population of Tigard. ▪ Lake Oswego has experienced modest growth, growing roughly 18% since 2000, or less than 1% per year. In contrast, Clackamas County and the state experienced population growth of 26% and 25% respectively. (US Census and PSU Population Research Center) FIGURE 2.1: LAKE OSWEGO DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE ▪ Lake Oswego was home to an estimated 17,500 households in 2023, an increase of over 2,650 households since 2000. The percentage of families has increased slightly from 66% of all households in 2000 to 68% in 2023. The city has a similar share of family households to Clackamas County (69%) but higher than the state (63%). Average household size is estimated to have remained fairly stable during this period. 20002010Growth2023Growth(Census)(Census)00-10(PSU)10-23Population135,27836,6194%41,55013%Households214,82415,8937%17,48110%Families39,77510,0793%11,84217%Housing Units415,66816,9958%18,3458%Group Quarters Population516322236%32948%Household Size (non-group)2.372.29-3%2.363%Avg. Family Size2.932.88-2%2.973%20002010Growth2023Growth(Census)(Census)00-10(Proj.)10-23Per Capita ($)$42,166$53,65227%$74,60039%Median HH ($)$71,597$84,18618%$123,30046%SOURCE: Census, Metro Consolidated Forecast, PSU Population Research Center, and Johnson EconomicsCensus Tables: DP-1 (2000, 2010); DP-3 (2000); S1901; S193011 From Census, PSU Population Research Center, growth rate 2010-2022 extended to 20232 2023 Households = (2023 population - Group Quarters Population)/2023 HH Size3 Ratio of 2023 Families to total HH is based on 2021 ACS 5-year Estimates4 2023 housing units are the '20 Census total plus new units permitted from '20 through '22 (source: Census, City)5 2023 Group Quarters Population based on 5-year ACS estimates 2017-2021PER CAPITA AND MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOMEPOPULATION, HOUSEHOLDS, FAMILIES, AND YEAR-ROUND HOUSING UNITSPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 5 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 5 ▪ Lake Oswego’s estimated average household size is 2.4 persons. This is lower than the Clackamas County average of 2.6 and similar to the statewide average of 2.44. A. POPULATION GROWTH Since 2000, Lake Oswego has grown by nearly 6,300 people within the UGB, or 18% in 23 years. This was lower than the countywide rate of growth. Clackamas County as a whole has grown an estimated 26% since 2000, while other cities in the county such as West Linn and Oregon City grew by 23% and 46% respectively. Portland’s population grew by an estimated 19% during this period (PSU Population Research Center). B. HOUSEHOLD GROWTH & SIZE As of 2023, the city has an estimated 17,500 households. Since 2000, Lake Oswego has added an estimated 2,650 households. This is an average of roughly 115 households annually during this period. The growth since 2000 has paced the growth in new housing units, which have been permitted at the rate of roughly 117 units per year. There has been a general trend in Oregon and nationwide towards declining household size as birth rates have fallen, more people have chosen to live alone, and the Baby Boomers have become “empty nesters.” While this trend of diminishing household size is expected to continue nationwide, there are limits to how far the average can fall. Lake Oswego’s average household size of 2.4 people, with 68% family households, is smaller than Clackamas County (2.6 persons; 69% families). Figure 2.2 shows the share of households by the number of people for renter and owner households in 2021 (latest data available), according to the Census. Renter households are more likely to be one-person households, with 75% having two or fewer residents. Owner households are more likely to have two or more persons. FIGURE 2.2: NUMBER OF PEOPLE PER HOUSEHOLD, CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO SOURCE: US Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC Census Tables: B25009 (2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) C. FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS As of the 2021 ACS, 68% of Lake Oswego households were family households, up from 63.4% of households in 2010. The total number of family households in Lake Oswego is estimated to have grown by over 2,060 since 2000. The Census defines family households as two or more persons, related by marriage, birth or adoption and living together. In 2023, family households in Lake Oswego have an estimated average size of 2.97 people. 20%38%19%18%4%2%0%40%35%11%11%3%1%0%0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%40%1-person2-person3-person4-person5-person6-person7-or-moreShare of HouseholdsHousehold SizeRenterOwnerPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 6 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 6 D. GROUP QUARTERS POPULATION As of the 2020 Census, the City of Lake Oswego had an estimated group quarters population of 0.8% of the total population, or 329 persons. Group quarters include such shared housing situations as nursing homes, prisons, dorms, group residences, military housing, or shelters. For the purposes of this analysis, these residents are removed from the estimated population total, before determining the number of other types of housing that are needed for non-group households. In Lake Oswego, nearly 90% of the group quarters population is found in assisted living facilities. E. HOUSING UNITS Data from the City of Lake Oswego and the US Census indicate that the city added roughly 2,680 new housing units since 2000, representing 17% growth in the housing stock. This number of new units is slightly higher than the growth in new households estimated during the same period (2,660), indicating that housing growth has kept pace with growing need. As of 2023, the city had an estimated housing stock of roughly 18,350 units for its 17,500 estimated households. This translates to an estimated average vacancy rate of 4.7%. Residential Permits: An average of 117 units have been permitted annually since 2000, with 24% being multi-family units. Most multi-family housing in Lake Oswego has been built in the last decade. FIGURE 2.3: HISTORIC AND PROJECTED RESIDENTIAL PERMITS, CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO SOURCE: HUD F. AGE TRENDS The following figure shows the share of the population falling in different age cohorts between the 2000 Census and the most recent 5-year American Community Survey estimates. As the chart shows, there is a general trend for middle age and young cohorts to fall as share of total population, while older cohorts have grown in share. This is in keeping with the national trend caused by the aging of the Baby Boom generation. Overall, Lake Oswego has an older population than the county, with a similar share of children, but a smaller share of those aged 25 to 44 years. 050100150200250300350Housing PermitsMulti-FamilySingle FamilyPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 7 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 7 FIGURE 2.4: AGE COHORT TRENDS, 2000 - 2021 SOURCE: US Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC Census Tables: QT-P1 (2000); S0101 (2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) ▪ The cohorts which grew the most in share during this period were those aged 55 to 74 years. Still, an estimated 79% of the population is under 65 years of age. ▪ In the 2021 ACS, the local median age was an estimated 46 years, compared to 40 years in Oregon, and 39 years nationally. Figure 2.5 presents the share of households with children, and the share of population over 65 years for comparison. Compared to state and national averages, Lake Oswego has a similar share of households with children. However, at 21%, the share of population over 65 is higher than the state and national figures. FIGURE 2.5: SHARE OF HOUSEHOLDS WITH CHILDREN/ POPULATION OVER 65 YEARS (LAKE OSWEGO) SOURCE: US Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC Census Tables: B11005; S0101 (2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) 20%10%10%16%21%11%6%4%1%18%10%9%12%16%14%14%5%2%17%11%12%14%13%13%12%5%2%0%5%10%15%20%25%Lake Oswego (2000)Lake Oswego (2021)Clack. Co. (2021)31%28%31%0%10%20%30%40%Lake OswegoOregonUSAShare of Households with Children21%18%16%0%10%20%30%40%Lake OswegoOregonUSAShare of Population Over 65 YearsPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 8 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 8 G. DIVERSITY TRENDS The following figure presents the distribution of Lake Oswego’s population by race and Hispanic ethnicity. The community grew more diverse between the 2010 and 2020 Census, with the population’s white (non-Hispanic) share falling from 90% to 80%. The Asian population makes up 8% of the population, and the Hispanic or Latino population makes up 5% of residents. 9% of residents identify as two or more races. FIGURE 2.6: RACIAL AND ETHNIC DIVERSITY, 2010 – 2020 (LAKE OSWEGO) SOURCE: US Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC Census Tables: P1, P2 (2010, 2020) In comparison, the share of the population identifying as white is also 80% in Clackamas County, and 75% statewide. The share of Lake Oswego’s population identifying as Hispanic or Latino is 5% of the population, indicating over 2,100 people as of the 2020 Census. This is lower than the 14% share statewide. FIGURE 2.7: AVERAGE NUMBER OF PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD BY RACIAL AND ETHNIC CATEGORY (OREGON) SOURCE: US Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC Census Tables: P17A-H, (State of Oregon, 2020) * This data is presented on a statewide basis using the most recent Census data available (2010). The data for the Lake Oswego or Clackamas County geographies feature unusually large margins of error due to the small sample size. 80%1%0%8%0%1%9%5%0%20%40%60%80%100%WhiteBlack or AfricanAmericanAmerican andAlaska NativeAsianHawaiian andPacific IslanderSome Other RaceTwo or moreracesHispanic or Latino(any race)Share of Population by RaceLake Oswego (2010)Lake Oswego (2020)Clackamas Co.Oregon2.52.42.52.82.83.53.74.02.70.01.02.03.04.05.0All HouseholdsWhite aloneBlack or African American aloneAmerican Indian and Alaska Native aloneAsian aloneNative Hawaiian and Pacific IslanderHispanic or LatinoSome Other Race aloneTwo or more races:Avg. Number of Persons per HouseholdAverage Household Size by Race & Ethnicity (Oregon)PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 9 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 9 Minority households tend to have a larger average household size than the average of all households (Figure 2.7). (This figure presents statewide data due to the high margin of error for local data in this data set.) Households identifying as “white alone” have the lowest average household size (2.4 persons), while all other racial and ethnic categories have a larger estimated average household size. Some of the non-white categories, such as black households and those of two or more races, are still similar in average size (2.5 and 2.7 persons, respectively). Those with the largest estimated households are Latinos, Pacific Islanders, and those identifying as “some other race.” Larger average household size indicates a need for units with more bedrooms on average among many minority households. Each household has its own housing needs in terms of the number of bedrooms and other factors, based on the specific makeup of each family. Based on voluntary guidelines provided by HUD for public housing programs, households of between 2 persons generally need a one-bedroom unit, households with 3 persons might need two bedrooms, and those with 4 persons might need three bedrooms. Larger households may need four or more bedrooms, which are typically found in single detached homes. Based on statewide data, many racial and ethnic minorities are currently less likely to own the homes they occupy (Figure 2.8) – meaning that they tend to occupy rental units. These communities face systemic obstacles to home ownership, including lower generational wealth, less access to capital and financing, and a history of discrimination in lending and geography (e.g., redlining). While the country and state try to address explicit discrimination through the law, the legacy of these barriers continues to hamper home ownership for many minority households. Going forward, many communities would benefit from more entry-level homebuying opportunities for these households, as well as additional rental housing for those who are still unready or unable to buy a home. FIGURE 2.8: HOME OWNERSHIP RATE BY RACIAL AND ETHNIC CATEGORY (OREGON) SOURCE: US Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC Census Tables: B25003A-H, (State of Oregon, 2021 ACS 5-year) * This data is presented on a statewide basis using the most recent Census data available (2020). The data for the Lake Oswego or Clackamas County geographies feature larger margins of error due to small sample size in some of the racial categories. Populations from some racial and ethnic minority groups also have lower average incomes and are more likely to have income below the official poverty level when compared to the total population. Such income levels are correlated with a greater share of renter households and impact the types of housing these populations consume, as discussed in further detail below. 63%65%36%48%63%32%45%43%50%0%20%40%60%80%100%All HouseholdsWhite aloneBlack or African American aloneAmerican Indian and Alaska Native aloneAsian aloneNative Hawaiian and Pacific IslanderHispanic or LatinoSome Other Race aloneTwo or more races:Ownership RateOwner-Occupied Households by Race & Ethnicity (Oregon)PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 10 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 10 H. PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY An estimated 8% of the population of Lake Oswego, or 3,140 people, report having some form of disability. This is lower than the statewide rate of 14% and the Clackamas County rate of 12% of people with a disability. (The Census reports these statistics for the “non-institutionalized population.”) The following figure presents Census estimates of the types of disability reported among Lake Oswego residents. Any type of disability impacts the type of housing that may be appropriate for a resident, but those with the greatest impact on needed unit type are generally an ambulatory, self-care, or independent living disability. Those with an ambulatory disability often need units with expanded access for a wheelchair, walker, or scooter. Those with self-care or independent living disabilities may require additional safety precautions around the home to protect a resident who cannot always be directly monitored. FIGURE 2.9: LAKE OSWEGO SHARE OF THE POPULATION WITH DISABILITY, BY TYPE SOURCE: US Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC Census Tables: DP02, (2020 ACS 5-year) FIGURE 2.10: LAKE OSWEGO POPULATION WITH A DISABILITY, BY AGE SOURCE: US Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC Census Tables: DP02, (2020 ACS 5-year) 7.8%2.4%1.7%2.7%2.9%1.1%2.3%0%2%4%6%8%10%Population with a disabilityHearing difficultyVision difficultyCognitive difficultyAmbulatory difficultySelf-care difficultyIndependent living difficultyShare of Population7.8%2.0%5.8%19.5%0%5%10%15%20%25%Total populationUnder 18 years18 to 64 years65 years and overShare of Population with Disability by AgePP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 11 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 11 Older residents are more likely to report a disability, including nearly 20% of those over 65 years. Of those aged 18 to 64 years, 6% of the local population reports a disability, and 2% of children. Because Census data tends to undercount the homeless and other vulnerable populations, there are likely more disabled residents in Lake Oswego than reflected in these data. I. INCOME TRENDS The following figure presents data on Lake Oswego’s income trends. FIGURE 2.11: INCOME TRENDS, 2000 – 2023 (LAKE OSWEGO) ▪ Lake Oswego’s estimated median household income was $123,000 in 2023. This is nearly 40% higher than the Clackamas County median of $88,500, and 75% higher than the statewide median of $70,000. ▪ Lake Oswego’s per capita income is roughly $75,000. ▪ Median income has grown an estimated 46% between 2010 and 2023, in real dollars. Inflation was an estimated 34% over this period, so the local median income has well exceeded inflation. This is not the case in many regions and nationally, where income growth has not kept pace with inflation. FIGURE 2.12: HOUSEHOLD INCOME COHORTS, 2021 (LAKE OSWEGO) SOURCE: US Census, Census Tables: S1901 (2021 ACS 5-yr Est.) Figure 2.12 presents the estimated distribution of households by income as of 2021. The largest income cohorts are those households earning between $100k and $200k per year (32%), followed by households earning over $200k (27%). ▪ 41% of households earn less than $100,000. ▪ Roughly 19% of households earn less than $50k per year. 2000 2010Growth2023Growth(Census) (Census) 00-10 (Proj.) 10-23Per Capita ($)$42,166 $53,65227%$74,60039%Median HH ($)$71,597 $84,18618%$123,30046%SOURCE: Census, Metro Consolidated Forecast, PSU Population Research Center, and Johnson EconomicsCensus Tables: DP-1 (2000, 2010); DP-3 (2000); S1901; S19301PER CAPITA AND MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME3%2%4%4%6%11%11%20%12%27%0%5%10%15%20%25%30% Less than $10,000 $10,000 to $14,999 $15,000 to $24,999 $25,000 to $34,999 $35,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,999 $100,000 to $149,999 $150,000 to $199,999 $200,000 or moreHousehold Income GroupsPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 12 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 12 J. POVERTY STATISTICS According to the US Census, the official poverty rate in Lake Oswego is an estimated 4% over the most recent period reported (2021 5-year estimates).3 This is roughly 1,700 individuals in Lake Oswego. In comparison, the official poverty rate in Clackamas County is 9%, and at the state level is 17%. In the 2017-21 period: ▪ The Lake Oswego poverty rate is low among all groups, but highest among those 65 years and older at 5%. The rate is 4% among those 18 to 64 years of age. The estimated rate is lowest for children at 3%. ▪ For those without a high school diploma, the poverty rate is 11%. ▪ Among those who are employed the poverty rate is 2%, while it is 7% for those who are unemployed. Information on affordable housing is presented in Section II F of this report. FIGURE 2.13: POVERTY STATUS BY CATEGORY (LAKE OSWEGO) SOURCE: US Census Census Tables: S1701 (2021 ACS 5-yr Est.) K. EMPLOYMENT LOCATION TRENDS This section provides an overview of employment and industry trends in Lake Oswego that are related to housing. Commuting Patterns: The following figure shows the inflow and outflow of commuters to Lake Oswego according to the Census Employment Dynamics Database. These figures reflect “covered employment” as of 2019, the most recent year available. Covered employment refers to those jobs where the employee is covered by federal unemployment insurance. This category does not include many contract employees and self-employed and therefore is not a complete picture of local employment. The figure discussed here is best understood as indicators of the general pattern of commuting and not exact figures. As of 2017, the most recent year available, the Census estimated there were roughly 23,100 covered employment jobs located in Lake Oswego. Of these, an estimated 2,250 or 10%, are held by local residents, while nearly 21,000 employees commute into the city from elsewhere. This general pattern is fairly common among many communities 3 Census Tables: S1701 (2018 ACS 5-yr Estimates); Methodology The Census Bureau uses a set of income thresholds that vary by family size and composition to determine who is in poverty. There are 48 separate income thresholds set based on the possible combinations of household composition. 3%4%5%2%7%11%10%7%3%0%5%10%15%20%Under 18 years18 to 64 years65 years and overEmployedUnemployedLess than high schoolHigh schoolSome college, associate'sBachelor's degree or higherPoverty Level of SubgroupsPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 13 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 13 in the Metro area, but the pattern is particularly stark here. The most common homes of local workers commuting into the city are Portland, Beaverton, or Tigard. This data set predates the surge in remote working that has taken place over the last few years. In prior years, it was safe to assume that most residents holding jobs outside the community likely commuted physically. Now, a resident might hold a job in another city but work from home. Unfortunately, these data do not quantify this growing segment. Similarly, of the estimated 18,000 employed Lake Oswego residents, 88% of them commute elsewhere to their employment. The most common destinations for Lake Oswego commuters are Portland and Beaverton. Smaller shares work elsewhere in the Portland metro or in the mid-Willamette Valley. FIGURE 2.14: COMMUTING PATTERNS (PRIMARY JOBS), LAKE OSWEGO Source: US Census Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics Jobs/Household Ratio: Lake Oswego features a balanced jobs-to-households ratio. There are an estimated 23,000 jobs in Lake Oswego (covered), and an estimated 17,500 households in Lake Oswego. This represents 1.3 jobs per household. There is no standard jobs-to-households ratio that is right for all communities, but it can provide a guide to the balance between employment uses and residential uses in the city. There is an average of 1.0 job held for each Lake Oswego household, a majority of which are located outside the city. 20,900Work in Lake Oswego,live elsewhere15,800Live in Lake Oswego,work elsewhere2,250Live and workin Lake Oswego90% / 10%12% / 88%PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 14 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 14 III. CURRENT HOUSING CONDITIONS This section presents a profile of the current housing stock and market indicators in Lake Oswego. This profile forms the foundation to which current and future housing needs will be compared. A. HOUSING TENURE Lake Oswego has a greater share of homeowner households than renter households. The 2021 ACS estimates that 71% of occupied units were owner occupied, and only 29% renter occupied. The ownership rate is little changed since 2000. The estimated ownership rate is higher across Clackamas County (73%) and lower statewide (63%). B. HOUSING STOCK As shown in Figure 2.1, Lake Oswego had an estimated 18,350 housing units in 2023, with a vacancy rate of 5% (includes ownership and rental units). The housing stock has increased by roughly 2,680 units since 2000, or growth of over 17%. FIGURE 3.1: ESTIMATED SHARE OF UNITS, BY PROPERTY TYPE, 2023 SOURCE: US Census, City of Lake Oswego Figure 3.1 shows the estimated number of units by type in 2023 based on US Census. Detached single-family homes represent an estimated 63% of housing units. Units in larger apartment complexes of 5 or more units represent 21% of units, and other types of attached homes represent 16% of units. (Attached single family generally includes townhomes, and some 2 to 4-plexes which are separately metered.) Manufactured homes represent well less than 1% of the inventory. C. NUMBER OF BEDROOMS Figure 3.2 shows the share of units for owners and renters by the number of bedrooms they have. In general, owner-occupied units are much more likely to have three or more bedrooms, while renter-occupied units are much more likely to have two or fewer bedrooms. 63%9%1%6%21%0%0%0%20%40%60%80%SingleDetachedSingleAttachedDuplex3- or 4-plex5+ UnitsMFRManuf.homeBoat, RV,other tempLake Oswego, OregonPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 15 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 15 FIGURE 3.2: NUMBER OF BEDROOMS FOR OWNER AND RENTER UNITS, 2021 (LAKE OSWEGO) SOURCE: US Census Census Tables: B25042 (2021 ACS 5-year Estimates) D. UNIT TYPES BY TENURE As Figure 3.3 and 3.4 show, a large share of owner-occupied units (81%), are detached homes, which is related to why owner-occupied units tend to have more bedrooms. Renter-occupied units are much more distributed among a range of structure types. About 18% of rented units are estimated to be detached homes or manufactured homes, while the remainder are some form of attached unit. Nearly 60% of rental units are in larger apartment complexes. FIGURE 3.3: CURRENT INVENTORY BY UNIT TYPE, FOR OWNERSHIP AND RENTAL HOUSING (LAKE OSWEGO) OWNERSHIP HOUSING RENTAL HOUSING Sources: US Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS, CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO 0%2%14%33%39%11%6%27%43%19%5%1%0%10%20%30%40%50%Studio1 bedroom2 bedrooms3 bedrooms4 bedrooms5 or moreNumber of BedroomsRenterOwnerSingle DetachedSingle AttachedDuplex3- or 4-plex5+ Units MFRManuf. homeBoat, RV, other tempTotal UnitsTotals:10,557 1,2929337 781 320 13,008Percentage:81.2% 9.9%0.1% 2.6% 6.0% 0.2% 0.0%100%OWNERSHIP HOUSINGSingle DetachedSingle AttachedDuplex3- or 4-plex5+ Units MFRManuf. homeBoat, RV, other tempTotal UnitsTotals:934 332250 6753,145 0 0 5,337Percentage:17.5% 6.2%4.7% 12.7% 58.9% 0.0% 0.0%100%RENTAL HOUSINGPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 16 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 16 FIGURE 3.4: CURRENT INVENTORY BY UNIT TYPE, BY SHARE Sources: US Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS, CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO E. AGE AND CONDITION OF HOUSING STOCK Lake Oswego’s housing stock reflects the pattern of development over time. The greatest periods of development in Lake Oswego were in the 1970’s and 1980’s. Roughly 15% of the housing stock has been built since 2000. FIGURE 3.5: AGE OF UNITS FOR OWNERS AND RENTERS (LAKE OSWEGO) SOURCE: US Census Census Tables: B25036 (2021 ACS 5-year Estimates) ▪ Unfortunately, good quantitative data on housing condition is generally unavailable without an intensive on-site survey of all local housing, which is beyond the scope of this analysis. Census categories related to housing condition are ill-suited for this analysis, dealing with such issues as units without indoor plumbing, which was more common in the mid-20th Century, but is an increasingly rare situation. Age of units serves as the closest reliable proxy for condition with available data. ▪ For ownership units, older homes may be in poor condition, but are also more likely to have undergone some repair and renovation over the years. Rental units are more likely to degrade steadily with age and wear-and-81%10%0%3%6%0%0%18%6%5%13%59%0%0%0%20%40%60%80%100%SingleDetachedSingleAttachedDuplex3- or 4-plex5+ UnitsMFRManuf.homeBoat, RV,other tempShare of UnitsUnit TypeLake Oswego, OregonOwnerRental7%8%17%20%23%10%7%3%5%9%8%20%25%23%5%5%1%3%0%5%10%15%20%25%30%Year Housing Unit BuiltOwnerRenterPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 17 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 17 tear, and less likely to receive sufficient reinvestment to keep them in top condition, though this is not universally true. F. HOUSING COSTS VS. LOCAL INCOMES Figure 3.6 shows the share of owner and renter households who are paying more than 30% of their household income towards housing costs, by income segment. (Spending 30% or less on housing costs is a common measure of “affordability” used by HUD and others, and in the analysis presented in this report.) As one would expect, households with lower incomes tend to spend more than 30% of their income on housing, while incrementally fewer of those in higher income groups spend more than 30% of their incomes on housing costs. Of those earning less than $20,000, an estimated 91% of owner households and 100% of renters spend more than 30% of income on housing costs. Even among households earning between $50,000 and $75,000 per year, a majority are housing cost burdened. Because Lake Oswego has an income distribution skewed towards higher income levels, there are relatively few households in these lower income segments, compared to most other cities. In total, the US Census estimates that over 31% of Lake Oswego households pay more than 30% of income towards housing costs (2021 American Community Survey, B25106) FIGURE 3.6: SHARE OF LAKE OSWEGO HOUSEHOLDS SPENDING MORE THAN 30% ON HOUSING COSTS, BY INCOME GROUP Sources: US Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS Census Table: B25106 (2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) Housing is generally one of a household’s largest living costs, if not the largest. The ability to find affordable housing options, and even build wealth through ownership, is one of the biggest contributors to helping lower income households save and cultivate wealth. Even if renting, affordable housing costs allow for more household income to be put to other needs, including saving. The following figures show the percentage of household income spent towards gross rent4 for local renter households only. This more fine-grained data shows that not only are 49% of renters spending more than 30% of their income on gross rent, but an estimated 29% of renters are spending 50% or more of their income on housing and are considered severely rent-burdened. 4 The Census defines Gross Rent as “the contract rent plus the estimated average monthly cost of utilities (electricity, gas, and water and sewer) and fuels (oil, coal, kerosene, wood, etc.) if these are paid by the renter (or paid for the renter by someone else).” Housing costs for homeowners include mortgage, property taxes, insurance, utilities and condo or HOA dues. 91%82%74%51%12%100%92%88%64%16%0%20%40%60%80%100%Less than$20,000$20,000 to$34,999$35,000 to$49,999$50,000 to$74,999$75,000 ormoreShare of HH: Housing Costs >30% of IncomeHousehold IncomeOwner HouseholdsRenter HouseholdsPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 18 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 18 Renters are disproportionately lower income relative to homeowners. Housing cost burdens are felt more broadly for these households, and as the analysis presented in a later section shows there is a need for more affordable rental units in Lake Oswego, as in most communities. FIGURE 3.7: PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME SPENT ON GROSS RENT, LAKE OSWEGO RENTER HOUSEHOLDS Sources: US Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS Census Table: B25070 (2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) G. PUBLICLY ASSISTED HOUSING Oregon Housing and Community Services (OHCS) tracks three currently operating affordable housing properties in Lake Oswego, with a total of 76 units. These are properties that are funded through HUD programs, tax credits and other programs which guarantee subsidized rents for qualified households. All of these units, save one, are offered for elderly residents. The Marylhurst Commons, currently under development, is planned to offer 100 affordable units for families. Completion is expected in 2024. The Housing Authority of Clackamas County administers over 1,600 Section 8 housing choice vouchers that allow low-income participants to find rental units anywhere in the county. Under this program, the renters can find participating landlords and the voucher helps to subsidize the cost of a market-rate rental unit. The unit does not have to be in a property dedicated to subsidized affordable housing but can be in any rental property. The high share of renters still paying over 30% of their income towards housing costs indicates that there is an ongoing need for rental units at the lowest price points. Agricultural Worker Housing: Lake Oswego is not currently home to properties dedicated to agricultural workers. This population may also be served by other available affordable units. People Experiencing Homelessness: The Census does make a multi-faceted effort to include the unhoused population in the total Decennial Census count, by attempting to enumerate these individuals at service providers, and in transitory locations such as RV parks or campgrounds, as of the official Census data (4/1/20). However, it is difficult to make an accurate count of this population, and it is generally presumed that the unhoused are undercounted in the Census. The most recent (January 2022) Point-in-Time count of people experiencing homelessness and households experiencing homelessness in Clackamas County5 found 597 unhoused individuals on the streets, in shelters, or 5 Figures are for the entire County 3%22%25%14%7%29%0%5%10%15%20%25%30%35%Share of Households% of Income to Gross RentPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 19 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 19 other temporary and/or precarious housing. The estimated 597 unhoused individuals represent 0.1% of the county’s total estimated population in 2022. ▪ An estimated 45% of individuals were in some sort of temporary shelter, while 55% were unsheltered. ▪ The total included 51 children (under age 18), and 26 youth (aged 18-24). ▪ Of those indicating a gender, 60% of those counted identified as men, 40% women. ▪ 5% of those counted were Hispanic or Latino compared to 9.5% in the general population. ▪ 304 individuals, or 51%, were counted as “chronically homeless”.6 While the Point-in-Time count is one of the few systematized efforts to count people experiencing homelessness across the country in a regular, structured way, it is widely thought to undercount the population of unhoused individuals and households. People who are doubled up, couch surfing, or experiencing domestic violence may not always be accurately counted. In addition to the impossibility of finding all unsheltered individuals experiencing homelessness, the count is conducted in late January, when homeless counts are likely near their lowest of the year due to inclement weather. It also relies on self-reporting. A recent analysis prepared for OHCS to test a potential approach for preparing Housing Capacity Analyses on a regional basis included estimates of the unhoused population in Oregon communities, including Lake Oswego. The approach utilizes a combination of data from the bi-annual Point-in-Time count and from tracking of unhoused school-aged children in keeping with the McKinney-Vento Act. The analysis estimates 239 households experiencing homelessness in Lake Oswego as of mid-2020. These include households that are unsheltered, in temporary shelters, or staying with friends or relatives. These households are a component of current and future housing need. The persistence of people experiencing homelessness speaks to the need for continuing to build a full spectrum of services and housing types to shelter this population, from temporary shelter to subsidized affordable housing. An analysis of the ability of current and projected housing supply to meet the needs of low-income people and the potential shortfall is included in the following sections of this report. 6 HUD defines “chronically homeless” as an individual with a disability as defined by the McKinney-Vento Assistance Act, who has been in uninhabitable conditions for more than 12 mo. or on four separate occasions in the last three years; or has been in institutional care for less than 90 days; or a family with an adult head of household who meets this definition. PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 20 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 20 IV. CURRENT HOUSING NEEDS (CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO) The profile of current housing conditions in the study area is based on Census 2010, which the Portland State University Population Research Center (PRC) uses to develop yearly estimates through 2019. The 2019 estimate is forecasted to 2023 using the estimated growth rate realized since 2010. FIGURE 4.1: CURRENT LAKE OSWEGO HOUSING PROFILE (2023) *This table reflects population, household and housing unit projections shown in Figure 2.1 We estimate a current population of 41,550 residents, living in 17,481 households (excluding group living situations). Average household size is 2.4 persons. There are an estimated 18,345 housing units in the city, indicating an estimated vacancy rate of 5%. This includes units vacant for any reason, not just those which are currently for sale or rent. ESTIMATE OF CURRENT HOUSING DEMAND Following the establishment of the current housing profile, the current housing demand was determined based upon the age and income characteristics of current households. The analysis considered the propensity of households in specific age and income levels to either rent or own their home (tenure), in order to derive the current demand for ownership and rental housing units and the appropriate housing cost level of each. This is done by combining data on tenure by age and tenure by income from the Census American Community Survey (tables: B25007 and B25118, 2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates). The analysis takes into account the average amount that owners and renters tend to spend on housing costs. For instance, lower income households tend to spend more of their total income on housing, while upper income households spend less on a percentage basis. In this case, it was assumed that households in lower income bands would prefer housing costs at no more than 30% of gross income (a common measure of affordability). Higher income households pay a decreasing share down to 20% for the highest income households. While the Census estimates that most low-income households pay more than 30% of their income for housing, this is an estimate of current preferred demand. It assumes that low-income households prefer (or demand) units affordable to them at no more than 30% of income, rather than more expensive units. SOURCETotal 2023 Population:41,550PSU Pop. Research Center- Estimated group housing population:329(0.8% of Total)US CensusEstimated Non-Group 2023 Population: 41,221(Total - Group)Avg. HH Size:2.36US CensusEstimated Non-Group 2023 Households: 17,481(Pop/HH Size)Total Housing Units:18,345(Occupied + Vacant)Census 2010 + permitsOccupied Housing Units:17,481(= # of HH)Vacant Housing Units:864(Total HH - Occupied)Current Vacancy Rate:4.7%(Vacant units/ Total units)Sources: Johnson Economics, City of Lake Oswego, PSU Population Research Center, U.S. CensusCURRENT HOUSING CONDITIONS (2023)PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 21 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 21 Figure 4.2 presents a snapshot of current housing demand (i.e. preferences) equal to the number of households in the study area (17,481). The breakdown of tenure (owners vs. renters) reflects data from the 2021 ACS. FIGURE 4.2: ESTIMATE OF CURRENT HOUSING DEMAND IN LAKE OSWEGO (2023) Sources: PSU Population Research Center, Claritas., Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS Census Tables: B25007, B25106, B25118 (2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) Claritas: Estimates of income by age of householder The estimated home price and rent ranges are irregular because they are mapped to the affordability levels of the Census income level categories. For instance, an affordable home for those in the lowest income category (less than $15,000) would have to cost $80,000 or less. Affordable rent for someone in this category would be $400 or less. The affordable price level for ownership housing assumes 30-year amortization, at an interest rate of 5% (somewhat less than the current market rate, but in line with historic norms), with 10% down payment. These assumptions are designed to represent prudent lending and borrowing levels for ownership households. The 30-year mortgage commonly serves as the standard. In the 2000’s, down payment requirements fell significantly, but lending standards tightened significantly since the 2008/9 credit crisis. While 20% is often cited as the standard for most buyers, it is common for homebuyers, particularly first-time buyers, to pay significantly less than this using available programs. Interest rates are subject to disruption from national and global economic forces, and therefore impossible to forecast beyond the short term. The 5% used here is roughly the average 30-year rate over the last 20 years. The Price Range# of HouseholdsIncome Range% of TotalCumulative$0k - $80k330Less than $15,0002.7%2.7%$80k - $130k267$15,000 - $24,9992.2%4.9%$130k - $180k357$25,000 - $34,9992.9%7.8%$180k - $250k636$35,000 - $49,9995.2%13.0%$250k - $350k1,051$50,000 - $74,9998.6%21.7%$350k - $440k1,147$75,000 - $99,9999.4%31.1%$440k - $510k1,109$100,000 - $124,9999.1%40.2%$510k - $560k892$125,000 - $149,9997.3%47.5%$560k - $680k1,827$150,000 - $199,99915.0%62.5%$680k +4,577$200,000+37.5%100.0%Totals:12,191% of All:69.7%Rent Level# of HouseholdsIncome Range% of TotalCumulative$0 - $400348Less than $15,000 6.6% 6.6%$400 - $700383$15,000 - $24,999 7.2% 13.8%$700 - $900554$25,000 - $34,999 10.5% 24.3%$900 - $1300621$35,000 - $49,999 11.7% 36.0%$1300 - $1800837$50,000 - $74,999 15.8% 51.9%$1800 - $2200764$75,000 - $99,999 14.4% 66.3%$2200 - $2500505$100,000 - $124,999 9.6% 75.9%$2500 - $2800410$125,000 - $149,999 7.8% 83.6%$2800 - $3400271$150,000 - $199,999 5.1% 88.7%$3400 +596$200,000+11.3% 100.0%All HouseholdsTotals:5,290% of All: 30.3% 17,481RentalOwnershipPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 22 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 22 general trend has been falling interest rates since the early 1980’s, but coming out of the recent inflationary period, the Federal Reserve has raised its base rate significantly in recent years and mortgage rates have also climbed to levels not seen in almost 20 years. CURRENT HOUSING INVENTORY The profile of current housing demand (Figure 4.2) represents the preference and affordability levels of households. In reality, the current housing supply (Figures 4.3 and 4.4 below) differs from this profile, meaning that some households may find themselves in housing units which are not optimal, either not meeting the household’s own/rent preference, or being unaffordable (requiring more than 30% of gross income). A profile of current housing supply in Lake Oswego was estimated based on permit data from the City of Lake Oswego and Census data from the most recently available 2021 ACS, which provides a profile of housing types (single family, attached, manufactured home, etc.), tenure, housing values, and rent levels. The 5-year estimates from the ACS were used because margin of error is lower than 1-year ACS estimates. ▪ An estimated 71% of housing units are ownership units, while an estimated 29% of housing units are rental units. This is slightly different than the estimated demand profile shown in Figure 4.2, which estimated a bit higher demand for rental units given local income and age levels. The inventory includes vacant units. ▪ 81% of ownership units are detached homes, and very few are manufactured homes. 17.5% of rental units are either single family homes or manufactured homes, while 59% are in structures of 5 units or more. ▪ Of total housing units, an estimated 63% are detached homes or manufactured homes. 37% are some sort of attached unit type. FIGURE 4.3: PROFILE OF CURRENT HOUSING SUPPLY BY TYPE (2023) Sources: US Census, PSU Population Research Center, JOHNSON ECONOMICS Census Tables: B25004, B25032, B25063, B25075 (2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) ▪ The affordability of different unit types is an approximation based on Census data on the distribution of housing units by value (ownership) or gross rent (rentals). ▪ Most subsidized affordable housing units found in the city are represented by the inventory at the lowest end of the rental spectrum. ▪ Ownership housing found at the lower end of the value spectrum generally reflect older, smaller homes, or homes in poor condition on small or irregular lots. It is important to note that these represent estimates of 81%10%0%3%6%0%0%18%6%5%13%59%0%0%0%20%40%60%80%100%SingleDetachedSingleAttachedDuplex3- or 4-plex5+ Units MFRManuf.homeBoat, RV,other tempShare of UnitsUnit TypeLake Oswego, OregonOwnerRentalPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 23 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 23 current property value or current housing cost to the owner, not the current market pricing of homes for sale in the city. These properties may be candidates for redevelopment when next they sell but are currently estimated to have low value. FIGURE 4.4: PROFILE OF CURRENT HOUSING SUPPLY, ESTIMATED AFFORDABILITY IN LAKE OSWEGO (2023) Sources: US Census, PSU Population Research Center, JOHNSON ECONOMICS Census Tables: B25004, B25032, B25063, B25075 (2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates) ▪ Most housing (58%) in Lake Oswego is found in price and rent levels affordable to those earning at least $125,000 per year, which is close to the city’s median income. There is very little housing available to those in lower income segments. Over 90% of housing is affordable to those earning at least $50,000, and only 9% affordable to those earning less than this. COMPARISON OF CURRENT HOUSING DEMAND WITH CURRENT SUPPLY A comparison of estimated current housing demand with the existing supply identifies the existing discrepancies between needs and the housing which is currently available. The estimated number of units outnumbers the number of households by roughly 865 units, indicating an average vacancy rate of 4.7%. In general, this identifies that there is currently support for more ownership housing at lower price points, while the upper end of the market is generally well supplied. This is because most housing in Lake Oswego is clustered at higher property values, which matches the community’s high average household income but leaves some households underserved. The analysis finds that the current market rates for most rental units are in the $1,300 to $2,200/month range. Therefore, this is where most of the rental unit supply is currently clustered. However, the greatest unmet need is found at the lower end of the income scale, where many current renters pay more than 30% of their income in housing costs. Rentals at the most expensive levels generally represent single family homes for rent. Figures 4.5 and 4.6 present this information in chart form, comparing the estimated number of households in given income ranges, and the supply of units currently valued (ownership) or priced (rentals) within those income ranges. The data is presented for owner and renter households. Affordable Estimated Affordable EstimatedPrice Level Units Rent Level UnitsLess than $15,000 $0k - $80k135$0 - $40070$15,000 - $24,999 $80k - $130k129$400 - $70043$25,000 - $34,999 $130k - $180k170$700 - $900106$35,000 - $49,999 $180k - $250k406$900 - $1300518$50,000 - $74,999 $250k - $350k735$1300 - $1800 1,852$75,000 - $99,999 $350k - $440k839$1800 - $2200 1,289$100,000 - $124,999 $440k - $510k753$2200 - $2500602$125,000 - $149,999 $510k - $560k924$2500 - $2800223$150,000 - $199,999 $560k - $680k 2,217 $2800 - $3400229$200,000+$680k +6,700 $3400 +40471%13,00829%5,337Income RangeOwnership HousingRental HousingShare of Total Units1%1%2%5%14%12%7%6%13%39%0%10%20%30%40%PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 24 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 24 FIGURE 4.5: COMPARISON OF OWNER HOUSEHOLD INCOME GROUPS TO ESTIMATED SUPPLY AFFORDABLE AT THOSE INCOME LEVELS IN LAKE OSWEGO (2023) Sources: PSU Population Research Center, City of Lake Oswego, Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS FIGURE 4.6: COMPARISON OF RENTER HOUSEHOLD INCOME GROUPS TO ESTIMATED SUPPLY AFFORDABLE AT THOSE INCOME LEVELS IN LAKE OSWEGO (2023) Sources: PSU Population Research Center, City of Lake Oswego, Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS The home value and rent segments which show a “surplus” in Figures 4.5 and 4.6 illustrate where current property values and market rent levels are in Lake Oswego. Housing prices and rent levels will tend to congregate around those levels. These levels will be too costly for some (i.e. require more than 30% in gross income) or “too affordable” for others (i.e. they have income levels that indicate they could afford more expensive housing if they chose). In general, these findings demonstrate that there are few lower-value housing opportunities for many owner households, and potential support for some less expensive types of ownership housing. There is a need for more rental units at lower rent levels (<$900/mo.). HOME SALE PRICES It is important to note that the figures presented in the prior section represent estimates of current property value or current housing cost to the owner, not the current market pricing of homes for sale in the city. For instance, a household living in a manufactured home that has been paid off over many years may have relatively low housing costs. This indicates that one owner household is living in a “lower value” unit. It does not indicate that units at this price point are available on the current market. 01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,000# of Households/UnitsIncome CohortsOwner Households vs. Current UnitsEst. Owner HouseholdsUnits Valued at Income Level05001,0001,5002,000# of Households/UnitsIncome CohortsRenter Households vs. Current UnitsEst. Renter HouseholdsUnits Affordable at Income LevelPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 25 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 25 If this hypothetical household were to sell their home, it would sell at a higher price reflecting inflation and current achievable market prices. For this reason, many of the lower value or lower rent units found in the previous section will actually become higher-priced units when they are sold or become vacant. For reference, this section presents home sales data from 2022 to indicate housing costs for new entrants into the market (Figure 4.7). • The median sale price was $860,000. • The average (mean) sale price was $1,075,000. • The average price per square foot was $430/s.f. • The median square footage was 2,300 s.f. FIGURE 4.7: LAKE OSWEGO HOME SALES (12 MONTHS) Sources: RMLS, JOHNSON ECONOMICS • 48% of sales were priced above $900,000. • 34% of sales were priced between $500,000 and $899,000. • Only 18% of sales were priced at less than $500,000. • Only 7% of sales were priced below $300,000. Affordability: As indicated, roughly 75% of recent sales in Lake Oswego were priced at least $600,000. Homes in this range would be mostly affordable to households earning at least $175,000 per year, which is well above the median household income of $123,000. Roughly 66% of households earn less than $175,000 per year, meaning that the bulk of housing supply on the current for-sale market (75%) is likely too expensive for most of these households. * * * The findings of current need form the foundation for projected future housing need, presented in the following section. 72%0%8%20%Home Sales by Unit TypeDetached HomeManuf. HomeAttached HomeCondo03434731395667663190100200300400<$100,000$100,000 - $199,000$200,000 - $299,000$300,000 - $399,000$400,000 - $499,000$500,000 - $599,000$600,000 - $699,000$700,000 - $799,000$800,000 - $899,000$900,000+Home Sales by Price LevelPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 26 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 26 V. FUTURE HOUSING NEEDS - 2043 (CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO) The projected future (20-year) housing profile (Figure 5.1) in the study area is based on the current housing profile (2023), multiplied by an assumed projected future household growth rate. The projected future growth is the forecasted 2043 population for the City of Lake Oswego included in the most recently adopted Coordinated Population Forecast from Metro for all cities in the region. This was adopted in 2021 and projected a very modest growth rate for Lake Oswego of well less than 1% per year.7 FIGURE 5.1: FUTURE HOUSING PROFILE (2043), LAKE OSWEGO Sources: PSU Population Research Center, Metro, Census, JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC *Projections are applied to estimates of 2023 population, household and housing units shown in Figure 2.1 The model projects growth in the number of non-group households over 20 years of over 1,800 households, but with accompanying population growth of just 411 new residents. The difference is that the household size is expected to decrease significantly to 2.2 persons, meaning more smaller households to house the same population. (The number of households differs from the number of housing units, because the total number of housing units includes a percentage of vacancy. Projected housing unit needs are discussed below.) 7 The projected growth and housing need presented in this report conforms to the statutory approach to completing a Goal 10 needs analysis. To comply with state rules, the analysis relies on estimates of current population from the Portland State University Population Research Center (PRC) and projections of future growth from the most recent Metro distributed forecast. The forecasted growth rates from Metro are very low in comparison to rates experienced during the past 20 years and low in comparison to projected rates in other parts of the region and state. The City's population increased by about 18%, with an average annual growth rate of about 1% between 2000 and 2020 per year. During the next 20 years, forecasted growth is projected to be a total of 1%, with an average annual growth rate of just 0.05% per year. Many community members in Lake Oswego, including members of the project Task Force, as well as members of the City's Planning Commission and City Council, have questioned the accuracy of the projected growth rates, but no contrary expert testimony of the population forecast is presented. To the extent the City grows faster than the growth rates predict, the deficit of land available to accommodate housing over the long term will be more acute and the City will consume remaining buildable land more quickly, potentially running out of buildable land within several years. Per ORS 197.297, the City is required to adopt an updated HNA at least once every six years; thus, the City will have an additional opportunity in 2029 to correct the population forecast, if the projections in the 2023 HNA are notably different than observed trends. It will be important for the City to coordinate closely with Metro as it updates its growth rates and to continue to monitor actual growth patterns, as well as the supply of buildable land in the City. To the extent growth occurs at a faster rate than projected, the City will need to identify and implement strategies to address a potential shortage in available land for housing in the near term. SOURCE2023 Population (Minus Group Pop.)41,221(Est. 2022 pop. - Group Housing Pop.)PSUProjected Annual Growth Rate0.05%Metro Coordinated Forecast (2021)Metro2043 Population (Minus Group Pop.)41,629(Total 2043 Population - Group Housing Pop.)Estimated group housing population:3321.7% of total pop. (held constant from 2022)US CensusTotal Estimated 2043 Population:41,961Metro Coordinated Forecast (2021)MetroEstimated Non-Group 2043 Households:19,298Metro Coordinated Forecast (2021)MetroNew Households 2023 to 20431,816Avg. Household Size:2.16Projected 2043 pop./2043 houseoldsUS CensusTotal Housing Units:20,313Occupied Units plus VacantOccupied Housing Units:19,298(= Number of Non-Group Households)Vacant Housing Units:1,016(= Total Units - Occupied Units)Projected Market Vacancy Rate:5.0%Stabilized vacancy assumptionPROJECTED FUTURE HOUSING CONDITIONS (2023 - 2043)PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 27 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 27 PROJECTION OF FUTURE HOUSING UNIT DEMAND (2043) The profile of future housing demand was derived using the same methodology used to produce the estimate of current housing need. This estimate includes current and future households but does not include a vacancy assumption. The vacancy assumption is added in the subsequent step. Therefore, the need identified below is the total need for actual households in occupied units (19,298). The analysis considered the propensity of households at specific age and income levels to either rent or own their home, in order to derive the future need for ownership and rental housing units, and the affordable cost level of each. The projected need is for all 2043 households and therefore includes the needs of current households. The price levels presented here use the same assumptions regarding the amount of gross income applied to housing costs, from 30% for low income households down to 20% for the highest income households. The affordable price level for ownership housing assumes 30-year amortization, at an interest rate of 5%, with 10% down payment. Because of the impossibility of predicting variables such as interest rates 20 years into the future, these assumptions were kept constant from the estimation of current housing demand. Income levels and price levels are presented in 2023 dollars. Figure 5.2 presents the projected occupied future housing demand (current and new households, without vacancy) in 2043. FIGURE 5.2: PROJECTED OCCUPIED FUTURE HOUSING DEMAND (2043), LAKE OSWEGO Sources: Census, Claritas, JOHNSON ECONOMICS Price Range# of HouseholdsIncome Range% of TotalCumulative$0k - $80k364Less than $15,0002.7%2.7%Extremely$80k - $130k295$15,000 - $24,9992.2%4.9%Low Income$130k - $180k394$25,000 - $34,9992.9%7.8%Very Low$180k - $250k702$35,000 - $49,9995.2%13.0%Income$250k - $350k1,160$50,000 - $74,9998.6%21.7%Low Income<80% MFI$350k - $440k1,266$75,000 - $99,9999.4%31.1%$440k - $510k1,224$100,000 - $124,9999.1%40.2%$510k - $560k984$125,000 - $149,9997.3%47.5%$560k - $680k2,017$150,000 - $199,99915.0%62.5%$680k +5,053$200,000+37.5%100.0%Totals:13,458% of All:69.7%Rent Level# of HouseholdsIncome Range% of TotalCumulative$0 - $400385Less than $15,000 6.6% 6.6% Extremely$400 - $700423$15,000 - $24,999 7.2% 13.8% Low Income$700 - $900611$25,000 - $34,999 10.5% 24.3% Very Low$900 - $1300686$35,000 - $49,999 11.7% 36.0% Income$1300 - $1800924$50,000 - $74,999 15.8% 51.9% Low Income <80% MFI$1800 - $2200843$75,000 - $99,999 14.4% 66.3%$2200 - $2500558$100,000 - $124,999 9.6% 75.9%$2500 - $2800453$125,000 - $149,999 7.8% 83.6%$2800 - $3400299$150,000 - $199,999 5.1% 88.7%$3400 +658$200,000+11.3% 100.0%All UnitsTotals:5,840% of All: 30.3% 19,298<30% MFI<50% MFIOwnershipRental<30% MFI<50% MFIPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 28 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 28 The number of households across the income spectrum seeking a range of both ownership and rental housing is anticipated to grow. It is projected that the homeownership rate in Lake Oswego will fall somewhat over the next 20 years to under 70% from 71%. COMPARISON OF FUTURE HOUSING DEMAND TO CURRENT HOUSING INVENTORY The profile of occupied future housing demand presented above (Figure 5.2) was compared to the current housing inventory presented in the previous section to determine the total future need for new housing units by type and price range (Figure 5.3). This estimate includes a vacancy assumption. As reflected by the most recent Census data, and as is common in most communities, the vacancy rate for rental units is typically higher than that for ownership units. An average vacancy rate of 5% is assumed for the purpose of this analysis. FIGURE 5.3: PROJECTED FUTURE NEED FOR NEW HOUSING UNITS (2043), LAKE OSWEGO Sources: PSU, City of Lake Oswego, Census, Claritas, JOHNSON ECONOMICS ▪ The results show a need for 1,968 new housing units by 2043. ▪ Of the new units needed, roughly 52% are projected to be ownership units, while 48% are projected to be rental units. This represents more renters than the estimated tenure split, but it is projected that more rental units will need to be added to correct the current modest deficit of rental units, plus the future ownership rate will fall slightly. This results in a proportionately greater share of future units being rental, rather than ownership units. ▪ There is some need for new ownership housing at the middle to low-end of the pricing spectrum. But income trends suggest that the greatest demand will remain in the upper-middle price ranges ($300k to $600k). ▪ The greatest need for rental units is found at the lowest and some higher price points. Market rents are currently clustered in the $1,300 to $2,200 range in current dollars. Therefore, most units are to be found in this range. Single DetachedSingle Attached2-unit3- or 4-plex5+ Units MFRManuf. homeBoat, RV, other tempTotal Units% of UnitsTotals:708132315792301,02452.0%Percentage:69.2%12.9%3.1%5.6%9.0%0.2%0.0%100%Single DetachedSingle Attached2-unit3- or 4-plex5+ Units MFRManuf. homeBoat, RV, other tempTotal Units% of UnitsTotals:5287731485850094448.0%Percentage:5.5%9.2%7.7%15.7%61.9%0.0%0.0%100%Single DetachedSingle Attached2-unit3- or 4-plex5+ Units MFRManuf. homeBoat, RV, other tempTotal Units% of UnitsTotals:760 220 104 205 677301,968100%Percentage:38.6% 11.2% 5.3% 10.4% 34.4% 0.1% 0.0%100%Unit Type:OWNERSHIP HOUSINGMulti-FamilyUnit Type:RENTAL HOUSINGMulti-FamilyUnit Type:TOTAL HOUSING UNITSMulti-FamilyPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 29 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 29 ▪ There is insufficient rental housing for the lowest income households making $35,000 or less or detached single-family homes for rent. Many households will need rent levels lower than the market rate in order to maintain housing costs that are affordable (see more detail below). Needed Unit Types The mix of needed unit types shown in Figure 5.3 reflects both past trends and anticipated future trends. Single detached units are expected to continue to make up a large share of new housing development for ownership households over the next 20 years. However, an increasing share of new needed units is anticipated to be attached housing types to accommodate renters and first-time home buyers. ▪ 39% of the new units are projected to be single detached homes or new manufactured homes, while 61% is projected to be some form of attached housing. ▪ Single attached units (townhomes on individual lots) are projected to meet roughly 11% of future need. These are defined as units on separate tax lots, attached by a wall but separately metered, the most common example being townhome units. ▪ Duplex, triplex, and four-plex units are projected to represent a growing 16% of the total need, reflecting new state rules for middle housing zoning. Duplex units would include a detached single-family home with an accessory dwelling unit on the same lot, or with a separate unit in the home (for instance, a rental basement unit.) ▪ 34% of all needed units are projected to be multi-family in structures of 5+ attached units. ▪ Less than 1% of new needed units are projected to be manufactured home units, which meet the needs of some low-income households for both ownership and rental. ▪ Of ownership units, 69% are projected to be single detached homes or manufactured homes, and 31% are projected to be attached forms. ▪ Nearly all new rental units are projected to be found in new attached buildings, with 62% projected in rental properties of 5 or more units, and 33% in other attached housing forms. Only 5.5% of new rental units are projected to be detached homes, including manufactured homes. Group Housing Needs: There is an estimated population of 332 individuals living in group housing in 2043, based on an assumption that the share of the population living in group quarters (1.7%) remains stable from current levels. This would represent an increase of just a few people living in group quarters, as forecasted population growth is modest. In Lake Oswego, the Census estimates that nearly all of Lake Oswego’s group housing population lives in nursing facilities. NEEDED AFFORDABILITY LEVELS Figure 5.4 presents the estimated need for net new housing units by major income segment, based on the projected demographics of new households to the market area. The needed affordability levels presented here are based on current dollars. Figure 5.4 also discusses the housing types typically attainable by residents at these income levels. Note that Figure 5.4 presents the official state measure of “low income” used to set rent and income limits for various affordable housing programs. This estimate via OHCS and HUD are based on an estimate of median income in Clackamas County of $106k in 2022, based on a family of four, while the median income in Lake Oswego was a higher $123k. For this analysis, the estimated Median Family Income (MFI) for a family of four ($106k) was adjusted to match the average household size in Lake Oswego of 2.4 persons ($89.5k) so that the estimates presented below reflect the city average. PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 30 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 30 Figure 5.4 presents some of the types of housing product that might commonly serve households in these income ranges. Many households below 60% MFI or even higher income will require some sort of subsidized affordable unit or voucher to find housing affordability. Those at 60% to 100% MFI may find housing in older and substandard market rate rentals, manufactured homes, and middle housing types. FIGURE 5.4: PROJECTED NEED FOR NEW HOUSING AT DIFFERENT INCOME LEVELS, LAKE OSWEGO Sources: HUD, Census, Claritas, JOHNSON ECONOMICS ▪ Figure 5.3 presents the net NEW housing unit need over the next 20 years. However, there is also a current need for more affordable units. For all households, current and new, to pay 30% or less of their income towards housing in 2043, more affordable rental units (subsidized and non-subsidized) would be required. This indicates that some of the current supply, while it shows up as existing available housing, would need to become less expensive to meet the needs of current households. ▪ There is a finding of new need at the lowest end of the rental spectrum ($900 and less). ▪ The projection of future ownership units finds that the supply at the lowest end of the spectrum will be insufficient due to the prevalence of newer homes, many of which will be detached houses. (This reflects the estimated value of the total housing stock, and not necessarily the average pricing for housing currently for sale.) Ownership options and lower and middle price points are often manufactured homes, townhomes, condos, and small detached homes, often on smaller lots. Subsidized Affordability Housing Need As alluded to in Figure 5.4, some low-income households, and particularly the lowest income households, typically need some sort of subsidized affordable housing in order to find rents affordable given their modest resources and other household spending needs. Figure 5.5 below presents estimates of need at key low-income affordability levels in 2022 and in 2043. The table uses HUD definitions of Extremely Low, Very Low, and Low Income, as well as 60% MFI which is a common affordability level for tax credit properties. ▪ There is an existing and on-going need at these levels, based on income levels specified by OHCS for Clackamas County. An estimated 12% of households qualify as at least “low income” or lower on the income scale, while Income Level (Rounded)Owner UnitsRenter UnitsTotalShareCommon Housing ProductExtremely Low Inc.< 30% MFI< $27,5005614920510%Government-subsidized; Voucher; Shelter; TransitionalVery Low Income30% - 60% MFI$27.5k - $55k9522131716%Aging/substandard rentals; Government-subsidized; Voucher; Manufactured homesLow Income60% - 80% MFI$55k - $73k7112019010%Aging apartments; Government-subsidized; Plexes; Aging single-detached; Small homesMiddle Income80% - 120% MFI$73k - $110k13417230616%Single-detached homes; Townhomes; Condominiums; Newer apartmentsUpper Income> 120% MFI> $110,00066928295148%Single-detached homes; Townhomes; Condominiums; New apartmentsTOTAL:1,0249441,968100%Household Income SegmentPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 31 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 31 9% of households qualify as “extremely low income”. (Again, this is based on the official state measure of Clackamas County median income for application to HUD and other subsidized affordable housing programs, which is relatively high.) FIGURE 5.5: PROJECTED NEED FOR HOUSING AFFORDABLE AT LOW INCOME LEVELS, LAKE OSWEGO Sources: OHCS, Claritas, JOHNSON ECONOMICS, HUD * Income levels are based on OHCS guidelines for avg. Lake Oswego household size of 2.4 persons. ▪ Typically, only rent-subsidized affordable properties can accommodate these extremely-low-income households and many other low-income households at “affordable” housing cost levels. Often the lowest income households must be served by housing choice vouchers and public housing. Tax credit projects are more likely to serve those earning 50% to 60% of MFI. Housing Need for People Experiencing Homelessness: Given the low forecasted population growth, Lake Oswego is assumed to maintain a fairly stable number of unhoused individuals and households over this period. Unhoused individuals and families may require a mixture of shelter types depending on individual circumstances, ranging from emergency shelter to transitional housing to permanent subsidized housing. This population is a subset of the extremely-low-income population shown in prior figures. Agricultural Worker Housing: There is currently no housing dedicated to this population in Lake Oswego. Based on the assumption that this type of housing will maintain its current representation in the local housing stock, this indicates that there will likely be no new need for housing dedicated specifically for agricultural workers over the planning period. However, this population may also be served by other available affordable units. # of Units % of All # of Units % of All # of Units % of AllExtremely Low Inc.≤ 30% MFI ≤$26,8001,4929%1,6979% 205 10%Very Low Income30% - 50% MFI≤$44,7001,5609%1,7719% 212 11%Low Income50% - 80% MFI≤$71,6002,07512%2,37012% 295 15%TOTAL:≤ 80% MFI ≤$71,6005,12729%5,83930%71236%Tax Credit≤ 60% MFI ≤$53,7003,96223%4,48323% 521 26%Income Level*NEW Need (20-Year)Affordablilty LevelCurrent Need (2022)Future Need (2043)PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 32 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 32 VI. RECONCILIATION OF FUTURE NEED (2043) & LAND SUPPLY This section summarizes the results of the Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI). The BLI is presented in detail in an accompanying memo to this report. The BLI was conducted for land within the city limits, assessing vacant and partially vacant lands based on residential zoning, and environmental and other constraints that may impact development. The following table (Figure 6.1) presents the estimated new unit capacity of the buildable lands identified in the City of Lake Oswego and within the UGB. Residential zones, as well as mixed-use zones that can accommodate some residential uses, were included in the inventory, and are broken into broad categories based on housing density. FIGURE 6.1: ESTIMATED BUILDABLE LANDS CAPACITY BY ACREAGE AND NO. OF UNITS (2023) Source: MIG • There is a total estimated remaining capacity of 1,327 units of different types within the study area. • The estimated remaining capacity for low density housing units remains the greatest share at capacity for 655 units, or 49% of the total. • There is a total estimated capacity for 195 middle housing units, including future infill in low density zones. This is roughly 15% of the total unit capacity. ACRESLand TypeGross AcresConstrained Area (Acres)Unconstrained Area (Acres)Developable AcresUnit CapacityResidential3,5308022,784174705Mixed Use4909639710146Non-Residential17221150--Public/Other3,1471,2741,899--Acres Total:7,3392,1935,230185851UNITSHousing TypeSingle Family UnitsMiddle Housing UnitsMulti-Family UnitsUnit CapacityResidential6483917705Mixed Use523118146Non-Residential----Public/Other----Vacant and Partially Vacant Total:65362135851Additional CapacityApproved Developments223341366Additional Middle Housing Infill-110-110TOTAL HOUSING UNIT CAPACITY:6551954761,327ACREAGEUNIT TYPEPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 33 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 33 • There is a total estimated capacity for 476 housing units in higher density multi-dwelling properties. This is roughly 36% of the total unit capacity. • 28% of the total capacity (366 units) is found in units already approved for development as of the time of this analysis. Additional infill opportunities identified on large-lot residential and some commercial lands account for an estimated 8% of capacity. See the attached Appendix for full Buildable Land Inventory details and methodology. The following table summarizes the forecasted future unit need for Lake Oswego. These are the summarized results from Section V of this report, presented here for reference. FIGURE 6.2: SUMMARY OF FORECASTED FUTURE UNIT NEED (2043) Sources: PSU Population Research Center, Census, Johnson Economics Comparison of Housing Need and Capacity There is a total forecasted need for nearly 2,000 units over the next 20 years based on the forecasted growth rate. This is greater than the estimated total capacity of 1,327 units. Figure 6.3 below presents a comparison of the BLI capacity for new housing units, compared to the estimate for new unit need by 2043. It breaks down need by general zoning category (LDR, MDR, HDR). • The projected demand for low-density housing types is higher than the remaining capacity by an estimated 192 units, or the equivalent of 38 acres of low density residential land. • The results find a deficit for medium-density housing of 249 units, or 31 acres. • The projected demand for high-density housing types is higher than the remaining capacity by an estimated 201 units, or the equivalent of 17 acres of high density residential land. Single DetachedSingle Attached2-unit3- or 4-plex5+ Units MFRManuf. homeBoat, RV, other tempTotal Units% of UnitsTotals:760 220 104 205 677301,968100%Percentage:38.6% 11.2% 5.3% 10.4% 34.4% 0.1% 0.0%100%TOTAL HOUSING UNITSMulti-FamilyUnit Type:7602203096773Single Detached HomesTownhomes2 - 4 Plex Units5 or More UnitsManufactured HomesHousing UnitsHousing Unit TypeNew Units NeededPP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 34 OF 55
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO | HOUSING CAPACITY ANALYSIS PAGE 34 • These findings assume that under newly adopted state rules, 3% of available buildable parcels in the LDR zone will be used for the various types of attached units (single-family attached townhomes, duplex – fourplex). FIGURE 6.3: COMPARISON OF FORECASTED FUTURE LAND NEED (2043) WITH AVAILABLE CAPACITY Sources: MIG, Johnson Economics • These findings point to a need for additional residential land in a range of zones over the 20-year planning period. Available inventory may meet an estimated 67% of total housing needs over the first half of the planning period, but a deficit is projected in the long run. • A range of potential housing policies and strategies will be considered in future development of a Housing Production Strategy by the City, including the ability of future plan areas to meet the need for different types of housing during the 20-year planning period. WITHIN CITY LIMITSUnitsAvg. Units/ac.AcresLow-Density Single-family detached; Some SF attached & plex655847(192)5(38)Med-DensitySF attached; Manufact. home; 2-4 plexes195444(249)8(31)High-DensityMulti-family apartments476677(201)12(17)TOTALS:1,3271,968(642)7(86)SUPPLY DEMANDGrowth Rate (0.05%)New Unit Need (2043)Zone & Plan CategoryTypical Housing TypeBuildable Land Inventory - Housing Unit CapacitySurplus or (Deficit)PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 35 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 35 APPENDIX A: LAKE OSWEGO RESIDENTIAL BUILDABLE LANDS INVENTORY Methodology and Results | July 18, 2023 Introduction This memorandum provides a Residential Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI) for the City of Lake Oswego, which will support the creation of a Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) for the City. The methodology for this BLI is based on the 2018 Metro BLI1 with further refinements through review and discussions with City staff. The BLI is conducted in the following steps: • Step 1: Study Area and Land Classification. This step identifies the land in the City that is available for residential uses. • Step 2: Constraints to Development. This step identifies constraints such as natural resources, steep slopes, and utility easements that limit development. • Step 3: Development Status. This step assigns a “Development Status” of vacant, partially vacant, or developed tax lots in the inventory. • Step 4: Net Buildable Area and Unit Capacity. This step removes land for future rights-of-way and other land needs to provide a net number of acres for each City zoning designation, then estimates number of units and mix of unit type (single detached, multi-dwelling, middle housing) expected based on the results of Step 4. Step 1: Study Area and Land Classification Study Area The study area for this analysis is shown in Figure 1. The study area includes land within the Lake Oswego City Limits.2 1 https://www.oregonmetro.gov/sites/default/files/2018/07/03/UGR_Appendix2_Buildable_Lands_Inventory.pdf 2 A prior version of this Buildable Lands Inventory included unannexed land outside of the Lake Oswego City Limits which has a City Comprehensive Plan designation. This land has been removed from the study area following PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 36 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 36 Figure 1. Study Area Map Land Classification Parcels in the inventory are categorized based on their Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designations, property ownership, and other characteristics available in City/regional datasets. These classifications are described in Table 1 and shown in Figure 4. Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Districts The City of Lake Oswego’s Comprehensive Plan Districts are described in Table 1. This is the primary basis for classifying lands into the categories of Residential, Mixed-Use, Nonresidential, and Publicly Owned/Other. Alignment with Zoning Districts are shown in the “Implementing Zones” column. Zoning discussion with the City’s Housing Production Strategy Task Force and Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) staff. PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 37 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 37 and Comprehensive Plan map designations are shown in Figures 2 and 3, respectively. Overarching categories of land and how they are considered in this inventory are described on the pages following those figures. Table 1. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Districts Comprehensive Plan Designations Implementing Zones Zone Purpose Residential Low Density R-15 To provide lands for single-family residential development with densities ranging from two to five dwelling units per gross acre, and to provide lands for middle housing development. R-10 R-7.5 Residential Medium Density R-5 To provide lands for single- and multi-family residential development with densities ranging from seven to eight dwelling units per gross acre, and to provide lands for middle housing development. R-DD Zone (1) The purpose of the R-DD zone is to assure that both single-family homes and middle housing are protected from noise, light, glare and reduction in privacy to the maximum extent possible during the area’s transition to higher density residential use, to facilitate good architectural design and site planning which maintains residential choices of unit size, cost and other amenities and supports the economic feasibility of new construction and development, and to assure protection and compatibility of all land uses, including commercial, residential, park, open space and historic sites. (2) The R-DD zone is intended for use in low density residential districts which are undergoing transition to increased densities, and which have scenic, historic, natural or residential features which should be preserved and integrated with new development. R-6 The FAN R-6 zone is intended to implement the land use policies of the First Addition Neighborhood Plan. The purpose of this zone is to ensure the design quality of proposed development in the neighborhood by: (1) Ensuring that proposed building designs are visually compatible with the character of existing structures, maintain adequate light and air between structures, and complement the neighborhood’s architectural character. (2) Minimizing the visual impact of garages from the street, and to continue established alley uses and functions such as access to garages, off-street parking and trash removal. (3) Encouraging compatible and sensitive remodeling and renovation of existing residences. (4) Preserving the small-town character of the existing streetscape by allowing single-family and middle housing development that is human scale and pedestrian oriented. (5) Enhancing the natural environment of the neighborhood as one of the dominant characteristics. PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 38 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 38 Comprehensive Plan Designations Implementing Zones Zone Purpose (6) Preserving FAN’s historical and architectural character by encouraging infill development that is compatible in design character to landmark structures on abutting lots. Residential High Density R-3 To provide lands for single- and multi-family residential development with densities of at least 12 dwelling units per gross acre, and to provide lands for middle housing development. R-2 R-0 R-W Commercial Neighborhood Commercial (NC) To provide land near residential areas for lower intensity commercial activities that primarily serve the surrounding neighborhood, smaller public facility uses, and residential uses. General Commercial (GC) To provide lands for a mix of higher intensity commercial activities supplying a broad range of goods and services to a market area approximately equal to the planning area identified in the Comprehensive Plan, as well as residential, public facilities, and cultural uses. Highway Commercial (HC) To provide lands for commercial activities which meet the needs of the traveling public as well as other highway-oriented retail uses which require access to a market area larger than the general commercial zone. This zone is not intended for regional shopping centers. Mixed Commerce (MC) To provide for a mix of uses requiring highway access and which provide a strong visual identity. Intended uses include local and regional convention type facilities, office uses and supporting retail uses. Office Campus (OC) To provide lands for major concentrations of regionally-oriented offices and employment opportunities for a market area larger than the planning area. Campus Research and Development (CR&D) To provide a mix of clean, employee-intensive industries, offices and high-density housing with associated services and retail commercial uses in locations supportive of mass transit and the regional transportation network. Campus Institutional (CI) The purpose of the CI zone is to provide zoning regulations for the Marylhurst Campus in order to provide land where permitted or conditional uses can be provided for in a unified campus setting. East End General Commercial (EC) To implement Comprehensive Plan policies applicable to the Downtown Town Center and to provide land for a mix of higher intensity commercial, residential, and cultural uses and public facilities that support a traditional downtown commercial core. Industrial Industrial Zone (I) The purpose of the industrial zone is to provide land where general industrial development can be located. Industrial Park Zone (IP) To provide lands where primarily light industrial and employment uses can occur in a campus-like setting under controls to make activities mutually compatible and also compatible with existing uses bordering the zone. Mixed Use West Lake Grove Zones (Townhome Residential - WLG R-2.5, To provide zoning for townhome residential, commercial, and mixed-use development in the West Lake Grove District that accommodates lower intensity commercial, public facility and residential uses; and to provide a transition between the Lake Grove Village Center and adjacent residential neighborhoods. PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 39 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 39 Comprehensive Plan Designations Implementing Zones Zone Purpose Residential Mixed Use - WLG RMU, and Office-Commercial - WLG OC) These districts are intended to supply services to a market area that is comprised of adjacent neighborhoods. Foothills Mixed Use (FMU) To foster a mix of housing, retail and office uses in a central location proximate to downtown and along the Willamette River. Commercial uses are allowed but are not intended to dominate the character of the area. Retail uses are limited in size to complement the downtown core and facilitate the development of neighborhood-focused retail served by transit. The design and development standards are intended to create a unique Lake Oswego community. The emphasis of the zone is on residentially related uses. The Foothills Mixed Use code provisions are intended to: i. Connect the FMU area with downtown, Tryon Creek, Old Town, the Willamette River and Oswego Lake; ii. Create a sustainable walkable neighborhood that possesses a thriving, active, and comfortable pedestrian environment; iii. Create visual interest through varied building heights that are urban in character, yet include detailed amenities at the ground floor that enhance the pedestrian environment; iv. Create high quality buildings, of long lasting materials, to promote the permanence of the community; v. Allow for a mix of residential uses, with urban density, and neighborhood scale retail and office development; and vi. Establish a standard of design that reinforces Lake Oswego’s sense of place. Public Use Public Functions (PF) The Public Functions (PF) zone is intended to specify appropriate land uses and development standards for public uses, such as government services, education, and similar activities. Park and Natural Area (PNA) Park and Natural Area (PNA) The purposes of the Park and Natural Area (PNA) zone are to: i. Protect, preserve, conserve and enhance natural areas, greenways and parks; ii. Permit a wide range of passive and active recreational uses, and accessory uses, on property for the future use and enjoyment of the City and its residents; iii. Implement Statewide Planning Goal 8, Recreational Needs; and iv. Establish a master plan process for park planning and development. PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 40 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 40 Figure 2. City of Lake Oswego Zoning Designations PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 41 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 41 Figure 3. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan Designations Residential Land Residential Land is intended to meet the City’s need for residential uses of various types. It includes land within the R-0, R-2, R-3, R-5, R-6, R-7.5, R-10, R-15, R-W, and WLG R-2.5 Comprehensive Plan designations, unless it meets the criteria for “Publicly Owned/Other” land. Mixed Use Land Mixed Use land can be developed to meet the City’s residential and employment needs – sometimes within the same structure. It includes land within the WLG RMU, CI, CR&D, EC, FMU, GC, HC, NC, OC, and WLG OC Comprehensive Plan designations unless it meets the criteria for “Publicly Owned/Other” land. More information about the assumptions for future housing development in these areas is found later in this report. Nonresidential Land Nonresidential land includes employment land and “Publicly Owned/Other” land, as follows. This land is not included in the inventory. PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 42 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 42 Employment Land Employment Land is intended to meet the City’s employment needs. It includes land within the MC and IP Comprehensive Plan designations unless it meets the criteria for “Public/Other” land. Publicly Owned/Other This category of land includes the SP, PF, and PNA designations, as well as land in the following categories: • Land in another Comprehensive Plan designation under City, County, State, Federal, or Special District Ownership • Land commonly held in Homeowners’ Associations (HOA) common ownership, such as required open space. • Religious or fraternal properties (with the notable exception of Marylhurst University, which is accounted for in a separate line item). • Private driveways and ROW As noted above, properties in this category are generally not included in the inventory. However, some specific parcels in this category may be included in other classifications if information is available to suggest that they have development capacity for residential or employment uses. PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 43 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 43 Figure 4.BLI Land Classification PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 44 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 44 Step 2: Constraints to Development One of the primary tasks of this BLI is to identify land that is constrained by one or more of the following physical constraints. Constraints may overlap one another spatially – in this case the more restrictive constraint applies. Assumptions for these constraints are listed below – they have been discussed with City staff but are subject to further refinement, as needed. Constraints are described in Table 2 and shown on Figure 5. Table 2. Development Constraints Constraint Description Developable Portion Steep Slopes Slopes greater than 25%. Density transfer resulting in the construction of 1-2 dwelling units allowed. 5% Developable Water Bodies Includes lakes, streams, other areas of open water 0% Developable FEMA Flood Hazard Areas Includes Zones A, AE, and X. Density transfer resulting in the construction of 1-2 dwelling units allowed. 5% Developable Greenway Management Overlay District Protects land along the Willamette River. Permitted uses include single-family dwellings and accessory structures associated with such dwellings. 25% Developable Sensitive Lands Includes Resource Protection (Streams and Wetlands; RP), Resource Conservation (Tree Groves; RC), and Habitat Benefit Areas (Tree Groves; HBA). RP and RC areas are tightly regulated, while HBAs are areas with optional resource protection incentives rather than regulations. RP – Density transfer possible. RC - Mostly applies to public land and open space tracts, which are not developable (PF and PNA zones, OS tracts in private developments, typically). HBA - Incentives, rather than regulations, are applied to protect natural resources. Usually does not limit development beyond a modest reduction. RP – 50% Developable RC – 0% Developable HBA – 95% Developable PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 45 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 45 Figure 5. Constraints to Development PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 46 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 46 The BLI includes the following information for each tax lot in the study area based on the location of constraints. • Acres – Total size of the tax lot • Constrained Acres – Acreage of constrained areas, per Table 2 • Unconstrained Acres – Total acres minus Constrained Acres The following table shows gross acres of land in each primary land classification in the Study Area. Table 2. Constrained and Unconstrained Acres by Land Type Land Type Total Acres Constrained Acres Unconstrained Acres Residential 3,530 802 2,784 Mixed Use 490 96 397 Non-Residential 172 21 150 Publicly Owned/Other 3,147 1,274 1,899 Total 7,339 2,193 5,230 Step 3: Development Status Each tax lot in the study area is categorized as Vacant, Partially Vacant, or Developed. The following data is used to determine development capacity of Study Area tax lots: • Tax assessor data, including Property Land Use Code, Improvement Value, and Land Value; • City inventory of outdoor areas, used in identifying public and commonly-held open spaces such as public facilities, parks and Homeowners Association-owned open spaces; • Metro Vacant Land Inventory derived annually from aerial photo information; • Review of recent aerial imagery; and • Discussion and review with City staff and the Housing Production Strategy (HPS) Task Force. Generally, vacant tax lots are assumed to have development capacity equal to the area unconstrained by natural resources, minus additional set-asides for future Right-of-Way and infrastructure (see Step 4). Developed parcels will be subject to further screening for redevelopment potential, described in later steps. Partially Vacant properties have an existing home but are large enough to subdivide based on criteria such as parcel size and allowable lot size, as described in this section. Residential Development Status • Vacant. Land that has a building improvement value of less than $20,000, as indicated by assessor data. All land outside of constrained areas is included in the developable area for these properties. • Vacant – Platted. Vacant land that is part of a platted but unbuilt subdivision is included in this category. Platted lots are assumed to contain one unit each unless other information is available (see Step 4). “Developable Acres” is shown as “0” because they are treated separately from other acreage in the inventory. PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 47 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 47 • Partially Vacant. This designation is intended for parcels with an existing single-detached home that are large enough to further subdivide or develop to provide additional residential units. While middle housing and townhomes are allowed in many zones, this analysis uses the minimum lot size required for single-detached dwellings as the basis for the Partially Vacant designation, as follows: o Parcels greater than 5 times the minimum lot size: These lots are categorized as “Partially Vacant.” ¼ acre is assumed to remain for the existing home and the remaining unconstrained acreage is assumed to be developable. o Parcels between 2 and 5 times the minimum lot size: For lots with a building value below $200,000, ¼ acre is assumed to remain for the existing home and the remaining unconstrained acreage is assumed to be developable. o Parcels less than 2 times the minimum lot size: These lots are categorized as “Developed” if improvement value is present or aerial photo review shows development. • Developed. All other residential land is designated Developed and has no developable area. Mixed Use Development Status Mixed Use development is subject to the same criteria as Residential Land. However, an additional screen is used to determine the likelihood of redevelopment of mixed-use parcels in Step 4, and assumptions about the residential/employment mix (see Error! Reference source not found.3) are applied. Mixed Use Residential Proportion Mixed use designations are assumed to develop partly with residential uses and partly with non-residential uses, per the following table. Table 3. Residential Portions of Mixed Use Tax Lots Mixed Use Designation Residential Portion Nonresidential Portion Notes West Lake Grove Residential Mixed Use (WLG RMU) 50% 50% Townhomes only allowed with office use in the same building West Lake Grove Office-Commercial (WLG OC) 25% 75% Residential limited to Boones Ferry Staging site, per LOC 50.03.003.2.d. Residential limited to Boones Ferry Staging Site. Percentage based on the size of this site in relation to the total size of district (see LOC 50.03.003.2.d for geography). Campus Institutional (CI) 50% 50% Multifamily development is limited to Subarea I of the Marylhurst Campus Zone. Campus Research & Development (CR&D) 30% 70% Assumption based on trends in this area East End Commercial (EC) 80% 20% Foothills Mixed Use (FMU) 80% 20% Most similar to EC in terms of residential/non-residential mix General Commercial (GC) 30% 70% PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 48 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 48 Highway Commercial (HC) 10% 90% Neighborhood Commercial (NC) 50% 50% Office Campus (OC) 30% 70% Summary The following table lists the number of tax lots, total and constrained acreage, and developable area by land type. A map summarizing development status is shown in Figure 6. Table 4. Developable Area of Residential and Mixed Use Tax Lots Land Type Gross Acres Constrained Area (Acres) Unconstrained Area (Acres) Developable Acres Residential 3,530 802 2,784 175 Mixed Use 490 96 397 14 Non-Residential 172 21 150 - Public/Other 3,147 1,274 1,899 - Total 7,339 2,193 5,230 189 PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 49 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 49 Figure 6. Development Status of Residential and Mixed Use Land PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 50 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 50 Step 4: Net Buildable Area and Unit Capacity This step of the BLI establishes the net buildable area of residential land in the Study Area by removing land needed for future right-of-way and other infrastructure set-asides, and by subtracting the non-residential portions of mixed-use zones. This step also accounts for platted subdivisions and other development with known approvals. Right of Way and Other Set-Asides When vacant land develops, land for roads, infrastructure, open space, and other needs reduce the gross available acres into a net developable acreage. The BLI uses the following assumptions to calculate net developable acreage for each parcel. • Residential Land: 20% of vacant properties, 0% of partially vacant properties • Mixed Use Land: 20% of vacant properties, 0% of partially vacant properties Assumed Density and Housing Mix Table 4 shows the assumed density for various zoning designations in the City of Lake Oswego. This information is based on the minimum lot sizes, likely densities, and staff assumptions based on recent projects and comparable zones, and parcel-by-parcel analysis. The proportion of units expected to be developed as Single Family Detached, Middle Housing, and Multi-Family are also shown. Table 4. Unit Density and Mix Assumptions Zoning Designation Notes Density % Single Family Detached % Middle Housing % Multi-Family Residential-Low Density Zones R-15 Min 15,000 sf lot area. 2.9 DU/AC net 2.9 DU/AC net 95% 5% - R-10 Min 10,000 sf lot area. 4.3 du/ac net. 4.3 du/ac net 95% 5% - R-7.5 Min 7,500 sf lot area 5.8 du/ac net 5.8 du/ac 95% 5% - Residential-Medium Density Zones R-5 7-8 units per gross acre, per code. 5,000 sf min lot size for single-family. 1,500 for townhouse. ~8 du/ac 90% 5% 5% R-DD Buffer zone. 21 du/ac theoretically possible. ~8 du/ac 95% 5% - R-6 First Addition Neighborhood (FAN) zone 6,000 sf lot area for Single-Family. 1,500 for townhouse. ~7 du/ac 95% 5% - Residential-High Density Zones PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 51 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 51 Zoning Designation Notes Density % Single Family Detached % Middle Housing % Multi-Family R-3 At least 12 du/ac. (3,375 min per dwelling, or 12.9 du/ac). Townhomes up to 29 du/ac ~12 du/ac 70% 10% 20% R-2 Min 12 du/ac 12 du/ac 60% 10% 30% R-0 Min 20 du/ac 20 du/ac 60% 10% 30% R-W ~12 du/ac 60% 10% 30% Mixed Use Zones West Lake Grove Residential Mixed Use (WLG RMU) Table 50.03.002-2 notes “R-5 density or greater” ~5 du/ac - 50% 50% West Lake Grove Office-Commercial (WLG OC) Table 50.03.002-2 notes “R-5 density or greater” 35 du/ac expected in BFR Staging Site, nothing in other areas - 20% 80% Campus Institutional (CI) Table 50.03.002-2 notes “R-5 density or greater.” Must have commercial on ground floor. Generally applies to Marylhurst University, which is treated separately. - - 100% Campus Research & Development (CR&D) Table 50.03.002-2 notes “R-5 density or greater” 54 du/ac for projects that include residential (~30% of the district, as above) based on LU 19-0041 - - 100% East End Commercial (EC) Table 50.03.002-2 notes “R-5 density or greater.” Must have commercial on ground floor. ~56 du/ac - - 100% Foothills Mixed Use (FMU) Table 50.03.002-2 notes “R-5 density or greater” ~56 du/ac - - 100% General Commercial (GC) Table 50.03.002-2 notes “R-5 density or greater.” Must have commercial on ground floor. Residential not allowed “In the GC-zoned area in the vicinity of Jean Way and Boones Ferry Road.” ~27 du/ac based on Mercantile project (LU 18-0026) - 25% 75% Highway Commercial (HC) Table 50.03.002-2 notes “R-5 density or greater” 8 du/ac (or R-5 density) for the 10% that may develop as residential - - 100% PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 52 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 52 Zoning Designation Notes Density % Single Family Detached % Middle Housing % Multi-Family Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Table 50.03.002-2 notes “R-5 density or greater.” Must have commercial on ground floor. 67 du/ac for the 50% that may develop as residential (based on LU 07-0031) - 50% 50% Office Campus (OC) Table 50.03.002-2 notes “R-5 density or greater” 21 du/ac for the 50% that may develop as residential (based on Galewood Commons Apartments) - - 100% Summary of Vacant and Partially Vacant Land Table 5 summarizes net residential acreage for both residential and mixed-use land in the study area, and Table 6 shows the breakdown of capacity by zoning designation. Land with a known development approval has been removed and is accounted for in a later step. Table 5. Capacity of Residential and Mixed Use Land Land Type Developable Acres Unit Capacity Residential 174 705 Mixed Use 10 146 Non-Residential - - Public/Other - - Total 185 851 Table 6. Unit Capacity by Zoning Designation Land Type Unit Capacity Land Type Unit Capacity Residential Land 705 Mixed Use Land 146 EC/R-0 5 CR&D 14 R-0 2 EC 67 R-10 241 GC 12 R-10 Comp Plan 14 NC 23 R-15 131 NC/R-0 9 R-3 28 OC/R-3 5 R-5 116 R-0 8 R-7.5 149 WLG-OC 7 R-7.5 Comp Plan 3 WLG-R RMU 1 R-DD 12 R-W 1 WLG-R 2.5 3 Total Capacity: 851 Units PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 53 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 53 Table 7.Mix of Unit Capacity on Vacant and Partially Vacant Land Land Type Unit Capacity Single Family Units Middle Housing Units Multi-Family Units Residential 705 648 39 17 Mixed Use 146 5 23 118 Non-Residential - - - - Public/Other - - - - Total 851 653 62 136 Additional Capacity: In addition to the capacity listed above, the following categories of additional residential unit capacity have been identified. These are listed in Table 7, along with the expected mix of housing units. • Approved Development. Several parcels have land use approvals and/or are actively undergoing development. Where information about the unit capacity of these approvals is known, that information is used as future capacity (rather than an average assumption based on the zoning designation). These approvals are listed in Table 8. • Additional Middle Housing Capacity: Due to the City’s middle housing legislation, most single family lots can be converted to duplexes or other middle housing types. The number of new units expected to be created through this process in the planning horizon is estimated at 1.5% of developed lots with single-detached dwellings outside of PUDs/easements. This totals 110 Units3. • Redevelopment of Commercial Land and Town Centers: An initial “strike price” analysis4 found very few properties that appear to be good candidates for redevelopment at $30/sf. Value per square foot for many properties along Kruse Way and in Town Centers is generally $50/sf or greater. There may be some opportunity to utilize parking areas for new residential uses, depending on the City’s development code and many other factors, though additional commercial infill is also a possibility. For the purposes of this BLI, no redevelopment capacity is assumed. 3 A previous version of this analysis assumed 3% of all single detached units, regardless of whether they were located in a PUD. Feedback from stakeholders and DLCD was that this infill assumption seemed high and was unrealistic due to the prevalence of CC&Rs in Lake Oswego. 4 “Strike Price” is a measure of land and building value per square foot at which a developer is assumed to be able to profitably redevelop a piece of property. The 2018 Metro BLI used a strike price of $12/sf for suburban jurisdictions – this analysis examine a more aggressive $30/sf and still found very few candidates for redevelopment. PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 54 OF 55
Lake Oswego Housing Needs Analysis July 18, 2023 APPENDIX A: Buildable Lands Inventory Page 54 Table 8. Parcels with Approved Development and Assumed Capacity Land Type Taxlot(s) Total Unit Capacity Single Family Units Middle Housing Units Multi-Family Units Habitat for Humanity Townhomes [Link] 21E18AB00400 21E18AB00300 21E18AB00200 21E18AB00100 21E18AA00400 23 0 23 0 5400 Meadows [Link] 21E07BA00900 160 0 0 160 Twin Fir Road 21E08AB02100 21E08AB02000 2 2 0 0 The Boulder [Link] 21E07DD02300 21E07DD02500 11 0 0 11 Marylhurst University 21E14DB02900 21E14 00300 21E14 00400 21E14 00401 21E14 00402 21E14 00403 21E14 00404 21E14 90000 21E14 900A1 21E14 900B2 170 0 0 170 Total 366 2 23 341 Table 9. Summary of Unit Capacity Land Type Total Unit Capacity Single Family Units Middle Housing Units Multi-Family Units Vacant & Partially Vacant Land 851 653 62 136 Approved Developments 366 2 23 341 Additional Middle Housing Infill 110 - 110 - Total 1,327 655 195 477 Next Steps This inventory will inform the Housing Capacity Analysis and Housing Needs Assessment to provide a picture of the availability of residential land as it compares to the need of certain types of housing units in the next 20 years. It forms part of the factual basis for City policies to address any deficiencies in unit capacity. PP 22-0005ATTACHMENT-1/PAGE 55 OF 55
MIG, Inc. | Lake Oswego Housing Produc�on Strategy 1
Lake Oswego Contextualized Housing
Needs Assessment
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (WORKING DRAFT)
The City of Lake Oswego completed its most recent Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) in the fall of 2023. The
analysis included an inventory of buildable land for residen�al uses and a projec�on of future housing
need, consistent with state and regional requirements. The HNA found that, despite a very low assumed
growth rate over the 20-year planning horizon, the City of Lake Oswego has a need for nearly 2,000 new
housing units, including over 1,100 mul�-family and middle housing units. According to the HNA, about
half of those units are needed to meet upper income ranges (greater than 120% of the Area Median
Income, or AMI), while the remaining half are needed to meet very low to middle income household
needs.
To advance the City's planning efforts to encourage and allow for development of needed housing, the
City is in the process of crea�ng a Housing Produc�on Strategy (HPS), the purpose of which is to iden�fy
a set of ac�ons that the City of Lake Oswego will take to facilitate housing development that meets the
needs of the community. The HPS focuses on how to fill the gap between the City's housing need and
supply, par�cularly housing available to low- and moderate-income households—and par�cularly low-
cost rental housing.
A key step in this process is developing a Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment (CHNA) per OAR
660-008-0050(1). This assessment is intended to build on previous work conducted for the HNA to
describe demographic, housing, and market condi�ons; housing affordability issues; barriers to mee�ng
iden�fied housing needs, including the needs of tradi�onally underserved and disadvantaged
popula�ons; and exis�ng or previous programs implemented to address housing needs.
Data sources for this report include the US decennial census and 5-year American Communi�es Survey
(ACS) tables, CoStar, Regional Mul�ple Lis�ng Service (RMLS), and Johnson Economics. Key takeaways
from this report follow.
Summary of Market Conditions
• For-Sale Housing. The median sale price was $860,000, while The average (mean) sale price was
$1,075,000. The median square footage was 2,300 sq. �. Atached units and condominiums
make up a significant share of home sales (28%). The median home sale price in Lake Oswego
has more than doubled over the past 10 years, from $395k in 2012 to $860k in 2022. Median
price growth has averaged 8% per year over the past decade but has recently experienced the
strongest one-year growth in 2020 (14%) and 2021 (19%).
• Rental Housing. The average effec�ve rent in Lake Oswego is $2,038/mo. In the last decade,
rent growth has been 52% or 4.3% per year. By comparison, infla�on has been 31% or 2.7% per
year for the same period. Rents peaked in 2022 and have moderated slightly since.
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 1 OF 9
CHNA Execu�ve Summary (Working Dra�) 10/24/2023
MIG, Inc. | Lake Oswego Housing Produc�on Strategy 2
•Housing Affordability. 75% of recent sales in Lake Oswego were priced at least $600,000.
Homes in this range would be mostly affordable to households earning at least $175,000 per
year. This is well above the median household income of $123,000. 50% of renter households
are considered cost burdened.
•Publicly Assisted Housing. The state tracks three current subsidized affordable housing
proper�es in Lake Oswego, with a total of 76 units. 75 of these units are offered for elderly
residents. The Marylhurst Commons will offer 100 affordable units for families. Upon
comple�on in 2024, the total 176 subsidized units in Lake Oswego will represent 1% of the local
housing stock. The Housing Authority of Clackamas County administers over 1,600 Sec�on 8
housing choice. No agricultural worker housing exists currently in Lake Oswego.
Figure EX-1. Lake Oswego Home Sales (12 months, July 2022 to July 2023)
Source: RMLS, Johnson Economics
72%0%
8%
20%
Home Sales by Unit Type
Detached Home Manuf. Home
Attached Home Condo
0
3
43
47
31
39
56
67
66
319
0 100 200 300 400
<$100,000
$100,000 - $199,000
$200,000 - $299,000
$300,000 - $399,000
$400,000 - $499,000
$500,000 - $599,000
$600,000 - $699,000
$700,000 - $799,000
$800,000 - $899,000
$900,000+
Home Sales by Price Level
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 2 OF 9
CHNA Execu�ve Summary (Working Dra�) 10/24/2023
MIG, Inc. | Lake Oswego Housing Produc�on Strategy 3
Figure EX-2. Median Home Sale Price (2010-2022)
Source: RMLS, Johnson Economics
Figure EX-3. Effective Rent Per Unit, 2001 to 2023.
Source: CoStar, Johnson Economics
$0
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
$700,000
$800,000
$900,000
Median Sale Price
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
Effective Rent Per Unit
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 3 OF 9
CHNA Execu�ve Summary (Working Dra�) 10/24/2023
MIG, Inc. | Lake Oswego Housing Produc�on Strategy 4
Figure EX-4. Vacancy Rate, 2001 to 2023
Source: CoStar, Johnson Economics
Figure EX-5. Housing Affordability.
Sources: US Census, Johnson Economics
Census Table: B25070 (2021 ACS 5-yr Es�mates)
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
Vacancy Rate
3%
22%
25%
14%
7%
29%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Sh
a
r
e
o
f
H
o
u
s
e
h
o
l
d
s
% of Income to Gross Rent
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 4 OF 9
CHNA Execu�ve Summary (Working Dra�) 10/24/2023
MIG, Inc. | Lake Oswego Housing Produc�on Strategy 5
Socio-Economic Information
• Racial Diversity. Lake Oswego is roughly 80% white, 8% Asian, and 9% two or more races. The
City is more diverse today than ten years ago.
• Disability. There are roughly 3,140 disabled individuals in Lake Oswego.
• Veterans. Veterans are 6% of the adult popula�on. 63% are 65 and older. Veterans have lower
than average poverty level, and 21% have some sort of disability.
Figure EX-6. Population by Race
SOURCE: US Census, Johnson Economics LLC
Census Tables: P1, P2 (2010, 2020)
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 5 OF 9
CHNA Execu�ve Summary (Working Dra�) 10/24/2023
MIG, Inc. | Lake Oswego Housing Produc�on Strategy 6
Figure EX-7. Disabled Population
SOURCE: US Census, Johnson Economics LLC
Census Tables: DP02, (2020 ACS 5-year)
Existing Adopted Housing Measures
The City of Lake Oswego already implements a variety of measures intended to enable or facilitate the
produc�on of needed housing. The City submited a “Pre-HPS Survey” to DLCD in 2022, as required by
former subsec�on 2 of ORS 456.586, which includes an exhaus�ve list of the housing measures the City
has adopted and implemented. In combina�on with the other findings in the Contextualized Housing
Needs report, this list will help the City and community understand where there are gaps in the City’s
approach toward mee�ng its housing needs.
Below is a summary of the key housing measures adopted by the City, organized into the categories
defined by DLCD. The full list of adopted measures will be included as an appendix to the HPS Report.
Zoning Strategies
• Height/density bonus for affordable developments – The City allows a limited height or density
bonus for affordable developments in the West Lake Grove Design District (WLG-OC) and R-DD
zones.
• Increased code flexibility for accessory dwelling units – The City removed occupancy
requirements for ADUs and expanded maximum ADU size to 1,000 sq. �. for internal remodels
of primary dwellings.
7.8%
2.4%
1.7%
2.7%
2.9%
1.1%
2.3%
0%2%4%6%8%10%
Population with a disability
Hearing difficulty
Vision difficulty
Cognitive difficulty
Ambulatory difficulty
Self-care difficulty
Independent living difficulty
Share of Population
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 6 OF 9
CHNA Execu�ve Summary (Working Dra�) 10/24/2023
MIG, Inc. | Lake Oswego Housing Produc�on Strategy 7
• Short-term rental regula�ons – The City requires that short-term rental is a home occupa�on
where a resident lives on the lot. Short-term rentals are not permited in ADUs where the ADU
received a system development charge (SDC) waiver.
• Mandatory affordable housing – City requires affordable housing (affordable to those earning
80% or less of AMI) on a por�on of the Marylhurst Special District and a por�on of the West
Lake Grove Design District (WLG-OC zone) where mul�family use is allowed.
• Increased density near transit sta�ons – The mixed-use zoning that is in place near transit –
Metro 'town centers' – allows residen�al use and does not limit density. These areas have
developed/redeveloped with high-density (50-100 units per acre) development in recent years.
• Lot coverage bonus for housing - – The City allows a limited lot coverage bonus within the Lake
Grove Village Center Overlay (LGVCO) for developments where housing is provided.
Reducing Regulatory Impediments
• Removed parking mandates near transit – In compliance with the state’s Climate-Friendly and
Equitable Communi�es rules, the City does not apply minimum parking requirements within
1/2-mile of priority transit, which includes the en�re Downtown Town Center, and will remove
minimum parking requirements in the City's other climate-friendly area (Lake Grove Village
Center) to comply with CFEC rules.
• Expedites permi�ng for affordable housing – The City has a prac�ce of expedi�ng the
permi�ng process for deed-restricted affordable units.
Financial Incen�ves
• Waives fees for affordable housing and ADUs – The City has adopted regula�ons to waive SDCs
and development review fees for income restricted affordable housing (80% or less of AMI) and
for accessory dwelling units. The City has exempted $388,073 in SDCs for ADUs since 2019.
Financial Resources
• Uses urban renewal funds to support housing – The Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency
underwrote some of the costs in the North Anchor development downtown to ensure the
provision of deed-restricted affordable housing units using funds from the City's urban renewal
program.
Land Acquisi�on, Lease, and Partnerships
• Surplus City-owned land / land banking for affordable housing – The City does this with vacant
or underu�lized sites, most recently the 1.4-acre construc�on staging property for the Boones
Ferry Road Improvement Project. The site will be used to create 50 deed-restricted affordable
housing units, using Metro Affordable Housing Bond funds.
• Public-private partnerships – The City has worked with organiza�ons such as Habitat for
Humanity and Mercy Housing Northwest to produce affordable housing units.
• Conversion of underperforming commercial assets – The Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency
acquired the North Anchor site to convert this commercial property into a mixed-use
development with affordable and market-rate housing.
• U�lizing surplus land owned by faith-based organiza�on for housing – The City worked
collabora�vely with the Sisters of Holy Names of Jesus and Mary (Sisters) when they were
considering reuse of the former Marylhurst University Campus. Ul�mately, the Sisters entered
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 7 OF 9
CHNA Execu�ve Summary (Working Dra�) 10/24/2023
MIG, Inc. | Lake Oswego Housing Produc�on Strategy 8
into an agreement with Mercy Housing NW for construc�on of 100 units of affordable family
housing.
Barriers to Development of Needed Housing
Numerous factors contribute to the availability of housing in Lake Oswego – market factors, physical
condi�ons, regula�ons, public investments, etc. Some of these factors can serve as barriers to the
produc�on of housing that is most needed in the city. To understand the major barriers to developing
needed housing in Lake Oswego, the project team interviewed a number of stakeholders involved in
housing produc�on in the city. These interviews were conducted in September and October 2023 and
included market-rate developers and architects with experience in single-family, middle housing, and
mul�-family housing produc�on; nonprofit housing providers, including Habitat for Humanity and Mercy
Housing Northwest; and City staff involved in Planning and Redevelopment.
Following are some of the key housing needs that the stakeholders iden�fied as gaps in the market:
• Affordable housing for low- and moderate-income households
• Middle housing (e.g., townhomes, duplexes, and cotage clusters)
• Housing op�ons for seniors and opportuni�es for aging in place
• Op�ons for more atainable homeownership (e.g., condos and middle housing)
• Apartments with family-size units (2-3 bedrooms)
• Mul�-family housing outside the Town Center
In terms of barriers to mee�ng these needs, and to housing produc�on more generally, some of the
major themes are summarized below.
• High cost of land in Lake Oswego. The city has very high land values, which translates to high
rental and sale prices, and makes deed-restricted affordable housing especially challenging to
pencil out.
• Few large, developable sites. There is limited land within the City and urban service boundary
to support mul�-family housing and other development types that typically rely on larger
parcels of land. The Buildable Lands Inventory prepared as part of the Housing Needs Analysis
also supports this no�on – finding a deficit of buildable land to meet future housing needs,
including lands zoned for high-density housing.
• Code barriers. Stakeholders iden�fied a range of barriers to housing development in the Lake
Oswego Community Development Code. Stakeholders expressed that City’s code is especially
challenging to work with compared to some other jurisdic�ons. The following specific code
barriers were iden�fied:
o Overlay and Design District standards are highly prescrip�ve, which can add to the cost
of development and limit flexibility. Stakeholders pointed to detailed architectural
standards as being a par�cular challenge – e.g., requirements for specific siding
materials adding to construc�on costs.
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 8 OF 9
CHNA Execu�ve Summary (Working Dra�) 10/24/2023
MIG, Inc. | Lake Oswego Housing Produc�on Strategy 9
o Tree protec�on and tree plan�ng and landscaping standards are also very prescrip�ve
and can be difficult to meet on constrained sites.
o Open space standards for mul�-family housing are excessive, limit the available space
on a site for housing units, and don’t necessarily lead to great outcomes. Open spaces
can be smaller and more concentrated while s�ll providing appealing ameni�es for
residents.
o Setbacks and other standards limit middle housing infill opportuni�es. Stakeholders
shared that si�ng standards can make it difficult for middle housing such as duplexes
and townhomes to fit on exis�ng lots.
• Process barriers. Stakeholders also noted that Lake Oswego’s development review and
permi�ng processes can be lengthy and contribute to housing costs. A few stakeholders noted
that this limits the number of developers that are interested in building in the city. In par�cular:
o The design review process in Design Districts adds �me and cost.
o Building permit review can also be slow.
o Due to prescrip�ve standards, applicants o�en need to apply for mul�ple variances,
which lengthens the process and adds uncertainty.
o Public improvements (e.g., road improvements and u�li�es) can be very costly.
• Neighbor opposi�on. A few stakeholders also noted that neighbor opposi�on to affordable or
higher-density housing can drag out the process and add to costs.
A focus of the Housing Produc�on Strategy will be to iden�fy tools and strategies to remove, reduce, or
help housing producers overcome these barriers.
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 9 OF 9
Housing Production Strategy Program - List of Tools, Actions, and Policies
OREGON ADMINISTRATIVE RULE CHAPTER 660, DIVISION 8, ATTACHMENT B
Revised - February 2022
Housing Production Strategy Guidance Document:
Categories of Tools, Actions, and Policies
The proposed categories contain tools, strategies, or policies that are intended to:
1.Reduce financial and regulatory impediments to develop Needed Housing;
2.Create financial and regulatory incentives for development of Needed Housing;
3.Provide access to local, state, and federal resources; and
4.Allow for local innovation.
These are strategies that a jurisdiction can take to proactively encourage
needed housing production through zoning and code modifications. These
strategies may also include regulations to ensure housing goals are met.
These strategies address known impediments to providing needed housing.
These include but are not limited to zoning, permitting, and infrastructure
impediments.
These are a list of financial incentives that jurisdictions can give to
developers to encourage them to produce needed housing.
These are a list of resources or programs at the local, state and federal level
that can provide money for housing projects. The majority of these resources
are intended to provide money for affordable housing projects.
These are a list of tax exemption and abatement programs that are intended
to encourage developers to produce housing.
These are strategies that secure land for needed housing, unlock the value of
land for housing, and/or create partnerships that will catalyze housing
developments.
Any other Housing Production Strategy not listed in Categories A through F
that the jurisdiction wishes to implement will be outlined in this section and
numbered accordingly.
Equitable Outcomes Note: Some of the strategies may not create an overall housing production increase however, they do increase or maintain housing for a specific affordability target or population.
Caution Note: Jurisdictions should be careful when picking strategies to ensure that housing strategies together in their aggregate do not work to suppress the overall supply of housing of stiffle housing production.
To assist cities in the creation and drafting of their Housing Production Strategy Report in compliance to HB 2003, the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) provided a guidance document of housing production strategies
a jurisdiction could employ to facilitate housing production in their community. The document contains a list of strategies assigned by categories. Each strategy includes a brief overview of its intent and purpose as well as a projection of its
expected impact by housing tenure and by income bracket. As the jurisdiction prepares a housing production strategy report, the jurisdiction would review the guidance document to select specific strategies that work best for their community
and that address their identified Housing Needs. The jurisdiction would simply reference the strategy number when describing the adoption, implementation, and expected magnitude of impact of each strategy in their report. If the jurisdiction has
a strategy that is not listed they would propose this under Category Z.
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 3/PAGE 1 OF 13
Anti-Displacement and Gentrification Toolkit:
In the Spring of 2021 DLCD partnered with Portland State University to create an anti-displacement and gentrification toolkit. Though not mandatory to use, the toolkit was designed 1) help jurisdictions better measure the pressures of anti-displacement
and gentrification in their communities, and 2) direct HPS strategies towards mitigating these pressures as more housing is produced. In the process several additional columns were created to better understand the impact of each strategy when it
comes to anti-displacement work. These additional columns are defined as follows:
Housing Equity Impact: DIRECT, (DIRECT), INDIRECT, AND (INDIRECT)
DIRECT strategies for meeting housing equity needs are focused on the supply. They are needed immediately and persistently by groups that are vulnerable in the housing market. These strategies directly produce or protect affordable housing,
especially for communities of color and other protected class communities. They have strong impacts for anti-displacement that can be seen in the short-term. A (DIRECT) strategy is one that is specific to affordable housing and/or protected classes and
vulnerable populations, but does not actually create housing.
Strategies that allow for more housing overall are INDIRECT; strategies that are oriented towards smaller units or diverse housing types are (INDIRECT) - they are more likely to address equity needs, but may also require additional tools to focus on
adffordability, tenure, or accessibility. Likewise, strategies for housing preservation can be important for anti-displacement planning, if they are focused on maintaining affordability along with quality.
Neighborhood Typology:
The toolkit establishes a methodology for cities to categorize census tracts based on where gentrification and displacement pressures have already occurred or may occur in the future. These six Neighborhood Typologies (Affordable and Vulnerable,
Early Gentrification, Active Gentrification, Late Gentrification, Becoming Exclusive, and Advance Exclusive)reflect the spatial distribution of housing inequity. Cities should take special consideration of these spatial inequities in the development of their
Housing Production Strategies. Some Housing Production Strategies when applied flatly across an entire city result in negative or inequitable outcomes for communities members most at risk of displacement. The This section is intended to highlight
which strategies may have unintended negative impacts on particular neighborhood typologies. This is not to imply that all Housing Production Strategies will have negative impacts on housing equity - many strategies work without particular concern
across any kind of neighborhood. However, some housing production strategies are better suited for particular neighborhood types, and some strategies need special nuance or policy refinement to add special mitigation protections against further
potential displacement impacts.
Green: GO use and implement, especially if a tool is useful in this neighborhood type
Yellow: PROCEED CAUTIOUSLY and carefully. This means that a strategy needs to be monitored for impacts and possibly paired with more direct mitigating strategies in this neighborhood type.
Red: STOP AND PLAN. This strategy is highly likely to create displacement pressures and must be paired with mitigation measures in this neighborhood type.
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 3/PAGE 2 OF 13
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
A01
Ensure Land Zoned for
Higher Density is not
Developed at Lower
Densities
This strategy will work on establishing minimum density standards, updating development codes to prohibit new single-family
detached housing in high density zones, and allow single-family detached homes in medium density zones only if they meet
minimum density or maximum lot size requirements.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale Morrow County HNA, 2017 INDIRECT All Planning and continued monitoring with attention to displacement in gentrifying
areas; add incentives for direct production of equity needs
A02
Zoning Changes to
Facilitate the Use of
Lower-Cost Housing
Types
In many cities, towns, and counties, changes to local zoning policies can help to facilitate the development of lower-cost housing
types, such as Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU’s), manufactured homes, multifamily housing, micro-units, or single-room
occupancy developments. Changes to local zoning policies can also help to facilitate the development of safe overnight sheltering
options for unhoused residents, such as Safe Park programs, Conestoga Hut Micro-shelters, sleeping pod micro-shelters, and
others.To increase the likelihood the market can produce lower-cost housing types, it is important to make them allowable as of
right in all locations and neighborhoods. If not, still provide flexibility in zoning code to still issue variance or conditional use
permits that allow deviations from existing regulations on a case-by-case basis.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale Local Housing Solutions DIRECT All Planning and continued monitoring of production vs. needs
A03
FAR, Density, or Height
Bonuses for Affordable
Housing
FAR, density, and height bonuses for affordable housing developments. Note: FAR/density bonuses do not work if there is not
adequate height to make additional development feasible.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --DIRECT
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrication
Late Gentrification
These tools work best in strong markets; have a medium impact on displacement
A04 Housing Rehabilitation
Codes
Housing rehabilitation codes (or rehab codes) are building codes designed to reduce the costs of renovating and rehabilitating
existing buildings, thereby facilitating the continued availability and habitability of older rental housing and owner-occupied homes.
This is especially helpful to facilitate conversation into multiplex housing.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale Local Housing Solutions INDIRECT
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
Where naturally occurring affordable housing is being lost to rehab; add incentives
to maintain affordability to increase anti-displacement impacts
A05 Code Provisions for
ADUs
ADUs are smaller, ancillary dwelling units located on the same lot as a primary residence. They are typically complete dwellings
with their own kitchen, bathroom and sleeping area. Given that ADUs are usually built by individual homeowners with limited
experience or financial resources, code provisions can have a significant influence on the feasibility of their development and
enable more widespread production. For example, easing occupancy requirements, allowing more ADUs on a lot, and expanding
maximum size requirements. Certain building and development code regulations can inadvertently drive up ADU construction
costs. More flexibility in siting, design, construction and lower fees are also needed to achieve feasibility in many cases.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
City of the Dalles Housing
Strategy Report (2017)(INDIRECT)All
ADUs, cottage, and middle housing have a medium impact on preventing
displacement, with planning and continued monitoring of production; add incentives
and programs to target affordability and increase impact
A06 Broaden the Definition
of Housing Type
Broaden the definition of “housing unit” to allow for more flexibility across use types. For example, SROs are not always allowed in
certain residential zones. Including them in the definition of housing unit, or broadening the set of uses allowed across all
residential districts, would allow for greater flexibility of housing type.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --(INDIRECT)
Affordable & Vulnerable
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
Exclusive
Planning and continued monitoring of production and locations; add incentives and
programs to increase impact and avoid clustering
A07
Allow for Single Room
Occupancy in
Residential Zones
Allow for SRO, Adult Dorms, and Cohousing in all residential zones. Note: SROs may be favored due to their ability to serve more
people for less cost; it is not always a better housing type for all populations. Considerations should be given to ADA accessibility
when planning SROs.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --DIRECT
Affordable & Vulnerable
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrfication
Late Gentrification
Exclusive
Planning and continued monitoring of production and locations; add incentives and
programs to increase impact and avoid clustering
A08 Promote Cottage
Cluster Housing
Cottage clusters are groups of relatively small homes typically oriented around shared common grounds with 4-14 homes typically
between 1,000-1200 square feet in size. By further defining cottage cluster design and development standards, housing code can
effectively address a predictable process for developers, and potentially encourage greater production for this housing type. Some
examples may include: allowing for a wide range of sizes and attached/detached options for housing; not specifying ownership
structure so that both renters/owners can live on the same cluster; ensuring that minimum site size, setbacks and building
coverage requirements do not prohibit cottage cluster development on smaller lots; draft design requirements that ensure
neighborhood compatibility, and efficient use of land, but are not so specific as to restrict the ability to adapt to varying
neighborhood contexts. Other ideas include: uniformed codes, form-based codes, and allowing shared underground infrastructure
when practical (e.g. sewer lines from each cottage can connect to one main that runs out to street, rather than 8 parallel lines out
to street).
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
City of the Dalles Housing
Strategy Report, April 2017 (INDIRECT)All
ADUs, cottage, and middle housing have a medium impact on preventing
displacement, with planning and continued monitoring of production; add incentives
and programs to target affordability and increase impact
A09 Short-Term Rentals
Regulations
Short-term rentals can be seen as an investment strategy for small investors, but can also remove rental housing supply from the
market, in effect driving up rent from the local housing market. To avoid this effect, regulations can include definitions for various
forms of short-term rentals, defining use, and occupancy standards, and even adding limits to the number of days that a short term
rental can be in operation in order to mitigate their impact on the local housing market. Short Term Rental Regulation should begin
with/include registration requirements for all short term rentals.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale Morrow County HNA, 2017 DIRECT All High impact on displacement especially in hot neighborhoods
A10 Inclusionary Zoning
Requiring that a portion of the units within a market rate development be set aside as affordable housing. This tool will often be
combined with property tax exemptions, fee waivers, or development bonuses to offset the cost of affordable housing units.
Careful consideration should be employed when enacting inclusionary zoning. Note: A number of studies, including those
analyzing the IZ Ordinance in Portland, have shown that IZ suppresses, rather than increases, the creation of new housing. Given
that, if IZ is proposed, the financial components need to be calculated right to ensure that the inclusionary rate is not too high for
the offsets provided and that overall housing production increases as a result.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --DIRECT Active Gentification
Late Gentrification
These tools work best in strong markets; have a medium impact on displacement;
they pair with incentives that can be customized to context for maximum overall
impact
Category A: Zoning and Code Changes
These are strategies that a city can take to proactively encourage needed housing production through zoning and code modifications. These Strategies may also include regulations to ensure housing goals are met.
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 3/PAGE 3 OF 13
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
A11
Add Restrictive
Covenants to Ensure
Affordability
Adding restrictive covenants to ensure affordability over time at a certain income level for affordable housing developments.
Restrictive covenants are usually placed on a property in exchange for a local or state government providing financial contribution
to the project. These covenants work best over the short-term (up to 30 years); after that they become unable to accommodate
changed circumstances.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --DIRECT All Strong tool for subsidized housing preservation in all markets
A12
Align Lot Division
Density with Zoning
Density
Sometimes there are conflicting regulations between the density that is allowed by the zoning code versus the density that is
allowed when lot division (for fee-simple lots) is considered. This can cause unintentional reductions in density, only caused by the
fact that the developer would like to create for-sale housing on fee-simple lots. Ideally, the densities would be aligned, so there is
not a density reduction between - condominium versus fee-simple developments.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --INDIRECT All Planning and continued monitoring of production; add incentives and programs to
target affordability and increase impact
A13 FAR & Density Transfer
Provisions
Enable and encourage Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) to maximize available Floor Area Ratio (FAR) provided public
benefit (e.g. historic preservation & affordable housing) are attained and covenants ensure long term benefit. This strategy
assumes that there are adequate, realistic, and relatively easy receiving areas for TRDs.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --DIRECT
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
These tools work best in strong markets; have a medium impact on displacement
when pained with affordability tools
A14
Re-examine
Requirements for
Ground-floor
Retail/Commercial
Critically re-assess requirements for ground floor retail; lively streetscape is a worthy goal, but not for every street. Jurisdictions
can inadvertently impose massive costs on developers by requiring ground floor retail and commercial space even when it’s
unlikely to be fully occupied or generate nearly enough revenue to pay for itself. Ground floor uses should be driven by market
demand; with residential use more beneficial to meet needed housing in some cases (eg. affordable housing).
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale City of Bend INDIRECT All --
A15
Encourage Diverse
Housing Types in High-
Opportunity
Neighborhoods
Enable developments that support multiple unit sizes, types, and tenure options to promote diverse housing options in high-
opportunity neighborhoods. With a goal of reversing historical patterns of racial, ethnic, cultural and socio-economic exclusion.
Use an analysis of “Access to Opportunity” to decide which zones or locations (via zoning overlay) to determine where this is
appropriate. Goal is to promote access to opportunity (e.g., high performing schools, multiple transportation options, services,
etc.) to households with a range of backgrounds and incomes. The jurisdiction could pare this strategy with a robust program of
incentives (e.g, deeper financial incentives, greater range of housing types, more regulatory waivers, etc.) to be made available in
these areas than in other areas of the city.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --(INDIRECT)Late Gentrification
Exclusive
Planning and continued monitoring of production; add incentives and programs to
target affordability and increase impact
A16
Manufactured Housing
Community
Preservation Zone
Change the zoning of existing manufactured housing communities to be preserved to a single-use zone that only allows
manufactured housing communities. Consider lifting restrictions of stick-built homes in cooperatively-owned and other
manufactured homes.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
City of Portland Mfd Dwelling
Park Amendment DIRECT
Affordable & Vulnerable
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Planning and monitoring for potential displacement; may need additional incentives
and programs in active gentrification for higher impact
A17 Small Dwelling Unit
Developments
Allow a land division where small lots or parcels are created below the standard lot/parcel size for dwelling units that are limited in
size. Calculate density differently for the dwelling units due to their limited size. Density example:
a. Dwelling units 600 square feet or smaller: 0.25 of a dwelling unit.
b. Dwelling units 601 to 1,200 square feet: 0.50 of a dwelling unit.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale City of Bend (INDIRECT)All
ADUs, cottage, and middle housing have a medium impact on preventing
displacement, with planning and continued monitoring of production; add incentives
and programs to target affordability and increase impact
A18
Increase Density near
Transit Stations and
Regional Multi-use
Trails
Adopt increased density codes by right near transit stations, with higher levels of density near high capacity/high frequency
stations, then stepping back into residential areas. Automatically upzone based on transportation corridor classifications; meaning
wider ROWs get more flexibility in land use by right. This will add some flexibility for new transit stops, including bus stops. Be
careful not to word the language so that people incorrectly assume that the density can only come after the transit has been put in
place.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --(INDIRECT)
Affordable & Vulnerable
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
Exclusive
Planning for transit extensions, especially in areas of early gentrification, is
important; add incentives and programs to target affordability and increase impact
for anti-displacement of transit-riding populations
A19
High Density
Requirements for to-be-
Annexed Land
Requiring a certain portion of to-be-annexed land to include a percentage of high density. Be careful that this strategy is not used
as a way for low density areas in high-infrastructure locations to shirk responsibility to upzone.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale City of Newberg INDIRECT All Planning and continued monitoring for housing needs; add incentives for direct
production of equity needs
A20
Pre-Approved Plan Sets
for Middle Housing
Typologies
Providing a pre-approved set of plans for middle housing typologies (ex. Cottage clusters, townhomes, and SROs). The plans
would be highly-efficient, designed for constrained lots and low cost solutions, and would allow for streamlined permitting. This
would help attract developers that typically develop only single-family housing to get into the missing middle housing production.
Consider partnering with a university, design institution, or developing a competition to produce plans.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --(INDIRECT)All
ADUs, cottage, and middle housing have a medium impact on preventing
displacement, with planning and continued monitoring of production; add incentives
and programs to target affordability and increase impact
A21 Pre-Approved Plan
Sets for ADUs
Provide a pre-approved set of plans for ADU designs (6-10 sizes/configurations) that, if chosen by a developer/owner, would lead
to automatic approvals and reduced permitting schedule. Plans would reduce the need for architectural costs and reduce barriers
to entry.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --(INDIRECT)All
ADUs have a medium impact on preventing displacement, with planning and
continued monitoring of production; add incentives and programs to target
affordability and increase impact
A22
Mixed Housing Types in
Planned Unit
Developments
Require or incentive a mix of housing types within Residential Planned Unit Developments (PUD).
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale City of Forest Grove INDIRECT All
Cottage and middle housing have a medium impact on preventing displacement,
with planning and continued monitoring of production; add incentives and programs
to target affordability and increase impact
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 3/PAGE 4 OF 13
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
A23 Accessible Design
Provide incentives in the development code to increase the number of units designed to meet Universal Design, Lifelong Housing
Certification, and other similar standards. Examples of incentives include: expedited review and permitting processing, planning
and building fee reductions, system development charge deferrals, density or building height bonuses.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --DIRECT All Directly addresses equitable housing need
A24
Legalize Alternative
Housing Types on
Wheels and in Parks
Many smaller housing formats are built on wheels, including tiny homes on wheels (THOWs), park model homes, and recreational
vehicles (RVs). providing occupants significant flexibility in where they site their homes, yet many local codes prohibit the siting of
these housing types outside of manufactured home parks and RV parks. Permitting these housing types, with appropriate siting
standards to ensure adequate public facilities access and life/safety, can provide additional permanent or interim housing options
outside of parks. Allowing broader siting of RV parks and amending standards to allow THOWs, park model homes, and other
housing types on wheels can also provide additional siting opportunities.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
Tiny House on Wheels (THOWS) -
City of Portland (INDIRECT)All --
A25
Legalize and Encourage
Tiny Homes and
Villages
The Oregon Reach Code, Part II, defines a “tiny house” as a dwelling that is 400 square feet or less in floor area, excluding lofts.
While many (though not all) jurisdictions allow tiny homes to be sited as a primary or accessory dwelling, few encourage their
development through regulatory incentives. Legalizing the siting of tiny homes as primary or accessory dwellings through the
removal of minimum unit size requirements can enable the development of this housing type. Jurisdictions can encourage the
development of tiny houses and tiny house villages by providing regulatory incentives – such as reductions in required off-street
parking or open space – for units less than 400 SF in floor area
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --(INDIRECT)All --
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
B01
Remove or Reduce
Minimum Parking
Requirements
Removing parking requirements for residential uses provides the opportunity to reduce the amount of lot area used for pavement
and provides more space for housing and open space. This strategy offers greater flexibility to site housing and reduces costs
associated with providing parking. Allow developers to respond to market demands and transit access without having the burden
of parking minimums. Consider removing parking requirements near transit or for affordable housing.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale City of Tigard INDIRECT All --
B02
Remove Development
Code Impediments for
Conversions
Streamlining the conversion of larger single-family homes into multi-unit dwellings (e.g. duplex or triplex). This should be aligned
with reduced off-street parking requirements, so that conversion doesn’t trigger the need to add additional driveways (or isn’t
halted by inability to add additional driveways).
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale City of Tigard (INDIRECT)Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Converstions that upgrade and upscale may displace through broader
neighborhood changes; conversions that create more rental and moderate cost
housing may stabilize
B03 Expedite Permitting for
Needed Housing Types
Expedited permitting will help to reduce costs of development of Needed Housing as identified by the City. Consider projects with
direct or indirect funding from local government as essential and projects with long term affordability covenants through tax
abatement or inclusionary requirements as high priority and/or only expedite housing according to the jurisdictions identified
needed housing types.
Local governments might also consider assigning a designating staff to shepherd projects through the construction process in
order to expedite process.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
City of Portland (direct funding
only)(INDIRECT)All --
B04 Expedite Lot Division for
Affordable Housing Expedite lot divisions and subdivisions for affordable housing projects
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --(DIRECT)All --
B05 Reduce Regulatory
Barriers to Lot Division
Remove barriers such as minimum street frontage, driveway requirements, etc., that impact minimum lot size/density during lot
division. Preferably allow by-right lot division up to max number of units allowed.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --(INDIRECT)All Increased dendsity in gentrifying neighborhoods may not serve to stabilize; add
incentives and programs to target affordability and increase impact
B06 Streamline Permitting
Process
In some cities, towns, and counties, the process associated with obtaining approval for new construction is so time-consuming or
costly that it dampens the amount of new development and adds significantly to its costs. To help streamline the process, cities,
towns and counties can initiate a comprehensive review of all steps in the development approval process to identify the factors
that most significantly suppress new residential construction and redevelopment. With a clearer picture of the obstacles, local
leaders can then begin to assess whether they can be reduced or eliminated to stimulate development activity. In doing the
comprehensive review, it is critical that actual timeline performance be evaluated not just the planned timeline.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale Local Housing Solutions INDIRECT All Planning and continued monitoring of production; add incentives and programs to
target affordability and increase impact
B07
Flexible Regulatory
Concessions for
Affordable Housing
Often, nonprofit housing developers and housing agencies face regulatory impediments to building affordable housing, which can
often derail projects. This strategy provides a flexible framework for delivery of affordable housing including but not limited to
reduced minimum setbacks, height bonuses, and/or allowing for flexibility in how units are delivered. This strategy is not intended
to allow for a lower quality for affordable housing buildings.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale Morrow County HNA, 2017 (DIRECT)All Planning and continued monitoring of production and locations; add incentives and
programs to increase impact and avoid clustering
Category B: Reduce Regulatory Impediments
These strategies address known impediments to providing needed housing. These include but are not limited to process, permitting, and infrastructure impediments.
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 3/PAGE 5 OF 13
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
B08
Waive Off-Site
Infrastructure
Requirements for
Needed or Affordable
Housing
Waive infrastructure build-out requirements for infill affordable or needed housing projects constructed in neighborhoods without a
network of those amenities currently. Example: Waive requirements for curb, gutter and sidewalk build-out on the lot if it is
located in an area without either connecting curb, gutter, and sidewalk currently or viable plans for funding infrastructure
construction within the next decade. This is especially relevant in smaller, more rural locations.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
Clackamas County Housing
Report (INDIRECT)All Planning and continued monitoring of production; add incentives and programs to
target affordability and increase impact
B09 Capital Improvements
Programming (CIP)
Programming work in a Capital Improvements Programming (CIP) so that projects are constructed sooner to support development
of middle housing or to open up more land in an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) for development of middle housing. Coordinate
housing planning with CIP work to prioritize those projects that would support development (e.g. new water line, sewer pumping
station). If the UGB is amended or the premises on which the CIP were based changed substantially, the CIP should be revised.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --INDIRECT All --
B10 Public Facility Planning
Completing water, sewer, and transportation PFPs and getting capital improvement projects (CIP) built so that costs to develop on
land zoned for needed housing can be further anticipated and supported. In addition, public utilities planning also allows for more
unit capacity, especially in areas that are upzoned for denser housing.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
City of Tigard
City of Bend INDIRECT All --
B11 Pro-Housing Agenda
Change the culture of Planning / Development Services departments to have a pro-housing agenda for both rental and
homeownership. Supplement with fair housing education and education on the supply and demand impact on housing prices. The
State could support jurisdictions in this effort by providing an incentive (e.g. funding set-aside) for jurisdictions that adopt
aggressive pro-housing policies. In the State of California housing funds are prioritized for cities that adopt pro-housing policies.
Though it may be counterintuitive, since this allows anti-housing cities to avoid housing altogether. Alternatively, the State of
Oregon could consider a stick rather than carrot approach (e.g. withholding highway funds).
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --INDIRECT All A more focused agenda on afffordable housing will address NIMBY and stigma
issues with rental housing, affordable housing, and protected classes
B12 Pro Affordable Housing
Agenda
Change the culture of Planning / Development Services departments to have a pro Affordable Housing agenda for both rental and
homeownership. Supplement with fair housing education and education on the supply and demand impact on housing prices. The
State could support jurisdictions in this effort by providing an incentive (e.g. funding set-aside) for jurisdictions that adopt
aggressive pro Affordable Housing policies. This agenda should include a plan to ensure that affordable housing is not
suppressed in single-family zones or in wealthier communities. As part of this, encourage departments to look closely at how
existing approaches may inadvertently favor one type of tenure over another.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --(DIRECT)All
A pro-affordable housing agenda does not create housing directly; but it is an
important component of planning to ensure that equity is achieved. Including Fair
Housing and addressing protected classes such as race/ethnicity and national
origin will further target this strategy to equitable outcomes
B13
Align Bike Parking
Requirements with
Actual Use
Require bicycle parking requirements more in line with actual use. Example: No more than 1-1.5 bike parking stalls per unit.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --INDIRECT All --
B14
Adopt Affirmatively
Furthering Fair Housing
as a Housing Policy in
Comprehensive Plan
Amend the comprehensive plan to explicitly make Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing a Housing Policy. Example below, based
on federal guidance on affirmatively furthering fair housing and current state protected classes. Jurisdictions may add additional
protected classes, such as ancestry, ethnicity, or occupation. Additionally, a jurisdiction could create an Analyis of Impediments to
Fair Housing (AI), even when not required, and conduct fair housing training for Council, Planning Commission, and other relevant
policymakers. Jurisdictions would work to make known evidence and best practices in planning, to reverse discrimination and
exclusion as well as concentrations of wealth, a required aspect of the comprehensive plan process.
Housing Policy x: Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
[Jurisdiction] affirmatively furthers access to decent, affordable housing with convenient access to the services and destinations
Oregonians need to thrive without regard to their race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status, mental or physical
disability, source of legally-derived income, marital status, sexual orientation or gender identity.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --(DIRECT)All
addressing affordability and equitable access for all people; as well as considering
neighborhood clustering and neighborhood change as part of access to
opportunity. It is an important undergirding for housing planning and directing
resources; but does not create housing
B15
Reduce the Power of
NIMBYism to stop,
slow, change, or reduce
affordable housing
Many jurisdictions give communities/neighborhoods too much veto power on both zoning policy, and particular project proposals
to keep others who they don’t approve of from moving in. Dedicate funds to educate citizens on poverty, exclusion, and racial
dynamics. Remove policies that allow neighborhood opposition to evidence based zoning proposals and individual projects.
Decisions about what kind and how much housing goes where it needs to be data-driven and focused on equitable outcomes
instead of the best outcomes for those with the most money and/or privilege.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --(DIRECT)All removing policies ais a stronger and more direct impact than educating
communities.
B16
Holistic Planning to
Distribute New Density
More Equitably
Geography is often at odds with social equity; natural beauty is often in wealthy neighborhoods, as are historic buildings, allowing
them to exclude new development and affordable housing. Develop a targeted plan to distribute density within the jurisdiction
more equitably to areas with quality schools, access to natural resources etc. Additionally, work to distribute transit equitably to
ensure that exclusionary neighborhoods don’t remain that way because they don’t offer transit for higher density housing.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --(INDIRECT)All Planning and continued monitoring of production; add incentives and programs to
target affordability and increase impact
B17
Reduce on-site
Common/Active Open
Space Requirements
Remove or reduce requirements for on-site common/active open space. Instead, ensure that adopted Parks plans fully consider
the needs of every neighborhood, and that the jurisdiction is actively working toward satisfying those needs.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --INDIRECT Affordable & Vulnerable
Early Gentrification
Take care with neighborhoods that are seeking more holistic revitalization to
balance non-housing needs with housing production
B18 Prioritize Home
Ownership
Jurisdictions would develop a comprehensive review of the impediments to the development of homeownership opportunities and
actionable steps to remove those impediments.
Note: An important impediment to condominium development is the risk associated with the current condominium law in Oregon. A
revamp of this law is needed to increase homeownership opportunities that are smaller in size. This would require action at the
state level.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale --(INDIRECT)All
To ensure access to homeownership to under-represented groups, pair
development of owner-occupied housing types with homebuyer education, financial
assistance like downpayments and low-cost loans, and affirmative marketing
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 3/PAGE 6 OF 13
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
B19
Survey Applicants on
Development Program
Decision-Making
Add a section to the city's development application asking developers how they decided on their development program and which
public incentives were part of the consideration. This would lead to better information about how to tailor city strategies toward
production. An alternative to requiring cities to collect this info, is to consider this approach as part of a production strategy. To be
a strategy it needs additional action like logging and making publicly available the aggregated survey information on the city's
housing/development/planning webpage or similar. The information could be collected on a form separate from the development
application, so it is clear that the additional information is not part of the permit decision.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
Housing Production Strategy
Technical Advisory Committee (INDIRECT)All --
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
Affordable & Vulnerable
(INDIRECT)Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Increase impacts by focusing SDC incentives on needed housing types from the
equity housing needs analysis
In strong market, this can produce more housing units; ADUs have medium anti-
displacement impact, can be increased with programs to target affordability and
equity
--
Reduced fees have medium impacts on displacement
Reduced fees have medium impacts on displacement
Reduced fees have medium impacts on displacement in strong markets; make more impact by
targeting to affordable development
Reduced fees have medium impacts on displacement in strong markets; make more impact by
targeting to affordable development
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale DIRECT --
(DIRECT)
(DIRECT)
(DIRECT)
(INDIRECT)
Category D: Financial Resources
These are a list of resources or programs at the local, state, and federal level that can provide funding for housing projects, primarily subsidized affordable housing projects.
Give Bonus Density Incentives for manufactured and factory built housing. Consider tying bonus to modular housing that
demonstrates if housing meets affordability targets of below 120% AMI. Metro King County RMHP
C05
Waive or Finance Park
Impact Fees for
Affordable Housing
A policy providing for the exemption (preferred) or financing park impact fees (helpful) for affordable housing ensures a mix of
affordable housing. Financing the fee while still collecting can mitigate the cost of the fee to coincide with the available cash flow
of the affordable housing.
Tualatin Hills Park &
Recreation District
C02
Increase impacts by focusing SDC incentives on needed housing types from the
equity housing needs analysisAll
Al l
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
All
All
Al l
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Category C: Financial Incentives
These are a list of financial incentives that cities can offer to developers to encourage them to produce needed housing.
City of Tigard
City of Florence
C06
Publicly Funded
Infrastructure
Improvements
Fund off-site improvements for workforce or affordable housing; e.g. street intersection improvements triggered by development.--
C07 Reconsider Applying
Park SDCs
If there are appropriate levels of parks and open space near the project, these impact fees should not be charged or should be
assessed at a much lower rate. They are not general funds to be allocated without a nexus to the development.--
City of Portland
C04
Incentivize
Manufactured and
Modular Housing
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
(INDIRECT)
(INDIRECT)
(INDIRECT)
C08 Transportation SDCs
Tied to Parking
Tie transportation SDCs to the number of parking spaces, as the number of parking spaces is a more accurate predictor of the
number of trips that will start or end at every development. By tying transportation costs directly to vehicle storage, the system will
both be assessing transportation impacts fairly and encouraging alternate modes of transportation.
--
D01
Community
Development Block
Grant (CDBG)
CDBG Grants are federal funds set aside in the form of grants to be used to meet national objectives: direct benefit for low and
moderate income households; benefit to predominantly low income areas; elimination of slums and blight. Eligible activities
include public works infrastructure, community facilities, new housing development, housing rehabilitation, and public services
(counselling, social services & microenterprise training, including short-term emergency rent assistance). Eligibility is based upon
the levels of low- and moderate-income families that may benefit from services provided by the eligible projects. While Cities can
choose not to apply for CDBG control of whether or not they receive CDBG is ultimately at the Federal level and like the State of
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
City of Tigard
City of Eugene
City of Beaverton
City of Hillsboro
City of Gresham
City of Portland
Modify SDC fee
schedules
Updating SDC fee schedule so that is tied to dwelling size. This strategy ensures that smaller dwelling sizes in single and multi-
family housing are not disproportionately burdened by fees and therefore encouraged. Consider per square foot fees rather than
per dwelling.
C03 Reduce or Exempt
SDCs for ADUs
Waivers/reductions of SDCS for ADU production in order to improve the feasibility of the development. Create a model ordinance
for the waiver, or deferment, of SDCs. Scale SDCs based on size, resource efficiency, and access to alternative transportation.
C01
Reduce or Exempt
SDCs for Needed
Housing
Reducing, deferring, and/or financing System Development Charges (SDCs) at a low interest rate for needed housing types. This
strategy reduces development costs.
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 3/PAGE 7 OF 13
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
Local Housing Solutions
In strong markets, LIHTC can be used to create mixed-income housing that provides
cross-subsidy to affordable units; LIHTC can also be combined with additional
programs to extend the affordability period for the housing
--
--
Employer-assisted housing in areas near transit or near workplaces can support
stability and equity, and contribute to a 'pro-housing agenda'.
--
--
Medium impacts to prevent displacement in strong market with lots of demolition
and conversion, with impacts in the short term and potential to fund housing. Plan
and monitor production vs. needs
Plan and monitor production vs. needs
The TIF set-aside can fund housing; but it is a financing mechanism that relies on
overall property values increasing to create the increment. TIF is associated with
gentrification and displacement, especially for people of color. This may be
exacerbated by Oregon's restriction of TIF funds to physical development; add
community and economic development activities for low-income and POC to
support their staying in place as neighborhoods improve
--
--
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
All
Al l
Early Gentrification
Active Gentriciation
All
Al l
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
Exclusive
All
Affordable & Vulnerable
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
All
Al l
DIRECT
DIRECT
DIRECT
DIRECT
DIRECT
(INDIRECT)
DIRECT
DIRECT
INDIRECT
DIRECT
DIRECT
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
D12 Targeted Vouchers
Vouchers that target renters at the 60-80% AMI who are often left out of the housing funded by bond funds and other public
sources that are focused on lower income levels. Housing Authorities use affordable housing dollars and issue vouchers that are
good for one year and pay any landlord the difference between what the tenant can afford and market rent. This takes the
reporting burden off the landlord and essentially allows any existing unit to be affordable. Each year the tenant would have to
prove to the Housing Authority if they were still income qualified and if not.
--
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
D10
Tax Increment
Financing (TIF) Set-
Aside
Create a TIF set-aside for affordable housing development programs within designated Urban Renewal Areas (URAs). Target
could be to begin setting aside funds for affordable housing projects as a medium-term action, over the next 5 years or so. For
example: Portland City Council designates 45% of the gross amount of TIF for designated housing purposes (rental housing for
households under 60% of Area Median Income (AMI) and homeownership for households under 80% of AMI.
City of Portland
D11 Flexible Use of Housing
Choice Vouchers
Public Housing Authorities have the ability to attach up to 20% of their voucher assistance to specific housing units for each low
income housing project, up to 25% of any single project. Project-Based Rental Assistance (PBRA) vouchers provide rental
assistance for eligible individuals and families who occupy specific housing units managed by private owners who have entered
into agreements with a housing agency. The household pays an established amount to the owner each month (typically
approximately 30% of monthly income) and the housing agency pays the balance of the rent due. If public housing authorities
include homeownership in their administrative plan, housing vouchers may also be used to facilitate low income homeownership.
Local Housing Solutions
D08 Demolition Taxes
Cities, towns, and counties establish demolition taxes and condo conversion fees as a way to generate revenue and replace
affordable housing lost to these activities. The proceeds from both demolition taxes and condo conversion fees are typically
deposited in a Housing Trust Fund to support affordable housing activities. To ensure that a demolition tax on residential
development does not deter needed redevelopment - this strategy should only be applied if the housing replacement is 1:1. If the
proposed development is more dense than the original structure, there should not be a demolition tax.
Local Housing Solutions
D09 Construction Excise Tax
(CET)
A Construction Excise Tax (CET) is a tax on construction projects that can be used to fund affordable housing. According to state
statutes, the tax may be imposed on improvements to real property that result in a new structure or additional square footage in an
existing structure.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
City of Portland
City of Eugene
City of Sisters
D06 HOME Program
HOME is a federal program established by Congress in 1990 that is designed to increase affordable housing for low- and very low-
income families and individuals. All States and participating jurisdictions receive HOME funds from HUD each year, and may
spend HOME on rental assistance, assistance to homebuyers, new construction, rehabilitation, improvements, demolition,
relocation, and limited administrative costs.
--
D07
Dedicated Revenue
Sources for Affordable
Housing
A dedicated revenue source for affordable housing provides an ongoing committed stream of revenue for affordable housing, often
deposited into a Housing Trust Fund. This can be helpful in increasing the total funding available for affordable housing. The fund
can receive its sources from: Transient Lodging Taxes collected from Short Term Rentals, developer fee and real estate transfer
taxes (not constitutional in Oregon ).
D04
Operating Subsidies for
Affordable Housing
Developments
Operating subsidies are payments made annually (or more frequently) to owners of affordable housing developments that make
the housing more affordable by covering a portion of the ongoing costs of operating the development. Local Housing Solutions
D05 Employer - Assisted
Housing Programs
Employer-assisted housing programs provide a channel through which employers can help their employees with the cost of
owning or renting a home, typically in neighborhoods close to the workplace. Assistance may be provided in a variety of ways,
including through down payment grants or loans that are forgiven over a period of employment, homeownership counseling and
education, rental subsidies and, less commonly, direct investment in the construction of rental housing.
Local Housing Solutions
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale City of Portland Housing
Investment Fund
Local Housing Solutions
D03 Housing Trust Funds
Housing Trust Funds are a flexible source of funding that can be used to support a variety of affordable housing activities.
Because they are created and administered at the city, county, region, or state level, housing trust funds are not subject to the
restrictions of federal subsidy programs and therefore can be designed specifically to address local priorities and needs. The
entity administering the fund determines eligible activities, which can include anything from emergency rent assistance for families
facing the threat of eviction or homelessness to gap financing for new construction of affordable housing to repairs for older
homeowners.
Local Housing Solutions
choose not to apply for CDBG, control of whether or not they receive CDBG is ultimately at the Federal level and like the State of
Oregon, these funds can be used for things that have little to do with housing, so may have limited impact. A better gauge may be
HOW cities use their CDBG; for housing benefit or other.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
City of Bend
City of Redmond
State of Oregon
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For SaleD02Low Income Housing
Tax Credit (LIHTC)
Federal tax provision that encourages private investment in affordable rental housing by providing qualified investors with a dollar-
for-dollar reduction in federal income tax liability in exchange for investment in qualifying new construction and rehabilitation
projects. LIHTCs may also be paired with Tax Exempt Revenue Bonds.
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 3/PAGE 8 OF 13
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
Oregon Measure 102
--
State of Oregon to offer non-recourse low-interest debt that can be used to fund workforce or affordable housing. This could be
provided through an existing relationship like Network for Oregon Affordable Housing (NOAH). This would be a valuable tool for
providing housing in rural communities, where conventional debt funding may not be readily available.
Note: This strategy has been suggested by the housing development community, but programs are not yet in place in the State of
Oregon.
State of Oregon to provide some form of collateralization to support private debt placement for a workforce or affordable housing
project. For example, the State could provide Letters of Credit and/or Guarantee on behalf of the developer to the private lender.
This would be a valuable tool for providing housing in rural communities, where conventional debt funding may be hesitant to
invest without substantial backing that the State could provide.
Note: This strategy has been suggested by the housing development community, but programs are not yet in place in the State of
Oregon.
Foundations Awards
Al l
Al l
--
--
Eviction prevention programs have high anti-displacement impacts, in the short-
term, and across all markets. They are especially useful in strong markets where
there are economic incentives to evict.
--
--
--
Weatherization funds can address displacement by improving habitability in low-income
neighborhoods; and by reducing energy costs and needs for expensive repairs that may displace
owners in gentrifying neighborhoods.
All
Planning ahead for affordability in TOD is important for not displacing households who are most
likely to use transit (low-mod income, renters, POC, and immigrants); making it an effective
strategy for equity and to support multi-modal transportation.
--
--
--
Affordable & Vulnerable
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
All
All
Al l
All
DIRECT
DIRECT
DIRECT
DIRECT
DIRECT
All
Affordable & Vulnerable
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
All
Al l
DIRECT
DIRECT
DIRECT
DIRECT
DIRECT
DIRECT
(INDIRECT)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
D24 State of Oregon Debt
Support --
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
D23 State of Oregon Debt --
D20
Local Innovation and
Fast Track (LIFT)
Program for Affordable
Rental Housing
Development
The Local Innovation and Fast Track (LIFT) Housing Program's objective is to build new affordable housing for low income
households, especially families. Funds are available for Serving Historically Underserved Communities, Rural and Urban Set-
asides, Urban Communities, Service to Communities of Color, and Rural Communities. Available for affordable homeownership
units (below 80% AMI).
OHCS Housing Development
Program
D21 Mental Health Trust
Fund Awards Administered by the Oregon Health Authority for capital construction costs. --
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
D18
W eatherization Funds
through Community
Action Agencies
Use weatherization funds administered by statewide network of Community Action Agencies to preserve aging housing stock
occupied by income-qualified residents. OHCS Weatherization Assistance
D19 Transit-Oriented
Development Grants
Provide financial incentives to developers to create transit-oriented communities. Funding can be used for site acquisition,
infrastructure projects and residential/mixed-use projects.Oregon Metro TOD Program
D22 Local, regional, and national foundations provide both capital funding and program funding for a wide variety of innovative housing
models and programs.
Examples: Meyer Memorial
Trust and Oregon Community
Foundation (OCF)
D16
General Obligation
Bonds – for Affordable
Housing
Following the passage of Measure 102 Oregon local governments, including cities and counties, can now issue voter-approved
general obligation bonds to provide direct funding for construction and other capital costs associated with the development and
construction of affordable housing. These funds can be loaned or granted to both public and privately owned affordable housing
projects. “Affordability” is required to be determined by voters and each jurisdiction, and can be above or below minimum
affordability levels established for the federal LIHTC program and other established federal and State affordable housing finance
programs, defining affordability by reference to Area Median Income (AMI) as established by HUD. The bonds could be paired
with other financing such as Low Income Housing Tax Credits, or could be used for homeownership opportunities.
D17
Use IHBG funds for
Urban Native
Americans
Mixing of Indian Housing Block Grants (IHBG), typically used for housing for Native Americans on reservation land, with other
traditional affordable housing funding sources allows preference for Native members in urban affordable housing projects.
D14 Eviction Prevention
Programs
Eviction Prevention Programs provide financial assistance to help renters facing eviction stay in their homes. These programs are
generally designed for families who are being evicted due to nonpayment of rent during or following an unforeseen crisis, such as
job loss or serious illness, rather than those who face more persistent affordability challenges. Jurisdictions may be interested in
investing in eviction prevention to address concerns about displacement of low-income renters and also to avoid or reduce use of
other more costly local services, like homeless shelters.
Local Housing Solutions
D15
Bond - for Resident
Support Services and
Permanent Supportive
Housing Services
Limited Tax General Obligation Bond that creates a funding source for supportive housing services, such as access to health care,
mental health, and other social services that better support and stabilize residents who face complex challenges and will benefit
from affordable housing programs.
D13 Low-Interest Loans /
Revolving Loan Fund
Housing Repair and Weatherization Assistance for low and moderate income households may be capitalized by Tax Increment
Financing (TIF), Community Development Block Grant (CBDG) Funds, or local Housing Trust Funds. City of Portland
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
Oregon Metro
City of Portland
Oregon Metro
City of Portland
NAYA and CDP and Confederated
Tribes of the Siletz
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 3/PAGE 9 OF 13
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
Authorized by Oregon Revised
Statute, Chapter 307.600
See Oregon Revised Statute,
Chapter 307.600
--
Take care to include homebuyer and post-purchase financial education to avoid loss
of assets in gentrifying neighborhoods, where owners can be pressured to sell or to
take out refinance loans.
Calibrate incentives to needed housing types, e.g., affordability levels. Incentives for
inclusion of affordable units work best in strong markets.
Calibrate incentives to needed housing types, e.g., affordability levels. Incentives for inclusion of
affordable units work best in strong markets.
Calibrate incentives to needed housing types, e.g., affordability levels. Incentives for inclusion of
affordable units work best in strong markets.
Calibrate incentives to needed housing types, e.g., affordability levels. Incentives for inclusion of
affordable units work best in strong markets.
--
Affordable & Vulnerable
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
Affordable & Vulnerable
Affordable & Vulnerable
DIRECT
(DIRECT)
DIRECT
(INDIRECT)
(INDIRECT)
(INDIRECT)
(DIRECT)
--
--
A land tax promotes equity among homeowners, if properly calibrated and incentives more
development of housing supply. This requires state law changes.
https://www.pdx.edu/news/psu-study-portland-land-value-tax-would-improve-equity-
homeowners-incentivize-development
Oregon State sales tax on luxury items, 2nd homes, etc. dedicated to providing funds for affordable housing funds.
Note: This strategy has been suggested by the housing development community, but programs are not yet in place in the State of
Oregon.
All
Al l
Al l
DIRECT
DIRECT
DIRECT
Category E: Tax Exemption and Abatement
These are a list of tax exemption and abatement programs that are intended to encourage developers to produce housing.
Property taxes are based on property values and so can go up regardless of the taxpayers' ability to pay. In the case of
homeowners rising property taxes can be an obstacle to housing affordability and stability A tool used in a number of jurisdictions
E05
Multiple Unit Limited
Tax Exemption
(MULTE)
Under the Multiple-Unit Limited Tax Exemption (MULTE) Program, multiple-unit projects receive a ten-year property tax
exemption on structural improvements to the property as long as program requirements are met.
E06
Homebuyer Opportunity
Limited Tax Exemption
Program (HOLTE)
Under the HOLTE Program, single-unit homes receive a ten-year property tax exemption on structural improvements to the home
as long as the property and owner remain eligible per program requirements.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
E07 Homestead Tax Consider allowing Homestead Tax on second homes to support development of affordable housing.
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
E03
Vertical Housing
Development Zone Tax
Abatement
Partial property tax exemption program on improvements for new mixed use development. To qualify, a project must have
improved, leasable, non-residential development on the ground floor and residential development on the floors above. A partial
abatement on land value is allowed for each equalized floor of affordable housing. This abatement could be made better by an
adjustment to the floor equalization formula - right now, there is a 20% abatement per equalized floor, but if the project ends up
being 3.8 equalized floors it only gets 3 floors worth of the abatement rather than an apportioned abatement.
E04
Multiple Unit Property
Tax Exemption
(MUPTE)
This strategy can be used to incentivize production of multifamily housing with particular features or at particular price points by
offering qualifying developments a partial property tax exemption over the course of several years.
E01
Nonprofit Low-Income
Rental Housing
Exemption
This tool can provide a simplified way for affordable housing owned and operated by a nonprofit (as well as land held by a
nonprofit for future affordable housing development) or Community Land Trusts (at least in land value) to qualify for a property tax
exemption. Work should be done to make it easier for projects/land to qualify; minimizing the number of taxing authorities needed
to grant an approval.
E02
Property Tax Exemption
for Affordable Housing
Tied to Level of
Affordability
Create a Property Tax Exemption for affordable housing that is tied to level of affordability instead of the ownership structure. For
example, grant a property tax exemption for affordable housing that serves households making less than 60% of AMI at initial
lease up. Don’t tie the property tax exemption to ownership (LLC, non-profit, housing authority) and only require income
verification at the beginning of a residents tenancy. The property should still get the exemption even if the household increases
income after their initial lease up so they can build assets in place.
D26
Reallocate Health and
Public Safety
Resources to Housing
Because healthy housing makes a huge difference in health care, public safety, and other costs, identify paths to redirect budgets
from those sectors toward housing construction funds and supporting services. Use advanced modeling projections and adjust as
needed over time.
--
D27 Georgist Land Tax Generate tax revenue for affordable housing by reducing the gains accrued from public investments that are capitalized into
private value.--
D25 Luxury Tax for Equitable
Housing --
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
Authorized by Oregon Revised
Statute, 307.841.
City of Hillsboro
City of Beaverton
City of Milwaukie
Oregon City
City of Gresham
City of Tigard
City of Wood Village
City of Forest Grove
See Oregon Revised Statute
Chapter 307.540
Homebuyer Opportunity Limited
Tax Exemption (HOLTE) - City of
Portland
Authorized by Oregon Revised
Statute, 307.651.
Multiple Unit Limited Tax
Exemption (MULTE) - City of
Portland
--
--
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 3/PAGE 10 OF 13
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
Public purchasing of vacant/under-utilized sites of land in order to save for future affordable housing development. House Bill
2003, section 15 supports land banking:
SECTION 15. (1) As used in this section, “public property” means all real property of the state, counties, cities, incorporated towns
or villages, school districts, irrigation districts, drainage districts, ports, water districts, service districts, metropolitan service
districts, housing authorities, public universities listed in ORS 352.002 or all other public or municipal corporations in this state.
Planning ahead for areas of public investment wth land banking can support affordable housing
development without needing to purchase lots. In already developed, exclusive areas, using
public land may be the only cost effective strategy for building new affordable units.
Important foundation with focus on housing for transit dependent people (Low income, renters,
POC and immigrants)
Land trusts are a very strong anti-displacement measure in all neighborhood types, with
immediate and long-term impacts.
Setting clear public goals; including monitoring of provision of public benefits; and including
financial penalties for not meeting goals are important for strengthening community benefits
agreements in public-private partnerships.
Preservation is cost-effective compared to new construction and can prevent displacement in
the immediate term for households in place.
--
--
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
Exclusive
All
Al l
Affordable & Vulnerable
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
Exclusive
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
Affordable & Vulnerable
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
All
--
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
f ( % )
(DIRECT)
(INDIRECT)
DIRECT
(INDIRECT)
DIRECT
DIRECT
INDIRECT
(INDIRECT)All
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
Supporiting owners to stay in place as housing markets heat up is an important preservation
strategy; it does not maintain the affordability of the unit at stake.
The OZ program has been found to be generally poorly targeted and monitored; as with any
investment incentive it is important to include strong anti-displacement protections for
vulnerable residents and ensure their inclusion in economic opportunities.
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
Exclusive
Affordable & Vulnerable
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
(DIRECT)
INDIRECT
Category F: Land, Acquisition, Lease, and Partnerships
These are strategies that secure land for needed housing, unlock the value of land for housing, and/or create partnerships that will catalyze housing developments.
F07
Providing Information
and Education to Small Providing information to small, local developers that will help them understand land use permitting processes and give them a
f ff
--For Rent
S
F05
Preserving Low-Cost
Rental Housing to
Mitigate Displacement
Preventing displacement and preserving "naturally occurring" affordable housing through acquisition, low-interest loans/revolving
loan fund for preservation, and/or code enforcement. Example: The Oregon Legislature committed $15 million in lottery bonds to
Oregon Housing and Community Services (OHCS) in 2019 to create a naturally occurring affordable housing loan fund. Modeled
after the Greater Minnesota Housing Fund.
NOAH Impact Fund
F06
Preserving Safe,
Affordable
Manufactured Homes
Manufactured home parks often provide a form of affordable housing stock, but are particularly vulnerable to redevelopment
pressures since lots are temporarily leased out. In order to preserve safe, affordable options into the future, manufactured home
parks may be protected through assistance that allows community purchase of the underlying land, manufactured homes and
provide funds used to maintain upkeep of these dwelling units. This strategy is often implemented through use of Land Trusts,
Resident-Owned Cooperatives, Public Ownership of Land, or Condominium Conversion of the real estate assets to preserve the
community(ies). Oregon Housing and Community Services (OHCS) has regularly received lottery bonds or general funds from the
Oregon Legislature to preserve manufactured home parks through either Resident Owned Cooperatives or Non-profit ownership.
F03 Community Land Trusts
Land acquired by nonprofits or community-based organizations that maintain permanent ownership of land. Prospective
homeowners are able to enter long-term (i.e., 99-year), renewable leases at an affordable rate. Upon selling, homeowners only
earn a portion of the increased property value, while the trust keeps the remainder, thereby preserving affordability for future low-
to moderate-income families
--
F04 Public/Private
Partnerships (P3)
Partnerships between government and the private sector and/or nonprofits have the capacity to bring resources to the table that
would otherwise not be available if each institution were able to help communities provide housing on its own. This can come in
the form of coalitions, affordable housing task forces, and collaboratives.
--
City of Portland
For Rent
For Sale
F01 Land Banking
E08
Property Tax Relief for
Income-Qualified
Homeowners
homeowners, rising property taxes can be an obstacle to housing affordability and stability. A tool used in a number of jurisdictions
for mitigating these effects on those with limited incomes is by capping the amount of property tax that homeowners have to pay
as a share of their income. Some jurisdictions also provide relief to lower-income renters by treating some portion of their rent as
attributable to property taxes and then providing an income tax credit to offset the increase in taxes. In addition to basing the
benefit on income, eligibility for caps can also be restricted to specific populations such as seniors, disabled persons, and/or
veterans.
Local Housing Solutions
F02 Joint Development
Agreements
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) enables local transit agencies to enter into Joint Development Agreements (JDAs) with
private or non-profit developers of low income housing, market-rate housing, and/or commercial development. Joint Development
is a process by which public transit or other local or state agencies agree to make land available at donated or reduced prices for
private development, which may include affordable housing. Projects must demonstrate benefit to transit operations (ridership)
and infrastructure and are subject to FTA approval.
--
E09 Investing into Federal
Opportunity Zones (OZ)
Qualified Opportunity Zones (QOZ) were created by the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. These zones are designed to spur economic
development and job creation in distressed communities throughout the country and U.S. possessions by providing tax benefits to
investors who invest eligible capital into these communities. Taxpayers may defer tax on eligible capital gains by making an
appropriate investment in a Qualified Opportunity Fund and meeting other requirements.
Opportunity Zones FAQ (IRS)
E10 Delayed Tax
Exemptions
Allow housing to be built and operated at market rate while allowing developers to choose a path that maintains or reduces rents
over time. Once the property falls below 80%AMI (but maintains HUD quality standards), tax exemptions would kick in. This
could be an alternative to upfront incentive dollars, SDC reductions, etc for providing affordable housing.
--
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
OHCS Mfd Dwelling Parks
Program
Metro TOD Program
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 3/PAGE 11 OF 13
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
Most likely to be cost effective in some neighborhood market types.
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
Prepare for agreement expiration with preservation plans
--
--
--
(DIRECT)
(DIRECT)
All
Affordable & Vulnerable
Early Gentrification
Active Gentrification
All
Al l
Al l
All
All
All
Affordable & Vulnerable
Active Gentrification
Late Gentrification
All
All
Al l
(DIRECT)
(DIRECT)
DIRECT
(DIRECT)
(DIRECT)
(DIRECT)
INDIRECT
(DIRECT)
(DIRECT)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
INDIRECT
DIRECT
F19 Affordable Housing
Preservation Inventory
Prepare an inventory of subsidized and naturally occurring affordable housing to support proactive policies intended to preserve
the affordable housing stock. This strategy is intended to help offset some of the need for costly new construction.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
F17 Designated Affordable
Housing Sites
A jurisdiction would establish designated sites with a completely different set of regulations than apply to the balance of the public
and private building sites. The sites would be overseen by an Affordable Housing Commission, that is empowered to prioritize,
fast track, and approve affordable housing projects (with designated and required affordability objectives) and bypass the majority
of the city’s fees and regulations. The Commission would have its own set of requirements (structural approval, zoning allowance,
etc.), but they would be streamlined, and tailored to facilitate a quicker and much less expensive process.
F18
Utilize Surplus Land
Owned by Faith-Based
Organizations for
Affordable Housing
Over the past few decades, faith institutions across the country have been declining. This has prompted conversations within
different faith communities about how to refocus their mission of social change. The housing affordability crisis in many cities
around the country has brought these institutions into the work of creating affordable housing in their communities. This strategy
would: 1) Identify faith and community-based organizations that are interested in offering their available land for development of
affordable housing, 2) Provide design and finance consultation for three organizations to prepare them for future affordable
housing development projects, and 3) Determine barriers to development and how those can be addressed and/or streamlined.
Expanding Opportunities for
Affordable Housing, Metro and
City of Portland
F15
Ordinances that
Address Zombie
Housing
More assertive tax foreclosures to enable zombie housing to be rehabbed into occupied housing. --
F16 Regulatory Agreement Regulatory Agreement, between the jurisdiction and developer, in place with the land sale that keeps the units affordable for 20
years in exchange for SDC waivers. This is straightforward without going through a difficult or costly process. City of Beaverton
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
F13 McKinney-Vento
Federal Surplus Cities may partner with the Federal Government to surplus Federal land for homeless housing or services under McKinney Vento. City of Bend
F14 Right of First Refusal for
Land Purchase
Affordable housing providers could be offered a Right of First Refusal for city, county, or state owned land when the land would be
used for affordable housing. Examples include a manufactured home program where residents can buy out the manufactured
home park when the owner is ready to sell.
CASA of Oregon - Mfd Housing Co-
Op Dev
F11
Combine Community
Land Trust with Limited
Equity Cooperative
Model
Combine a Community Land Trust (CLT) with a Limited Equity Cooperative for a lower barrier entry to homeownership of a share
of a permanent small/tiny home community. SquareOne Villages
F12 Surplus Land for
Affordable Housing
Sell land at the State or City’s cost (below market) to developers of affordable housing. Long-term lease at very minimal cost to
developers for land the City is not yet ready to surplus. County surplus of foreclosed land to affordable housing developers and/or
housing authority.
City of Bend
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
F09 Enhanced Use Lease of
Federal Land
The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) may lease land for up to 85 years to developers of projects which provide the VA
with compensation. Such enhanced use leases have been used to provide land for permanent affordable housing for people
experiencing homelessness including veterans in Oregon, Minnesota and Washington States.
Housing Authority of Douglas
County
F10
Prioritize Housing on
City/County Owned
Land
Surplus property suitable for housing is offered up for affordable development. City of Eugene
F07
and Education to Small
Developers
sense of clarity and certainty about requirements so they can better provide smaller scale housing at an affordable level.
F08
Conversion of
Underperforming or
Distressed Commercial
Assets
Acquisition of underperforming or distressed commercial assets (commercial, retail, industrial, or hotel) or partnerships with
owners of the assets for conversion into needed housing. --
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
The Center for Housing Policy,
Washington DC
Opportunity Zone Toolkit, US
Department of Housing and
Urban Development
--
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 3/PAGE 12 OF 13
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)
Housing
Equity
Impact
Neighborhood
Typology Mitigating Measures
#Strategy Description Affordability Target Tenure
Target Source (if available)Housing
Equity Impact Neighborhood Typology Mitigating Measures
------
All
All
--
--
(DIRECT)
(DIRECT)
Category Z: Custom Options
Any other Housing Production Strategy not listed in Categories A through F that the jurisdiction wishes to implement will be outlined in this section and numbered accordingly.
--
F21
Public or Mission-Driven
REITs and Turn-Key
Delivery
--
Z01 TBD Any other Housing Production Strategy not listed above in Categories A through F that the jurisdiction wishes to implement should
be filled in here and numbered accordingly. --
Most public subsidies and tax incentive programs are complex due to the need for regulation and corruption prevention, imposing
many impediments to developing affordable housing. Jurisdictions would participate in a public REIT that buys turn-key projects
for set costs. This would motivate mission-minded developers to drive down cost knowing that risk is minimal by having a buyer at
the end. If the developer doesn’t deliver the required specs, quality, and competitive construction cost, then they have to sell or
rent on the open market or find other incentives in current, standard fashion. The jurisdiction could invest state pension funds in
these REITs.
Note: Though this strategy has been suggested by the housing development community, it is not clear if this program is currently
available to jurisdictions in the State of Oregon
----
F20
Fair Housing Education,
Referral, and Other
Services
Provide residents, property owners, property managers, realtors, lenders and others involved with real estate transactions with
access to Fair Housing information and referrals. Ensure that city staff know how to identify potential Fair Housing violations and
make referrals to the Fair Housing Council of Oregon and state and local enforcement agencies. Partner with and fund Fair
Housing Council of Oregon to provide periodic Fair Housing Audit Testing, customized outreach and education and other
specialized services.
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
Publicly-Subsidized (< 30% AMI)
Affordable (30-80% AMI)
Workforce (80-120% AMI)
Market Rate (> 120% AMI)
For Rent
For Sale
For Rent
For Sale
p
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 3/PAGE 13 OF 13
Lake Oswego HNA+HPS Project
HPS Scope of Work, Revised Descrip�on of Tasks and Timelines
3.1 Evaluate exis�ng housing strategies. The consultant will review the policies and other measures
already adopted by the City for their effec�veness in promo�ng the development of needed housing.
The City will iden�fy and provide all available informa�on about exis�ng relevant measures. The
consultant will also interview key City staff and up to eight (8) housing producers and/or service
providers to seek input on exis�ng policies and programs, and poten�al new strategies for housing. This
input will be used to iden�fy strategy alterna�ves to address the most housing and residen�al land
needs as determined in previous tasks.
Ac�vi�es
•Using the DLCD housing strategies “master list” as a star�ng point, dra� an ini�al menu of
strategies to consider. Iden�fy strategies that are already being implemented by the City (most
informa�on already provided).
•Conduct housing producer interviews
•Dra� Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment
•Recommend strategies to be deleted from ini�al list and ra�onale for removal (e.g., requires
change in state or federal law, beyond level of resources available to City, minimal projected
benefit or impact, does not address needs iden�fied in Contextualized Housing Needs
Assessment, etc.). Consultant provide ini�al sugges�ons; mee�ng with City staff to review and
refine.
•Summarize results in a table or matrix for review with Task Force
Timeline: Mid-August – late-September; meet with Task Force in early October
Conduct Housing Producer Interviews Aug - Sep
Draft Initial Menu of Strategies to Consider Sep 5
Draft Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment Sep 25
Table with Refined List of HPS Strategies Sep 25
HPS Task Force Meeting #4: Evaluate Existing Strategies Oct 6
CC-SS #4: Evaluate Existing Strategies Nov 7
PC-WS #4: Evaluate Existing Strategies Nov 13
3.2 Outline housing strategy alterna�ves, which shall be summarized in a Housing Strategy Alternatives
Memo.
The Consultant shall dra� a Housing Strategy Alterna�ves Memo addressing any changes to the City’s
comprehensive plan, public facility master plans, land use regula�ons, fees, and other policies and
programs, as applicable, that would be most effec�ve in suppor�ng the produc�on of needed housing.
For example, the Memo might iden�fy strategies for priori�zing infrastructure investments, amendments
09/06/2023
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 4/PAGE 1 OF 4
to zoning and development standards, and new incen�ves (regulatory or financial) to encourage the
produc�on of needed housing, considering the results of previous tasks.
The Consultant will present the Memo to the HPS Task Force in two mee�ngs in order to introduce the
housing strategy alterna�ves and receive input. The consultant will coordinate with the City on all
mee�ng materials and presenta�ons with City staff, and facilitate the HPS Task Force mee�ngs.
Ac�vi�es
• Provide preliminary recommenda�ons for strategies to pursue, building on previous tasks
• Briefly summarize:
o The purpose of the strategy
o The housing need fulfilled by the strategy
o How strategies will be implemented and by whom (i.e., is the City the lead or another
organiza�on)
o Ini�al opportuni�es, constraints or consequences
• Present results in either table or narra�ve format
• Review results with Task Force (1 mee�ng)
Timeline: Mid-October – late-November; meet with Task Force in early December
Preliminary Recommendations to City staff Nov 6
Draft Housing Strategy Alternatives Memo Nov 27
HPS Task Force Meeting #5: Housing Strategy Alternatives Dec 8
Refine Alternatives based on HPS input Dec 11 - 15
PC-WS #5: Housing Strategy Alternatives Jan 8
CC-SS #5: Housing Strategy Alternatives Jan 16
3.3 Refine housing strategy recommenda�ons. The consultant will work with City staff and the HPS Task
Force to refine the list of alterna�ve housing strategy op�ons developed in Task 3.2 in an Ini�al Housing
Strategy Recommenda�ons Memo, pursuant to direc�on from the Planning Commission and City
Council.
The Consultant shall dra� a Housing Strategy Recommenda�ons Memo with a refined list of strategies
based on input from Task 3.2. The Consultant will also atend and present this Memo at 2 HPS Task Force
mee�ngs for review and input in order to develop a preferred list of strategies for inclusion in the HPS.
Recommended strategies will be presented to the Planning Commission and City Council for further
direc�on.
The City will schedule and provide no�ce and an agenda for each HPS Task Force mee�ng. The
consultant will be expected to coordinate all mee�ng and presenta�on materials with City staff, and
facilitate the mee�ngs. The HPS Task Force may review more than one strategy op�on at each mee�ng.
The Consultant shall provide a brief paper, case study, or similar writen descrip�on illustra�ng each
strategy, as generally outlined below.
09/06/2023
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 4/PAGE 2 OF 4
For the strategies that are recommended for inclusion in the City’s HPS, the consultant will produce the
following for each strategy within the Ini�al Housing Strategy Recommenda�ons Memo, based on the
consultant’s evalua�on, input from staff, and feedback gathered through outreach and engagement:
• A descrip�on of the strategy;
• Iden�fied housing need being fulfilled and analysis of the income and demographic popula�ons
that will receive benefit and/or burden from the strategy, including low income communi�es,
communi�es of color, and other communi�es that have been discriminated against, according
to fair housing laws;
• Approximate magnitude of impact, including (where possible/applicable) an es�mate of
• the number of housing units that may be created, and the �me frame over which the strategy is
expected to impact needed housing;
• Timeline for adop�on and implementa�on;
• Ac�ons necessary for the local government and other stakeholders to take in order to
implement the strategy;
• Poten�al cost and funding source op�ons;
• Feasibility of the strategy based on a general assessment of opportuni�es and constraints.
Ac�vi�es – As described above/no change
Timeline: Mid-December – mid-April; meet with Task Force in early February and late-March; conduct
community mee�ng in early April
Draft Initial Housing Strategy Recommendations Memo Jan 29
HPS Task Force Meeting #6: Initial HPS Recommendations #1 Feb 9
HPS Task Force Meeting #7: Initial HPS Recommendations #2 Mar 22
Community Forum / Public Workshop Event Apr 4
Refine Memo based on Task Force + public input Apr 5 – 19
CC-SS #6: Initial Recommendations May 7
PC-WS #6: Initial Recommendations May 13
3.4 Dra� Housing Produc�on Strategy (HPS) Report. The consultant will prepare a first dra� of a
Housing Produc�on Strategy Report for City review and feedback. The consultant’s analysis will be
informed by the recommenda�ons contained in the HNA, and shall be developed in consulta�on with
the HPS Task Force, the Planning Commission, and the City Council before being synthesized into a dra�
HPS.
The HPS Report is to incorporate the results of Tasks 3.1, 3.2, and 3.3, including an explana�on of how
the City’s exis�ng measures and final proposed strategies help to achieve fair and equitable housing
outcomes, affirma�vely further fair housing, and overcome discriminatory housing prac�ces and racial
segrega�on.
HPS Report shall include:
1. A qualita�ve assessment of how the strategies collec�vely address the contextualized housing
needs iden�fied in the HNA and, taken collec�vely, will increase housing op�ons for popula�on
groups experiencing a current or projected dispropor�onate housing need, including:
• Exis�ng City policies, codes, and programs;
09/06/2023
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 4/PAGE 3 OF 4
• Proposed ac�ons;
2. An explana�on for any iden�fied needs not otherwise addressed above; and
3. An outline the City’s plan for monitoring progress on the housing produc�on strategies.
Ac�vi�es – As described above/no change
Timeline: Mid-April – late-July; meet with Task Force in late June
Initial Draft HPS Report May 27
HPS Task Force Meeting #8: Review Draft HPS Report Jun 14
Revise Draft HPS Report based on Task Force input Jun 17 – 28
CC-SS #7: Review Draft HPS Report Jul 16
PC-WS #7: Review Draft HPS Report Jul 22
3.5 Finalize the HPS for adop�on as an appendix to the Comprehensive Plan. Following review by staff
and revisions, as needed, the consultant will produce a public review dra� of the Final HPS Report for
review and comment by the HPS Task Force, Planning Commission, City Council, and other interested
par�es. The consultant will summarize the HPS Task Force comments on the dra� and make any minor
updates to the dra� as required. Following public review and comment, the consultant will produce a
final version of the HPS Report.
The City will host one public open house or similar mee�ng to present and receive feedback on the key
strategies outlined in the dra� HPS. The consultant will assist staff with the presenta�on.
Ac�vi�es – As described above/no change
Timeline: Mid-July – mid-October
Final HPS Report Aug 2
DLCD Notice Aug 5
Planning Commission Public Hearing (PC-PH) Sep 9
+ Adoption of Findings Sep 23
City Council Public Hearing (CC-PH) Oct 15 + Nov 5
+ Adoption of Findings Nov 5 or 19
09/06/2023
PP 22-0005 ATTACHMENT 4/PAGE 4 OF 4