HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - 2025-11-04 AGENDA
,(vx E CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Tuesday, November 4, 2025
v p 5:30 p.m.
City Hall Council Chamber—3rd Floor
GR E G ON' 380 A Avenue, Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Staff Contact: Laural Hawkins, CityRecorder@LakeOswego.City
Virtual Access ADA Accommodation Requests Translation Services
This meeting will be held in lakeoswego.city/accommodation Traduccion o interpretacion
person.To participate remotely, 503-635-0282; Relay 711 ill sIM
please email the City Recorder by Please allow four business days to teats
noon the day of the meeting. process your request. 5
503-534-5738
This meeting will be livestreamed on the City's YouTube Channel and at lakeoswego.city.
The meeting will also be broadcasted live on Tualatin Valley Community TV;check tvctv.org for details.
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. ROLL CALL
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. PRESENTATIONS
4.1 Proclamation — Native American Heritage Month
5. PUBLIC COMMENT
The purpose of Public Comment is to allow community members to present information or raise
an issue regarding items not on the agenda or regarding agenda items that do not include a
public hearing.A time limit of three minutes per individual shall apply. Public Comment will not
exceed thirty minutes in total, unless changed by the Mayor. If you are unable to attend the
meeting and prefer to provide public comment in writing, by phone or electronically, please
email the City Recorder by noon the day of the meeting.
6. CONSENT AGENDA
The Consent Agenda allows the City Council to consider items that require no discussion.An item
may only be discussed if it is pulled from the Consent Agenda.The City Council makes one
motion covering all items included on the Consent Agenda.
Motion: Move to adopt the Consent Agenda.
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO Box 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 2
6.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes
• September 2, 2025 Draft Regular Meeting Minutes
• September 16, 2025 Draft Regular Meeting Minutes
Motion: Move to approve minutes as written.
7. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA
8. COUNCIL BUSINESS
8.1 Resolution 25-45, Approving the 2026 Solid Waste and Recycling Rates
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 25-45.
8.2 Ordinance 2972, Adopting a Revised Charge Statement for Community Health and
Resiliency Advisory Board
Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2972.
9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
9.1 Ordinance 2967, Fair Housing Policy and Education (LU 25-0001)
Public Hearing Process:
1. Review of hearing procedure by Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney
2. Staff Report by Erik Olson, Long Range Planning Manager
3. Testimony—the following time limits shall be observed, but may be changed by
the Council: 10 minutes for representatives of recognized neighborhood
associations, homeowner associations, government agencies, or other
incorporated public interest organizations; 5 minutes per individual
4. Questions of Staff
Motion: Move to enact Ordinance 2967.
10. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL
11. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
12. EXECUTIVE SESSION
The Lake Oswego City Council will meet under the authority of ORS 192.660(2)(d) to
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO Box 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 3
conduct deliberations with persons designated by the governing body to carry on labor
negotiations, and (f) to consider information or records that are exempt by law from
public inspection.
13. ADJOURNMENT
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO Box 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
4.1
o<e �vA E O
� Proclamation
C.) o Native American History Month
GREGO�
WHEREAS the City of Lake Oswego resides on the ancestral homelands of the Clackamas,
Chinook, Clowewalla, Tualatin, Molalla, Multnomah, Siletz and Kalapuya peoples these
communities who have cared for and sustained these lands and ecosystems since time
immemorial; and
WHEREAS National Native American Heritage Month serves as an opportunity to celebrate the
vibrant cultures, languages and traditions of Native American, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian
and affiliated Island communities, recognizing their enduring influence and immeasurable
contributions to our Nation's history and cultural richness; and
WHEREAS, the 2025 theme, "Celebrating Tribal Sovereignty and Identity", underscores the
inherent rights of Tribes to self-determination and to participate in divisions impacting their
lands, people and futures, while affirming the federal trust responsibilities and moral
obligations of the United States toward Indigenous Nations; and
WHEREAS Native American Heritage Month provides an opportunity to honor Indigenous
veterans and all those who have courageously served in defense of our Nation, while
acknowledging the resilience, wisdom and leadership Indigenous peoples continue to bring to
every field of endeavor;
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that we, the Lake Oswego City Council, proclaim November
2025 as Native American Heritage Month in the City of Lake Oswego. We encourage all
residents to celebrate and learn from the rich heritages and living traditions of Indigenous
communities and to engage in reflection, education and dialogue that deepen our shared
commitment to respect, reconciliation and equity.
Together, let us honor the past, celebrate the present and work toward a future built on mutual
understanding and belonging for all who call Lake Oswego home.
Joseph M. Buck, Mayor
November 4, 2025
6.1
COUNCIL REPORT
V -w 0
OREGO�
Subject: Approval of City Council Meeting Minutes
Meeting Date: November 4, 2025 Staff Member: Laural Hawkins, City Recorder
Report Date: October 24, 2025 Department: City Manager's Office
Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation
❑X Motion ❑ Approval
❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial
❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded
❑ Resolution , ❑X Not Applicable
❑ Information Only Comments:
❑ Council Direction
❑X Consent Agenda
Staff Recommendation: Approve minutes as written.
Recommended Language for Motion: Move to approve minutes as written.
Project/ Issue Relates To: NA
Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question):
❑Council Goals/Priorities ❑Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑X Not Applicable
ATTACHMENTS
1. September 2, 2025 Draft Regular Meeting Minutes
2. September 16, 2025 Draft Regular Meeting Minutes
Respect Trust. S.e'vi-
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
O �tL CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING
�` n MINUTES
° -- O
September 2, 2025 ATTACHMENT 1
c'REGO�
1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Buck called the regular City Council meeting to order at 5:31 p.m. on Tuesday, September 2,
2025. The meeting was held both virtually via video conferencing and in-person in the Council Chamber
at City Hall 380 A Avenue.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Buck, Councilors Afghan, Corrigan, Mboup, Rapf, Verdick, Wendland
Staff Present: City Manager Martha Bennett, City Attorney Ellen Osoinach, Interim City Recorder
Kim Ono, Long Range Planning Manager Erik Olson, Assistant Fire Chief Kris Artman,
Battalion Fire Chief Greg Barnum
Others Present: Sachi Arakawa, Cascadia Partners; Morgan Nolen, Contract Arborist for the City of
Lake Oswego; Emily Murkland, Community Planning Coordinator, Clackamas
County; Jamie Poole, Deputy Disaster Manager, Clackamas County
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. PROCLAMATIONS
4.1 National Preparedness Month
Mayor Buck proclaimed that September was National Preparedness Month in Lake Oswego.The City
was hosting an Emergency Preparedness Fair at City Hall on Thursday, September 18 from 5:30 p.m.to
7:30 p.m.The signed proclamation would be available on the City's website.
5. PUBLIC COMMENT
• Edward Conrad,testified that his own review of Lake Oswego's sidewalk and bike lane facilities
showed most were inadequate for safe e-bike and e-scooter use. He encouraged the City to address
these deficiencies and plan for safer pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure.
• Chris Durkee, Chair, Palisades Neighborhood Association,testified in support of reducing local
speed limits to 20 miles per hour.The Association's board had voted unanimously to back the City's
plan and suggested that streets without sidewalks be prioritized.
• Mike Perm thanked the Council for the Go Slow campaign and said lowering speed limits was a good
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 8
September 2, 2025
first step toward safer neighborhood streets. The Council and Planning Department were
encouraged to continue reducing car dependency and explore ways to make local streets safer,
more active, and more people centered.
• Kate Lupton, shared a close call with her child near Pilkington Road earlier that day and expressed
gratitude for the City's pedestrian safety efforts. Lowering the speed limit by five miles per hour
would make a meaningful difference for children's safety.
• Ginny Adelsine, urged the City to install a four-way stop at the Cornell/Hemlock St intersection,
citing daily safety risks to children, pedestrians, and cyclists. She described frequent near misses,
including a recent accident involving a young boy, and said drivers on Cornell had no reason to slow
down despite heavy pedestrian use.The City should act before a serious accident occurred.
• Sarah lannarone, Executive Director,The Street Trust, urged support for Ordinance 2966 regarding
the citywide "20 is Plenty" speed reduction. Lower speed limits would make streets safer, reduce
crashes, support local spending, and strengthen economic resilience by helping families save on
transportation costs. A December 2023 technical advisory memo outlining these benefits had been
submitted to the City.
6. CONSENT AGENDA
6.1 Resolution 25-31,Appointing Members to the Foothills District Community Advisory
Committee
6.2 Ordinance 29-58,Annexing 5450 Kenny St. (AN 25-0001)
6.3 Ordinance 2961,Annexing 6210 Lakeview Blvd. (AN 25-0002)
6.4 Resolution 25-38,Approving Amendment No. 4 to Subrecipient Agreement 24-006 Between
the City of Lake Oswego and Clackamas County Human Services Department's Social Services
Division for Fiscal Years 2023—2027
6.5 Ordinance 2966, Directing the City Engineer to Reduce Statutory Speed Limits by 5 MPH on
Residential Streets Under the City's Jurisdiction
Mayor Buck noted Item 6.5 had been removed from the Consent Agenda at the request of Councilor
Rapf.
Councilor Rapf moved to adopt the Consent Agenda as amended. Councilor Mboup seconded the
motion.A voice vote was held, and the motion passed,with Mayor Buck and Councilors Afghan,
Corrigan, Mboup, Rapf,Verdick, and Wendland voting 'aye', (7-0).
7. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA
7.1 Ordinance 2966, Directing the City Engineer to Reduce Statutory Speed Limits by 5 MPH on
Residential Streets Under the City's Jurisdiction
Mayor Buck explained at its last meeting, Council had a discussion and public hearing on Ordinance
2966, but Councilor Rapf and Councilor Mboup were not present.
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 8
September 2, 2025
Councilor Rapf said he had received many emails both supporting and opposing the "20 is Plenty"
initiative. While he understood the appeal of lower speed limits, especially as a parent, he had asked for
the item to be removed to allow for more discussion. He asked whether it was the right time to move
forward given the City's limited budget and the estimated $200,000 cost.
Councilor Mboup noted that data clearly supported reducing speeds to 20 miles per hour, which was
the common standard in other parts of the world.The $200,000 cost was minimal compared to the
value of public safety.
Councilor Afghan supported the reduction, citing strong national and local data showing slower speeds
saved lives. Lake Oswego's lack of sidewalks and narrow streets made lower limits especially important
for pedestrians and cyclists.
Councilor Afghan moved to enact Ordinance 2966. Councilor Verdick seconded the motion.
Councilor Wendland stated he did not support the ordinance, citing concerns about process,
enforcement, and effectiveness.The City had not followed its usual level of public outreach for a major
policy change, and lowering speed limits without a plan or resources for enforcement could give
residents a false sense of security. Local data showed few accidents on neighborhood streets,with most
occurring at major intersections. He preferred targeted measures such as speed bumps or stop signs
over blanket speed reductions and questioned the impact, noting Portland's post-implementation study
found only a one-mile-per-hour decrease in average speeds.
Councilor Verdick supported the ordinance, noting that while enforcement might not increase, it would
not decrease either. She viewed 20 is Plenty as one tool to improve pedestrian safety and encourage
walking and biking. Speed bumps were not a lasting solution, and traffic studies failed to measure how
safe pedestrians felt. More signage would remind drivers to slow down, and acting now would avoid
higher costs later.
Councilor Corrigan believed financial objections were not compelling, noting that pathways and
personnel costs far exceeded the$200,000 needed for the speed reduction program.There was
potential for improved safety and quality of life if residents felt more comfortable walking. In that sense,
the investment was a bargain for a citywide benefit.
Mayor Buck stated that no other initiative could have such a broad impact for the same cost.The 25
mph limits were based on outdated standards prioritizing vehicle flow rather than safety.The 20 mph
standard reflected modern data on survivability and safety, and even small reductions in speed could
significantly affect outcomes in crashes. The increased signage would serve as a visible reminder that
local streets were shared spaces where pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers must coexist safely.
A roll call vote was held, and the motion passed,with Mayor Buck and Councilors Afghan,Corrigan,
Mboup,and Verdick voting`aye';Councilors Rapf and Wendland voting'no' (5-2).
8. STUDY SESSION
8.1 Wildfire Response and Disaster Preparedness
Emily Murkland presented via PowerPoint an overview of the County's multi-year evacuation planning
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 8
September 2, 2025
project, outlining its three phases. Phase I involved developing GIS-based evacuation maps that
identified 21 zones countywide, using flood, wildfire, and landslide data to assess risks and potential
impacts to roadways. Phase II refined those maps through collaboration with fire districts, local staff,
and community partners to ensure the routes were practical in real-world conditions. Phase III focused
on community engagement through the "Be ClackGO Prepared" campaign,which encouraged residents
to sign up for public alerts, review evacuation route maps now available online, and build personal
preparedness kits.The campaign received strong engagement and would be repeated annually ahead of
fire season with future updates guided by community feedback and survey data.
Questions and comments from Council were addressed as follows:
• The ClackGO program focused on helping residents prepare to leave during an evacuation by
identifying what to take and how to exit safely.The evacuation maps were created to help residents
understand the ways in and out of their neighborhoods and would also be shared with short-term
rentals so visitors unfamiliar with the area could access the same information.
• While the maps would not change how the City managed streets day to day,they could help guide
traffic management during emergencies, such as determining whether both sides of a road could be
used for evacuation.The Lake Oswego Fire Department had been instrumental in reviewing and
refining the maps.
• Lessons from the 2020 wildfires informed the current approach, which allowed Level 3 "Go Now"
areas to evacuate first before expanding alerts. Because each type of disaster—flooding, wildfire, or
severe storms—required different responses, evacuation plans were designed to remain flexible to
ensure safe and efficient movement throughout the community.
Fire Chief Barnum reviewed the City's wildfire preparedness, covering escalating response steps from
local firefighting efforts to regional mutual aid, state conflagration declarations, and interstate
assistance through the Emergency Management Assistance Compact.The presentation briefly reviewed
how wildfires spread, noting that most homes burn from windblown embers rather than advancing
flames and stressed the importance of home mitigation, especially within five feet of the structure.
Residents were encouraged to request free home assessments, participate in the Firewise Program, and
use the Watch Duty app and Emergency Alert System to stay informed. Everyone was urged to take at
least one action to make their home and community more fire resilient.
Councilor questions were addressed by Staff and County officials as follows:
• Wildfires often start in vegetation but typically spread through windblown embers rather than trees.
Properly trimming trees and keeping fires on the ground reduces risk, and preventing structure
ignition limits ember spread.
• Evacuation communication relies on Flash Alerts, social media, wireless emergency alerts, the
Emergency Alert System, and public websites.The Lake Oswego dispatch center works with the
County to send coordinated alerts and provide real-time updates about routes, shelters, and
resources.
• Firewise standards recommend keeping vegetation at least 10 feet from roofs and gutters and
maintaining defensible space between trees and other fuels.These guidelines will inform updates to
the City's Tree Code.
• To prevent traffic bottlenecks, evacuation notifications will be phased by zone rather than citywide.
The City has practiced evacuation plans with experts and prepared for complex situations, including
livestock relocation and blocked routes.
• The Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board would work with neighborhood associations
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 8
September 2, 2025
to promote emergency preparedness and household-level readiness.
8.2 Housing Production Strategy Implementation Policy
Long Range Planning Manager Erik Olson presented the Council report via PowerPoint, providing an
update on the implementation of the City's Housing Production Strategy (HPS), adopted in November
2024,to address future housing needs identified in the Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) and to meet State
requirements under House Bill 2003 and Statewide Planning Goal 10.The HPS was approved by the
Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) in April 2025 with conditions requiring
annual progress summaries and a midpoint report after three years. Staff was looking for Council
direction on the initial work plan for implementing the near-term HPS priorities.As part of an eight-year
implementation cycle, only a limited number of strategies could be initiated at once. The presentation
covered strategies as follows:
• Code Audit and Amendments:The City would utilize a Metro 2040 Planning and Development Grant
to begin a comprehensive review of the Development Code in early 2026.The project would identify
and remove barriers to housing and business development while aligning with new State legislation,
including HB 2138. Coordination between State regulatory updates and local code revisions would
be critical, and Staff intended to ensure that housing and economic development objectives were
advanced together.
• Minimum Parking Requirements:This strategy had already been completed in December 2024
through amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Community Development Code,which
removed minimum parking requirements citywide to comply with Climate Friendly and Equitable
Communities (CFEC) rules.
• Rezone Land:The City would utilize a DLCD Planning Assistance Grant to review non residentially
zoned properties and identify opportunities to enable multifamily housing.A DLCD-appointed
consultant would assist in this two-phase project, with a memorandum of recommendations
expected by the end of 2026 and formal code amendments anticipated by 2027-2028.
Staff address key questions from Councilors as noted:
• If DLCD-selected consultants were used, the City would still define the project scope and grant
approvals would continue to come before Council. Many elements of the work would still move
through normal City processes.
• The HPS had always been conceived as a two-phase effort addressing both residential and
nonresidential rezoning.The current focus was on nonresidential areas,with residential rezoning
deprioritized due to its complexity and limited necessity given recent State legislation.
• The residential phase was not part of the current grant. DLCD's HB 2138 and the City's Middle
Housing Code already unlocked additional capacity in existing residential zones.The intent was to
advance nonresidential zoning work first and assess progress before revisiting residential capacity.
• Council's adopted HPS remained in place.There was no mechanism to undo it immediately, but at
the three-year midpoint Council could evaluate whether housing capacity goals had been met
through non-residential zoning and determine whether further work was needed.
• HB 2138 would already introduce changes affecting density and local impacts. It was reasonable to
expect most new housing capacity to come from nonresidential areas.
• Rezoning residential property could mean changing lot sizes, for example from R-7.5 to R-2, allowing
subdivision of existing lots. Such changes could significantly affect property owners and cause
concern among residents.
• No residential rezoning was being proposed.The intent was to retain local control while fulfilling
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 8
September 2, 2025
State housing goals and managing the process proactively rather than reacting to DLCD direction.
• Council was invited to share any concerns about the DLCD consultant roster. DLCD's intent was to
streamline the grant and contracting process so cities could respond more quickly to State housing
mandates.
• The DLCD Grants were paid for out of the State's General Fund.There were many cities asking for as
much grant funds as possible.
Olson continued with a review of the Foothills District Plan update.The City was taking a comprehensive
look at the area to develop a set of recommendations and a new plan reflecting current community
values.The project included a rezoning component consistent with the Rezone Land strategy, though
the extent to which additional residential capacity might be unlocked in the area was yet to be
determined.The presentation reviewed steps underway and noted that the Foothills District work
related to the Tax Increment Financing (TIF) strategy and fit within the broader HPS framework.The
project timeline aligned with the three-year midpoint of the HPS, when the City aimed to quantify added
housing capacity through a defined methodology for the required report submission.
Questions from Councilors were addressed as follows:
• The red line on the Foothills map represented an early concept of the study area boundary.The
boundary was not yet finalized, and the intent was to maintain flexibility.The study area would
likely extend slightly beyond the red line shown, and further discussion with the project
management team and public input would help determine the final limits.
• The urban renewal boundary might differ from the Foothills study area boundary. When the City
withdrew the urban renewal boundary, it could be adjusted to capture some of the assessed value
on the opposite side of the highway.
• The project was expected to span approximately two years.The appointed advisory group had been
carefully selected to reflect diverse perspectives, and the public involvement strategy provided an
initial framework for how the community would be engaged in the process.
Olson continued with a presentation reviewing HPS Strategy 7,which proposed modifying the SDC fee
schedule to more directly align fees with dwelling size.The larger fee structure revision was scheduled
to begin in 2027, consistent with the HPS timeline.
Staff addressed key questions from Councilors as follows:
• The City had committed to revisiting the fee schedule for cottage clusters,which would begin this
year with recommendations expected for inclusion in next year's Master Fees and Charges Schedule.
The item would return to Council later in the year.
• Cottage clusters did not currently fit well within existing SDC categories.The City was charging the
single-family rate, which was higher than the multifamily rate. Staff were developing a methodology
to establish a rate between the two, working with Engineering to determine an appropriate
calculation.
• The new methodology would be incorporated into the fee schedule once complete.A broader
review of the overall SDC structure would follow later as part of the Transportation System Plan
Update.
Olson presented a review of HPS Strategy 8,which established a nonprofit low-income housing tax
exemption for regulated affordable housing available to households at or below 60 percent of area
median income (AMI).The City adopted the program last year to make it available for the Mercy
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 8
September 2, 2025
Greenbrae development at Marylhurst Commons.The El Nido development at the Boones Ferry Road
staging site was also seeking to utilize the exemption this year.
Staff addressed key questions from Councilors as follows:
• The exemption applied specifically to nonprofit developers and to projects serving residents at or
below 60 percent of AMI.While the City could tailor the program below that threshold, it was not
available above 60 percent AMI.
• Council could consider establishing local criteria in addition to meeting the State's requirements, but
any criteria would need to align with the structure and limitations of the existing tax exemption
program.
• Staff were also preparing to implement a low-income rental housing tax exemption that would be
available to both nonprofit and for-profit developers building housing for households earning 60
percent of AMI or less.That work was scheduled to begin this year and could extend into early 2026.
Options and recommendations would be presented to Council in the near future.
Olson continued, presenting a review of HPS Strategy 10,which called for pursuing public-private
partnerships for affordable housing.The strategy was written broadly to allow flexibility and depended
on cooperation with private-sector partners. By the midpoint report, DLCD required the City to
demonstrate at least one tangible action from a list of four recommendations: donation of surplus City-
owned land for affordable housing; partnerships with faith-based organizations to utilize excess or
underused land for affordable housing; leveraging federal, state, and regional resources, such as the
Metro Affordable Housing Bond; using TIF funds to support affordable housing partnerships. Acceptable
forms of progress could include a memorandum of understanding, a Council resolution or directive, or
an allocation of funding.
Staff addressed key questions from Councilors as follows:
• Previous actions could not be counted toward HPS compliance.While the City had completed
several related efforts before the HPS was adopted, DLCD required new activity during the reporting
period.
• Establishing a new TIF district within the Foothills area was identified as a practical and feasible
method to comply with the DLCD condition and would align with other City priorities.
• Even a nonresidential zoning update would likely satisfy the condition, and the City was already on
track to meet the intent of this strategy.
• There were no penalties if the City failed to act; the requirement functioned primarily as a
statement of intent. Council direction would be sufficient to demonstrate progress.
Olson reviewed the HPS strategy to Use TIF to Support Affordable Housing Development.The City
intended to include affordable housing as an eligible project within the forthcoming Foothills Urban
Renewal Plan. While the focus would be Foothills,TIF could also be used elsewhere in the city, and such
actions could be credited toward State housing goals.
Staff addressed key questions from Councilors as follows:
• Councilors discussed the extent to which Foothills planning should account for affordable housing.
The committee tasked with envisioning the area would not be required to include affordable
housing but could explore it as part of the broader planning process.
• TIF could be used flexibly, including for infrastructure that supported mixed-income housing or as an
incentive to encourage development of affordable units.The strategy did not require a specific
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 8
September 2, 2025
dollar commitment but ensured that affordable housing was considered among eligible TIF projects.
Olson continued with a review of the HPS strategy addressing Fair Housing Policy and Education.The
strategy directed the City to amend the Comprehensive Plan to make affirmatively furthering fair
housing an official City policy and to expand public education on fair housing rights.The City had begun
work in this area and planned to complete adoption of the new policy by the end of the year. A public
hearing before the Planning Commission was scheduled for the following Monday, with a Council
hearing set for November 4. If approved,the amendment would be completed before year-end. DLCD
advised postponing the analysis of impediments to fair housing until the next HNA cycle, but educational
initiatives could begin sooner. He concluded the presentation by reviewing next steps for
implementation of the remaining HPS strategies.
9. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL
Councilor Wendland reminded Councilors that the October Wine Walk was approaching.Tickets were
available through the Chamber.
Councilor Verdick thanked the City Staff for their work in coordinating a successful National Night Out.
10. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
Martha Bennett recognized the Parks and Recreation Department for the successful 2025 concert
season and the record attendance at the Teen Lounge that summer. She reported that the City received
a grant to extend the Saturday Farmer's Market for three weeks.
11. ADJOURNMENT,CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Buck adjourned the City Council Meeting at 7:49 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Laural Hawkins, City Recorder
Approved by the City Council on November 4, 2025.
Joseph M. Buck, Mayor
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 8
September 2, 2025
ATTACHMENT 2
� E Fo
JtL CITY COUNCIL MEETING
n MINUTES
September 16, 2025
OREGO�
1. CALL TO ORDER,CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Buck called the regular City Council meeting to order at 3:03 p.m. on Tuesday, September 16,
2025.The meeting was held both virtually via video conferencing and in-person in the Council Chamber
at City Hall 380 A Avenue.
2. ROLL CALL
Present: Mayor Buck, Councilors Afghan (via Zoom), Corrigan, Mboup, Rapf,Verdick,
Wendland
Staff Present: City Manager Martha Bennett, City Attorney Ellen Osoinach, Interim City Recorder
Kim Ono, City Recorder Laura! Hawkins, Deputy City Manager Madison Thesing,
Management Analyst Nell Diamond, Director of Special Projects Stefan Broadus,
Community Development Director Jessica Numanoglu, Planning Manager Johanna
Hastay, Public Works Director/City Engineer Erica Rooney, Sustainability Program
Manager Amanda Watson
Others Present: Nancy Werner, outside counsel from Bradley Werner, LLC; Eric Cress, UDP; Bob
Naito, Naito Development
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. PUBLIC COMMENT
• Catherine McMullen,Clackamas County Clerk, recognized National Voter Registration Day,which
celebrated every eligible citizen's right to vote easily and securely. She encouraged residents to
confirm their voter registration, sign up for ballot tracking through Clackamas County, and plan to
vote in upcoming elections. More information about eligibility requirements was available through
Clackamas.us/elections and OregonVotes.gov.
• Carole Ockert, Land Use Liaison, First Addition Neighbors/Forest Hills(FANFH) Neighborhood
Association, spoke regarding Item 13.1,the LORA/North Anchor Fifth Addendum to the Disposition
and Development Agreement. She noted the neighborhood's long involvement with multiple North
Anchor proposals and expressed appreciation for the collaboration among Staff,the developer, and
the neighborhood. Ms. Ockert observed that the agreement's provision for City-held funds would
generate interest benefiting the Downtown Urban Renewal District, estimated between $70,000
and $100,000. FANFH remained committed to supporting a good outcome for the City.
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 1 of 18
September 16, 2025
• Young Palmer shared information about a new technology described as a form of phototherapy
involving wearable patches. He offered to provide a sample for a volunteer to try.
5. PROCLAMATIONS
5.1 Hispanic Heritage Month
Mayor Buck declared September 15 through October 15 as Hispanic Heritage Month in Lake Oswego.
The signed proclamation was available on the City's website.
6. CONSENT AGENDA
6.1 Resolution 25-39,Authorizing the Mayor to Execute a Municipal Judge Employment
Agreement
6.2 Resolution 25-40,Authorizing the City Manager to Sign the Franchise Agreement Extension
between the City of Lake Oswego and Comcast Oregon
Councilor Rapf moved to adopt the Consent Agenda. Councilor Mboup seconded the motion.A voice
vote was held, and the motion passed,with Mayor Buck and Councilors Afghan, Corrigan, Mboup,
Rapf,Verdick, and Wendland voting'aye', (7-0).
7. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA
No items were removed from the Consent Agenda.
8. COUNCIL BUSINESS
8.1 2026 Pavement Rehabilitation Project (Work Order 378)
Director of Special Projects Stefan Broadus presented the Pavement Management Program update via
PowerPoint, reviewing the program's history and summarizing accomplishments from 2018 through
2022, during which the City's Pavement Condition Index (PCI) improved from 68 to 75.The presentation
also reviewed reduced funding levels in recent years, cost-effective maintenance strategies, and
preliminary results from the latest pavement condition assessment.The current PCI was 70, an expected
decline from 2022's high given lower pavement investment levels. The 2026-2030 program would
coordinate with utility projects, continue assessment cycles, and focus on arterial and collector streets.
Staff sought Council authorization to proceed with the design phase and to amend the professional
services contract by$650,000, bringing the total to approximately$1 million.
Staff addressed key questions from Councilors as noted:
• The total cost of projects completed between 2023 and 2025 was just under$3 million, with
approximately$1.5-1.75 million spent in 2025 and smaller amounts in the prior two years. Some
projects were partial width paving to address localized failures, such as the north lane of B Avenue,
which provided a cost-effective repair.
• About 20 to 30 percent of program costs from 2018-2022 were for ADA curb ramps, 5 to 10 percent
for stormwater structures, and the remainder for paving. In recent years,fewer curb ramps were
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 2 of 18
September 16, 2025
triggered because work often involved patching or roads without sidewalks, lowering those costs.
• Stormwater improvements were paid from the Stormwater Fund.The $3 million referenced
included work associated with catch basins funded through that source.
• Approximately$3 million per year was transferred from the General Fund into the Street Fund to
support paving and other capital projects, such as Lakeview Boulevard.
• The $650,000 contract amendment requested was for engineering and design work supporting the
next construction cycle. It was part of a multi-year, $24 million effort projected over the next four
years.
• The $24 million investment was expected to improve the Pavement Condition Index (PCI) from the
current 70 to approximately 73-75, depending on final project selection and additional paving from
development-related improvements.
• Repairs to Blue Heron Road were funded and on the Capital Improvement Project list but not part of
the Pavement Rehabilitation Project.
• Arterial and collector streets scored a few points higher than the overall Pavement Condition Index
of 70,while local streets were a few points lower.The program would continue prioritizing arterials
and collectors but reserve a portion of funding for local roads to ensure those areas also received
attention over time.
• The program budget was$24 million as shown in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP)with flexibility
built in.The first two years were fully budgeted, while the remaining four years were shown as
funded but not yet budgeted and would be revisited with the next CIP update.The $650,000
contract amendment before Council represented the design phase for the next construction season
and was part of the larger$24 million program. Some improvements would also draw from the
Stormwater Fund for catch basin retrofits and from a separate ADA curb ramp line item of
approximately$750,000 per year.The total program amount could therefore vary depending on
scope and funding sources. Staff planned to return twice each year, once for the design contract
amendment and again in the spring to approve the construction contract for the following summer's
paving work.
Councilor Rapf stated that maintaining the City's streets was one of the most important responsibilities
of local government and that well-paved roads directly improved livability. While the City had invested
$3 million in paving projects between 2023 and 2025, people might not realize how much work and cost
were involved in maintaining road infrastructure. Mayor Buck noted that paving was one of the largest
discretionary investments the City made, and significant General Fund resources were directed to the
Street Fund to maintain pavement conditions.While the community also prioritized pedestrian
improvements, there remained a strong public desire for well-maintained roads. Councilor Rapf
commented that residents often did not understand the "dig once" policy and that paving required
coordinated planning rather than simply replacing asphalt.
Councilor Wendland moved to authorize the City Manager to amend the Professional Services
Contract with Consor North America, Inc. (Consor) in the amount of$650,369 for professional
engineering services for the 2026 Pavement Rehabilitation Project(Work Order 378). Councilor
Verdick seconded the motion.A voice vote was held,and the motion passed,with Mayor Buck and
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 3 of 18
September 16, 2025
Councilors Afghan,Corrigan, Mboup, Rapf,Verdick, and Wendland voting'aye',(7-0).
8.2 Legislative Update
Deputy City Manager Madison Thesing presented the legislative update via PowerPoint, providing a
high-level recap of the 2025 session that concluded in June.The presentation reviewed bills the City had
prioritized, including those related to housing,transportation funding, recreational immunity, and
infrastructure investment. She summarized which measures passed or failed, explained their relevance
to City operations, and noted that the League of Oregon Cities would release a comprehensive report on
all legislation affecting cities which would be shared with the Councilors once available.
Community Development Director Jessica Numanoglu continued the presentation with a summary of
key housing-related legislation from the 2025 session via PowerPoint. She reviewed four major bills
affecting the City's planning and permitting processes and described how Staff would address them
through future code updates and administrative procedures.
• Senate Bill 974(Engineering Review Shot Clock) established new deadlines for reviewing engineering
plans for residential development. Cities were required to determine completeness within 30 days
and issue a final decision within 120 days, with mutual extensions permitted up to 245 days. Failure
to meet deadlines could result in fee refunds or payment of applicant costs.The bill also created a
new"Urban Housing Application" category that removed the option for an initial public hearing on
certain land use applications, including planned developments and upzonings, although appeals
could still be heard publicly.The implementation deadline was July 1, 2026. A separate provision
prohibited cities from applying certain design standards to residential projects of 20 units or more,
excluding multifamily housing. Because Lake Oswego typically processed small subdivisions,the
impact was expected to be minimal.The provision would sunset January 1, 2033.
Questions from Councilors were addressed by Staff as noted:
• Numanoglu explained that the City's Code currently required a public hearing for rezoning
applications, and additional clarification on the new Urban Housing Application provisions was
expected from the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD)the following month.
• Numanoglu noted Senate Bill 974 established a 30-day completeness review period to ensure
engineering submittals contained all necessary materials before the 120-day review timeline began.
• City Manager Bennett added that the City could deny a permit if plans were incomplete,
though that approach would be inefficient for both the City and the applicant. Numanoglu
explained that the flexibility built into the statute was intended to prevent those situations and
encourage applicants to submit plans that could be approved.
• City Attorney Osoinach clarified that a Comprehensive Plan amendment could still include a public
hearing, but certain elements might not become part of the official record of decision even though
public testimony could be received.
Numanoglu continued her presentation, summarizing the following legislation:
• House Bill 2658 established limits on frontage improvements that local governments could require
for renovations or alterations to existing buildings.The restrictions did not apply to new
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 4 of 18
September 16, 2025
construction or to projects involving changes in occupancy.The bill still allowed cities to require
right-of-way dedication, collect system development charges or local improvement district fees, and
apply ADA-related requirements where applicable.The implementation deadline was 2031.The
measure was not expected to significantly affect Lake Oswego because frontage improvements
were rarely required for minor renovations. She noted that because cities could no longer require
public improvements in those cases, they also could not collect fees in lieu of such improvements.
She confirmed that no other bill adopted during the session preempted the City's ability to require
public improvements, aside from a related provision under House Bill 2138.
• House Bill 2258, known as the Oregon Home Bill, created a "permit-ready plans" program under the
Oregon Building Codes Division that allowed standardized housing plans to proceed directly to
inspection without plan review, provided the applicant did not alter the preapproved plans.The bill
did not preempt local land use regulations, so projects would still need to comply with local
requirements such as setbacks and height limits.The second part of the bill required the Land
Conservation and Development Commission to develop rules by January 1, 2027 to streamline local
development review for certain small scale residential projects that met specified site and zoning
criteria.The rulemaking would determine applicable design standards, allowable variances, approval
procedures, and tree protection measures.
• House Bill 2138 addressed middle housing allowances and included several implementation
deadlines.The bill changed the definitions of middle housing and cottage clusters with most
provisions requiring implementation by January 1, 2027, and the cottage cluster standards extended
to January 1, 2028.The bill allowed middle housing to be attached or detached and permitted
cottage clusters to include attached units with no more than four dwellings per configuration. It
removed the 900-square-foot maximum for cottage clusters and directed the DLCD to define "small
footprint or floor area"through rulemaking. Because the City was expected to implement these
changes before rulemaking was complete, Staff planned to defer related Code amendments until
DLCD issued guidance.
• The City would already need to amend the Code to allow attached cottage clusters,triplexes,
and duplexes. She recommended deferring any changes to minimum unit size standards or
footprint requirements until state rulemaking clarified definitions and timelines.
• House Bill 2138 also prohibited traffic impact analyses for projects with fewer than twelve
townhomes or cottages, which would not significantly affect Lake Oswego because small
residential projects rarely triggered such analyses.
• The bill included new provisions to support sustainability and preserve existing housing. Middle
housing would now be allowed on lots containing an existing dwelling, duplex, or accessory
dwelling unit, allowing new housing to be added behind existing homes even if the original
structures did not meet current development standards.The new units would need to comply
with setbacks and other requirements, and lots could be divided to separate existing dwellings
from new middle housing.
• A final provision established bonus units for applicants who provided either an ADA-accessible
unit or a unit affordable at 120 percent of the area median income (AMI).Triplexes, duplexes,
and cottage clusters could receive one additional unit,while quadplexes,townhomes, and
cottage clusters could receive two additional units under those conditions.
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 5 of 18
September 16, 2025
Responses to Councilor questions regarding bonus units were as follows:
• Cities would be required to amend their codes to ensure that height, density, or floor area standards
could be modified to accommodate the additional bonus units allowed under House Bill 2138.The
legislation did not reference setbacks or lot coverage and did not specify how the required
adjustments would be made.Those details would be determined through rulemaking by the DLCD.
• The impact of these adjustments on local development was not yet known, and it was unclear
whether the new allowances could be added on top of existing exemptions.
Several Councilors expressed concerns about potential increases in building height and density in
residential areas as a result of State legislation. Some Council members reiterated prior concerns about
the erosion of local control over land use decisions and the need for clear State rules that balance
flexibility with home rule authority.
Numanoglu continued her presentation, summarizing a House Bill 2138 provision related to single-room
occupancies (SROs),which were housing units consisting of four or more small, individual, lockable living
spaces that could share kitchens or bathrooms. While no known SROs existed in Lake Oswego,the bill
required cities to allow up to six SRO units on a single-family—zoned lot and to allow three times the
existing density for SROs on multifamily—zoned lots.The new rules did not mandate larger buildings but
allowed more units within the same overall building size.The implementation deadline was January 1,
2027.This requirement, along with other provisions of House Bill 2138,would be incorporated into the
City's upcoming Code audit and amendment project to ensure compliance with State law.The City had
applied for a Metro grant to support that work and had received preliminary approval,with final action
by the Metro Council expected by the end of October.
• She clarified that single-room occupancies (SROs) were classified as residential rather than
commercial uses and were intended for long-term living rather than short-term stays. Facilities such
as hotels, motels, or senior residential housing were considered commercial uses with their own
classifications and were not defined as SROs.The City did not currently define SROs in its Code and
would need to add a definition during a future update.
• She overviewed the Clear and Objective Standards provision in House Bill 2138.The requirement
took effect immediately upon the bill's adoption and applied specifically to the development of
housing. It required that tree removal standards and other related codes use clear and objective
criteria and that such standards not discourage housing through unreasonable cost or delay.The
provision also limited the degree of discretion that could be used if a discretionary review path was
offered in addition to a clear and objective one.The City was in the process of updating its Tree
Code and anticipated focusing on compliance with the new requirements by the following spring.
Clear and objective standards would need to be measurable and not open to interpretation.
Examples included requirements such as preserving a specific percentage of trees on a lot or
maintaining a defined canopy coverage, rather than subjective language related to neighborhood
aesthetics. Staff had not yet determined how to structure these standards and planned to bring
conceptual options to Council for discussion at a study session in November.
• The new standards would not allow unrestricted tree removal. Clear and objective meant that
standards must be measurable and specific, such as requiring preservation of a set percentage
of trees or canopy coverage, rather than using subjective terms.
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 6 of 18
September 16, 2025
• Staff clarified that the City would adopt its own framework for compliance, and that any
disagreement over whether the standards were clear and objective could be appealed to the
Housing Accountability and Production Office or challenged through litigation.
• Another House Bill 2138 provision related to housing density.The bill invalidated covenants,
conditions, and restrictions (CC&Rs)that prohibited the development of accessory dwelling units,
middle housing, or prefabricated homes. Any such restrictions adopted before January 1, 2020,
were rendered unenforceable.The implementation deadline was January 1, 2027.The measure
ensured consistent application of middle housing standards across the City so that lots located
within planned developments could not be subject to CC&Rs that prevented compliance with state
housing laws.
Councilor Wendland commented that earlier housing legislation had assured property owners that
existing CC&Rs would remain valid, so this change felt like a reversal of that position. While the new rule
created consistency,the State should have been upfront about its intent when the original housing bill
was passed.
Numanoglu resumed the presentation, reviewing provisions in House Bill 2138 related to middle
housing land divisions.The new requirements took effect immediately and allowed middle housing land
divisions to be processed as expedited land divisions.These applications were decided by the City
Manager within 63 days after being deemed complete. Reviews were handled at the Staff level, and no
appeals were heard by a hearings officer rather than the Development Review Commission or City
Council. Public notice was not required, and the notice of decision was provided only to the applicant.
No public hearing could be held, third-party intervention was not allowed, and only the applicant could
appeal the decision.
• Although the process was highly streamlined, it primarily concerned the division of land for
ownership purposes rather than middle housing development itself. Public concerns typically
centered on the housing projects, not on the land division component, which explained the narrow
appeal process.
• DLCD was required to adopt rules by January 1, 2028 to establish limits on local standards that might
discourage development of manufactured, prefabricated, or site-built middle housing through
unreasonable costs or delays. DLCD was also tasked with defining"small footprint" and "floor area,"
creating incentives for cottage clusters with shared community amenities, and revising parameters
for middle housing types and discretionary reviews.The details of these requirements were not yet
known.
Thesing concluded the presentation with a summary of transportation-related legislation from the
regular and special sessions, highlighting the State's short-term effort to stabilize the Oregon
Department of Transportation's operations and prevent service cuts and layoffs while a longer-term
funding strategy was developed. The legislative discussion also covered accountability measures,tolling
provisions, and adjustments to the Statewide Transportation Improvement Fund (STIF)transit tax,which
was extended with a sunset date in 2028.The measure had passed the House and was awaiting Senate
approval. Overall,the legislation was described as a temporary financial fix rather than a comprehensive
transportation funding package with broader budget considerations expected to be addressed during
the 2026 short session.
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 7 of 18
September 16, 2025
The City Council recessed from 4:41 p.m. through 4:53 p.m.
9. STUDY SESSION
9.1 SB 1537, Mandatory Adjustments and the Approved Exemption
Planning Manager Johanna Hastay provided an update via PowerPoint on Senate Bill 1537 and the
City's requested exemption from mandatory adjustments. SB 1537 focused on removing regulatory
barriers to housing through a mandatory adjustments program that allowed applicants to seek up to ten
design or dimensional adjustments if eligibility standards were met. Cities could apply for exemption if
they demonstrated adequate local variance processes.
• The City applied for and received exemption approval in July 2025,joining a small group of
jurisdictions that qualified.The exemption was granted with conditions requiring annual reporting
and performance standards through 2032, including maintaining at least a 90 percent approval rate
for housing-related land-use applications involving adjustments.
• Required materials included a public notice and a 21-page handout outlining local adjustment
options, State requirements, and procedures for inquiries or complaints.These documents were to
be distributed with all housing-related permits and pre-applications.
• The State cautioned the City against adopting new Code provisions that might create additional
regulatory barriers, directing that flexibility be retained in design and dimensional standards.
• Three local standards did not qualify for exemption and remained subject to the State's mandatory
adjustment process:
• Special street setbacks, for which the City would need to allow at least a 10 percent adjustment.
• Maximum building height,where the State required up to a 20 percent or one-story increase,
overriding the City's 50-foot charter height limit.
• Maximum density,where the City must allow additional housing units when local adjustments
increased massing,though the rule applied only to residential units and not to new lots.
• Council direction was requested on whether to amend the Community Development Code to create
local pathways for special street setbacks and maximum density or to retain the State-mandated
adjustments until the program sunsets in 2032.
• Promoting the local adjustment process could increase application volume and make sustaining a 90
percent approval rate more difficult. A future evaluation of exemption status was recommended if
conflicts or capacity issues arose.
Councilor questions were addressed by Staff as noted:
• Between 10 and 20 applications per year involved housing with adjustments or variances. Those
numbers included every housing type from single-family additions to commercial mixed-use
developments. Many potential applications did not proceed because applicants were guided toward
processes that met existing criteria and avoided delays.
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 8 of 18
September 16, 2025
• Coordination with applicants occurred frequently and helped ensure that most land-use applications
submitted were successful under the City's variance process. Staff was concerned about their
ongoing ability to maintain good customer service while managing the added complexity and
uncertainty created by overlapping legislative updates.
• The City was not subject to the full program of mandatory adjustments, which applied only when a
project demonstrated a net increase in housing and a minimum of 17 units per acre.
• Osoinach said that changing State regulations could create separate classes of applicants depending
on when rules took effect or expired, which could lead to future court challenges.
• Bennett commented the sunset provision functioned more as a pilot project and that legislative
updates often arrived before prior reforms could be evaluated.The constant changes created
uncertainty during a difficult financial climate.
• Osoinach noted the number and detail of new State mandates had increased Staff workload and
diverted time from other City priorities.
Councilors discussed the State's Mandatory Adjustment Program and its impacts on local control with
some noting that maintaining a 90 percent approval rate placed pressure on the City and risked
undermining established local standards. Several members observed that compliance with new
legislative requirements had already required significant Staff time. Others thanked Ms. Hastay, Director
Numanoglu, and Staff for their work and voiced frustration with state mandates that limited local
decision-making, encouraging residents to share their views with legislators.
Mayor Buck directed Staff to see how the legislation and related rulemaking played out and to return at
a later date if further evaluation or Code amendments were needed.
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
10.1 Resolution 24-29,A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Amending
Resolution 19-03, Regarding Fees and Minimum Insurance Limits for Utilities Operating in the
Public Rights-of-Way; and
Ordinance 2931,An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego Amending LOC
Chapter 51 (Utility Facilities in Public Rights-of-Way),to Clarify and Improve Definitions
Licensing and Reporting Requirements,and the Enforcement Process Regarding Utility
Providers Using the Public Rights-of-Way; and
Ordinance 2965,An Ordinance of The City of Lake Oswego Amending Regulations for Wireless
Facilities in the Public Rights of Way
Osoinach reviewed the hearing procedures and asked if any Councilor wished to declare a financial
conflict of interest. None were heard.
Public Works Director/City Engineer Erica Rooney introduced the item as a continuation of a public
hearing held last spring, which had been continued to address concerns raised at that time.
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 9 of 18
September 16, 2025
Management Analyst Nell Diamond presented the utility and rights-of-way(ROW) related items via
PowerPoint, defining right-of-way use and access and providing background on efforts to update
Chapter 51, originally adopted by Ordinance 2804 in 2019,to standardize terminology and management
of utility facilities in the ROW. The original framework established permitting standards for small cell
wireless facilities consistent with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requirements for size,
location, and appearance.
• In 2021,the City hired a consultant to assist with licensing utility providers and updating Chapter 51.
A telecommunications legal firm under contract with the City also recommended revisions. Due to
personnel changes, the pandemic, and other delays, completion was postponed until 2024.
Recommendations to amend Chapter 51 were revisited and modified to align with current
standards.
• The process continued with the goal of adding clarity, revising definitions, and reviewing fee
structures for utilities in the ROW.A public hearing was held on March 18, 2025, during which
wireless utility stakeholders raised concerns.A follow-up listening session was conducted on April
14, after which updated ordinances and a resolution were drafted.
• The presentation explained the distinctions between wireless communication facilities,which
include antennas, structures, and equipment located on City-owned poles within the ROW. Larger
macro-cell towers provided broad coverage,while smaller cells complemented them by improving
coverage in higher-density areas.
• The three actions proposed were highlighted as follows:
• Ordinance 2931 amended Chapter 51 regulating utilities in the ROW, standardized terms for
utility providers, required licensees to provide facility details, established a framework for
permitting small cell facilities, and aligned City regulations and fees with FCC law.
• Ordinance 2965 updated regulations for wireless facilities in the ROW, replaced Ordinance 2820,
ensured consistency with local, state, and federal law, and corrected minor errors. It focused
specifically on small cell facilities and incorporated design standards consistent with City Code.
• Resolution 2429 updated fee amounts, revised methodology, and addressed concerns raised by
wireless stakeholders at the March hearing.
• The revised fee structure provided greater clarity by separating fees for utility service
providers (facility owners) and operators (entities that owned hardware and leased capacity
to providers).The definition of small wireless facilities was updated to match the federal
definition, reflecting changes at the federal level. Under the new structure, wireless owners
in the ROW would pay an annual cost-based fee rather than a five-percent gross-revenue
fee.Two categories were defined: wireless service facilities, which owned and operated
hardware in the ROW, would pay a cost-based fee of$627.47 per the FCC's methodology;
and communication service providers leasing such facilities would pay a $400 annual
registration fee.
• Concerns regarding removal of equipment were addressed by specifying that qualified
personnel would conduct work in accordance with state and federal safety laws. Ms.
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 10 of 18
September 16, 2025
Diamond concluded that the proposed amendments incorporated stakeholder feedback and
aligned with Council policy goals. Staff recommended enactment of Ordinances 2931 and
2965 and adoption of Resolution 2429.
Questions from Councilors were addressed by Staff as noted:
• Diamond confirmed that providers and facility owners operating within the city were required to
obtain business licenses and pay applicable fees. She explained that fee requirements were the
same regardless of pole ownership, provided the facilities were located within the public ROW.
• Bennett clarified that some poles were privately owned, such as by PGE, but if located in the
ROW,the City's regulations and fees applied.
• Rooney added fees were associated with any equipment installed in the ROW, regardless of
ownership.
• Osoinach stated that the ordinances applied specifically to facilities within the ROW and that
concerns raised by industry representatives regarding locations outside the ROW were unfounded,
as the Code did not extend to private property.
• Diamond confirmed the change from a five-percent franchise fee to a flat-fee structure and
explained that approximately 95 percent of utility providers were larger operators generating about
$3.1 million annually,with an additional $125,000 to$150,000 from entities not subject to the five-
percent franchise fee.
• Osoinach explained that the small cell wireless area was complex and primarily regulated at the
federal level.The City took the necessary time to listen to industry feedback, align with federal law,
and meet Council policy goals.The resulting package represented a balanced approach that
complied with legal requirements while ensuring wireless providers were not discouraged from
expanding coverage in Lake Oswego.
• Osoinach explained that the Code was structured to provide incentives for improved service
performance but that the City lacked clear legal authority to mandate network build-out
requirements for wireless providers.
• Outside Counsel Nancy Werner, Bradley Werner LLC,added that while the City could not require
providers to expand service, the issue could be raised with industry representatives during their
comments.
Councilors expressed frustration with poor cell service in Lake Oswego, and Councilor Mboup objected
to industry claims that the City was violating the law.
Mayor Buck reopened the continued public hearing and called for public testimony.
• Lelah Vaga,Wireless Policy Group,testified on behalf of Verizon and expressed appreciation for
Staff's work. She spoke about concerns regarding private property, noting that macro facilities, or
larger cell towers, were primarily located on private property. In Lake Oswego,the Code did not
allow those facilities within the public ROW, so they were situated on private or non-ROW property.
During the April meeting,Verizon understood that the City was considering the provision of fiber
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 11 of 18
September 16, 2025
service from a third party. Each time a macro tower was built, both power and fiber optic
connectivity were delivered to the site in the same way as other utilities.Verizon learned, however,
that having fiber optic service delivered to a private site was considered a use of the ROW.As a
result, even if all wireless facilities were on private property, a wireless provider could still be
considered a utility provider under the City's ROW Code because it contracted for that fiber service.
In such arrangements,there was the operator who owned the structure, the operator who owned
the fiber,the provider, sometimes the same or a separate entity, who contracted with the customer
for service, and finally the customer who used that service.
• Verizon was concerned that it would be treated as a utility provider under the Code even when
none of its facilities were in the ROW and it merely purchased fiber service. Wireless and fiber
services were materially different and should not be regulated the same way. If a wireless
carrier operated a small cell in the ROW, built by an infrastructure company that owned all
equipment used to transmit the signal,then it would appropriately be considered a utility
provider under the Code. However, when facilities were entirely on private property and
wireless carriers were only customers of fiber providers, she believed the City's management
under the ROW Code was not applicable. She thanked the City for addressing the gross revenue
concerns, noting that this was a highly complex area of law. She requested clarification about
the cost breakdown supporting the$627 fee, explaining that it was common practice to provide
a breakdown when a fee differed from the federal "safe harbor" rate. She added that most
management of small cell facilities was handled by the wireless carrier and the pole owner,
whether PGE,the carrier itself, or an infrastructure company.
Mayor Buck asked which companies Wireless Policy Group represented that operated within Lake
Oswego. Vaga responded that she was representing Verizon and working on behalf of Troy Gagiano.
Wireless Policy Group also represented other members of the wireless industry, including AT&T.
• Troy Gagliano,Verizon,testified that Verizon did not own any towers or fiber optic cable within
Lake Oswego.Verizon leased infrastructure from companies such as Crown Castle and Lumen, which
paid the five percent gross revenue fee to the City. He compared the arrangement to an apartment
building, noting that while the property owner pays property tax, tenants are not individually taxed
for their use of the property. Verizon was not disputing the $400 annual fee but raised a concern
about fairness and potential double-charging. Oregon and Washington were among the most
challenging regions in which to site wireless infrastructure, largely due to visual impact concerns,
and Verizon engineers were evaluating possible small cell sites in Lake Oswego to improve coverage.
From 2021 to 2023, national data usage doubled,the largest increase ever recorded and was
projected to triple by 2029. Data from the National Center for Health Statistics showed that 83
percent of Americans below the federal poverty line,88 percent of renters, 85 percent of Hispanic
adults, and 86 percent of adults aged 18 to 64 lived in wireless-only homes.Verizon invested
approximately 17 billion dollars annually in expanding and maintaining its network, with
investments directed to jurisdictions where the permitting process was fair, predictable, and clear.
The company supported continued dialogue, particularly regarding the City's volumetric limits on
small cell facilities of three cubic feet and six cubic feet, which were among the lowest in the region,
and requested flexibility to allow exceptions in specific locations where greater capacity might be
needed to improve service.
Councilor Mboup said that he would like to meet with Mr. Gagliano regarding Lake Oswego's cell service
and noted that addressing the poor reception in Iron Mountain was a priority.
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 12 of 18
September 16, 2025
Councilor Wendland asked whether the concern was that providers were being double charged.
Gagliano replied not under the current proposal, but that had been an issue under the original draft.
Councilor Wendland asked whether the main concern was that wireless providers with facilities on
private property were being charged for ROW use. Vaga confirmed that was correct.At the earlier
hearing her understanding had been different, but at the April follow-up meeting it was clarified that
being a customer of a fiber provider subjected Verizon to ROW regulation. Verizon paid the fiber
provider, and fees were charged to the provider based on those payments,yet Verizon was still being
regulated for ROW use simply for contracting for fiber service.That remained a primary concern, along
with questions about whether the wireless provider fee could legally be set as a flat annual rate rather
than cost-based. She noted that while there were other technical disagreements,the core issue was the
idea that wireless providers with all facilities on private property could be subject to ROW management.
Councilor Wendland asked if that meant Verizon was not using the ROW at all. Gagliano replied that
companies like Lumen or Ziply Fiber, which operated within the ROW, had a physical impact there and
paid franchise fees. If Verizon had infrastructure in the ROW, it would also pay based on gross revenue,
but the issue involved fiber cables transmitting data.When someone made a call,the signal was
transmitted as data through light in a fiber optic cable.Vaga explained that fiber providers, such as
Lumen, operated data centers and switched facilities that connected to Verizon's equipment.The fiber
cable carried multiple users' data to the cell site, where radios converted the signals into radio waves for
wireless transmission. She explained wireless technology was radio-based and distinct from fiber
service,which is why consumers often have both a cell plan and a home internet connection.
Mayor Buck asked if the issue was about charges on towers connected to fiber.Vaga said the concern
was not about the $400 annual charge, but that Verizon was being classified as a utility provider under
the ROW policy simply for being a fiber customer. When the tower was on private property,the City's
explanation was that the fiber line passed through the ROW, and the only alternative would be
microwave backhaul service that avoided the ROW,which was less efficient and impractical.
Councilor Wendland noted that the growing percentage of wireless-only households showed the
importance of reliable service. He recalled earlier Council discussions about tower design and said that
newer, smaller towers were expected to be more efficient and less intrusive.Vaga noted both macro
towers and small cells would continue to be needed. Macro towers provided broad coverage, while
small cells added capacity in targeted areas.The industry once expected widespread small cell
deployment, but those units had proven more expensive and less effective than anticipated. Small cells
now complemented macro towers, using the same frequencies at different power levels to boost service
where needed. Ordinance 2965, she said, opened discussion about volumetric limits and small cell siting
challenges, and Verizon welcomed continued collaboration with Staff.
Gagliano added that constructing new 80-foot towers was difficult, so Verizon aimed to co-locate on
existing infrastructure such as light poles, stadium structures,water towers, or PGE poles. Small cells
could be installed along roadways to fill coverage gaps and maximize the efficiency of existing macro
sites.
• Meridee Pabst,AT&T,thanked Staff for their time, responsiveness, and willingness to listen and
compromise throughout the process. AT&T's primary concern regarded the fee methodology for
wireless providers without facilities located in the ROW. AT&T did not own utility facilities in Lake
Oswego's ROW.Three general bases had historically been used by Oregon cities to charge fees to
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 13 of 18
September 16, 2025
service providers.The first was through a franchise agreement, which had been Lake Oswego's past
practice. AT&T held franchise agreements with cities such as Portland and Salem where it had
wireless facilities in the ROW and paid associated fees. However, no Oregon city had required AT&T
to obtain a franchise agreement for fiber service purchased from another provider when its towers
were entirely outside the ROW. Franchises were intended to authorize the installation and use of
facilities within the ROW itself. Over time, many Oregon cities transitioned to ROW license codes,
which AT&T generally supported for their flexibility. Most jurisdictions charged wireless providers a
per-site fee only when they had facilities in the ROW.A smaller number of cities, however,
attempted to collect ROW use fees from providers without any ROW facilities. AT&T argued that
indirect use could not be treated as actual use for the purpose of collecting ROW fees.The case
Qwest v. Portland addressed this distinction, noting that taxes or fees for ROW use could not be
imposed for indirect access.The third type of fee historically used by Oregon cities was a privilege
tax,charged for the general privilege of conducting business in a community. Portland,for example,
imposed a Utility License Fee, while Eugene charged a 2 percent registration fee. Since 2019,
Oregon's corporate activity tax had preempted local taxes based on gross receipts, and no new local
taxes had been enacted since.The City's current fee structure appeared more like a privilege tax
than a ROW use fee, since there was no actual ROW occupation under these circumstances.
Although the charge had been revised to a flat fee rather than a percentage of revenue, AT&T had
declined to pay similar fees elsewhere in Oregon based on this same reasoning and would likely do
so in this instance as well.
• Kathy Putt,Crown Castle,stated that Crown Castle, a shared wireless infrastructure provider
operating in Lake Oswego, had different concerns than the carriers. She appreciated the opportunity
to provide testimony on the proposed ordinances and resolution.Wireless services were critically
important in today's economy and daily life, but in order to provide this essential service, providers
needed the ability to operate and periodically upgrade their networks. None of that would be
possible if the proposal were adopted in its current form.
• While the Staff report indicated that stakeholder concerns had been addressed,the concerns of
wireless infrastructure providers had not been resolved despite multiple letters, meetings, and
discussions with Staff. Referring to proposed Ordinance 2931, Section 51.01.100 ("lease
capacity", Page 84 of the packet), she explained that as written, the section would create an
effective prohibition of service for Crown Castle.As a wireless infrastructure provider, Crown
Castle built, operated, and maintained a network of towers, fiber, and small wireless facilities,
and then leased capacity on those facilities to carrier customers. Crown Castle owned the
facilities including antennas,fiber, and related equipment except for the radios,which were
owned by the carrier customers. Subsection 2, however, did not allow a provider to lease
capacity on its network to others if additional equipment owned by the lessee was required.
This language would effectively prevent Crown Castle from leasing capacity to its customers,
which was the core of its business model.The language was new, and this had not been an issue
in the past, so it was unclear why the City was pressing for such prohibitive wording. Deleting
this requirement would allow the company to continue operating within city limits, and Crown
Castle strongly urged the Council to reconsider the provision.
• Section 51.01.130 regarding public ROW fees was also problematic because it charged fees to
both operators and customers for the same facilities.As the licensed operator of facilities in the
ROW, Crown Castle expected to pay for its use. However,federal law required that any such
fees be based on the actual and reasonable costs of maintaining the ROW.There was no
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 14 of 18
September 16, 2025
additional cost to the City when a customer used Crown Castle's infrastructure to provide
service; therefore, customers should not be required to pay any fee to the City for that use.This
section needed further work because it focused on imposing fees on various types of users
rather than applying cost-based fees to telecom facilities located in the ROW.
• Despite the Staff report's claim that stakeholder concerns about fees had been addressed,
Crown Castle's concerns remained unresolved. On Page 2,the City proposed separate fees for
small wireless facilities and for the fiber that served as a critical component of the network.
Neither fee appeared to be cost based, as required by federal law. Page 17 of the Staff report
stated that entities owning, placing, operating, or maintaining small wireless facilities in the
ROW would pay cost based fees under FCC rules, yet the proposed fees did not appear to reflect
City ROW costs. On the following page,the City proposed a $400 annual flat fee for service
providers that did not own facilities in the ROW. Because these providers used existing
infrastructure,there was no related cost to the City, and such a fee should not apply.
• Regarding proposed Ordinance 2965, Crown Castle had submitted written comments the day
prior outlining numerous issues. Significant portions of the ordinance were inconsistent with
federal regulations and, as written,would prevent Crown Castle from upgrading its existing
facilities.The original ordinance was adopted in 2019,and conditions had changed substantially
since then. She recommended that the City conduct a comprehensive rewrite, as the ordinance
was overly restrictive and out of compliance with federal requirements.
• In conclusion, if adopted in its current form, the proposed changes would prohibit Crown Castle
from building or operating its existing wireless network. If the City valued connectivity and
private sector investment, it should delay adoption until a mutually agreeable solution
consistent with federal regulations could be reached. Regulations such as these, she noted,
often drove projects out of one community and into the next.
Councilor Afghan asked about the financial impact that Crown Castle described as a hardship. Ms. Putt
clarified the issue was not about the fee amounts, which were small, but rather how the fees were
calculated. Federal law required that such fees be cost based, and the proposed structure, whether five
percent of gross revenues or a per linear foot fee for fiber, did not meet that requirement.The proposal
also continued to allow what she described as double charging, with both Crown Castle and its carrier
customers being charged for use of the same facilities. Under the standards in Ordinance 2965, Crown
Castle would be unable to upgrade its existing facilities.The company was currently exploring a project
to do so, but the proposed standards would prevent it. Crown Castle's goal was to operate in
communities where fees and regulations were consistent with federal law, and if they were not,the
company would not contest the issue but would instead invest in other jurisdictions.
• Skip Newberry, President and CEO,Technology Association of Oregon,testified that the pace of
technological change was accelerating, and both residents and businesses were becoming
increasingly dependent on wireless infrastructure for health care, banking, education, government
services, public safety, and employment opportunities.To remain competitive, communities needed
to attract and retain residents and businesses by remaining appealing places for wireless
investment.Achieving digital equity and economic development goals was not possible without
practical steps to support continued infrastructure investment.The City was asked to keep its rules
flexible to allow innovation in wireless technology, particularly in the design standards for small cells
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 15 of 18
September 16, 2025
in Ordinance 2965, and to continue dialogue with the industry about providing flexibility in total
equipment volume to accommodate evolving technology.
Mayor Buck confirmed there was no further testimony and closed the public hearing.
Mayor Buck noted that he could not find companies such as Verizon,AT&T, or Crown Castle on the
City's business licenses. Diamond said she would follow up, as she believed they did hold business
licenses.
Osoinach explained that the legislation represented a compromise.To the extent that any provider
disagreed with the City's approach, it reflected a philosophical difference rather than a financial one.As
with most legislative issues, compromise was typically the resolution, and the ordinances before Council
were the product of that process.
Werner stated that the Ordinance had been in place since 2019 and had applied to both owners and
users since that time.There were some clarifications on how it applied to different ROW users, but it
was not a significant change in City practice. Lake Oswego, like many Oregon cities, imposed fees on
both owners and users because in the past, some wireline companies had separated ownership and
service operations to avoid paying revenue-based fees.To prevent such loopholes, cities began requiring
both entities to pay fees tied to their benefit from ROW use.The City's current approach followed that
model, applying consistent principles to wireless providers while implementing a low,flat fee structure.
The reasoning extended logically to wireless companies leasing fiber infrastructure in the ROW. Whether
a provider leased a small cell or fiber line, it was still benefiting from public ROW access, and the flat
$400 fee ensured consistency without double-charging.
Mayor Buck raised the issue of the "lease capacity" provision and Crown Castle's claim that the
proposed ordinance would prevent it from operating.Werner responded that federal law required cost-
based fees only for small wireless facilities physically installed in the ROW, not for all types of
telecommunications facilities.The ordinance did not require Crown Castle to pay two fees; rather, it
recognized that owners and lessees made different uses of the ROW and should both contribute to
maintenance costs.She disagreed that charging a $400 flat fee to companies leasing ROW facilities
constituted a prohibition on service.
City Manager Bennett asked for clarification regarding whether small cell providers had to own all the
equipment on their poles.Werner explained that the existing ordinance already contained language to
that effect and that the revised lease capacity section actually made the provision less restrictive.
Facility owners could lease to any party, provided that the lessee did not add new infrastructure to the
ROW. If new facilities were installed,that entity would need its own license. The rule did not interfere
with leasing arrangements; it simply clarified license obligations for entities introducing new ROW
infrastructure.
Councilor Wendland asked whether the ordinance could discourage investment or limit the industry's
ability to upgrade equipment. Osoinach confirmed that Staff recommended adoption of the ordinances
and resolution, emphasizing that, in her legal opinion supported by outside counsel,the package
complied fully with federal law. While industry representatives had expressed disagreement,she said
the process had been designed to balance compliance,fairness, and Council's policy goal of maintaining
an inviting investment environment. Whether the regulations might discourage investment was
uncertain, but Staff believed they represented a reasonable and lawful compromise consistent with the
City's intent not to deter industry participation. Her opinion was that the ordinance reflected Council's
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 16 of 18
September 16, 2025
direction and that entities using the ROW should not do so without contributing to its management and
maintenance costs.Although some industry representatives disagreed with the City's approach,the
ordinances presented a fair and balanced policy for Council consideration.
Councilor Mboup moved to adopt Resolution 24-29 and enact Ordinances 2931 and 2965. Councilor
Rapf seconded the motion.
Mayor Buck thanked Staff for their work and the industry representatives for their comments, noting
that the City needed to reach middle ground and finalize the matter.
A voice vote was held,and the motion passed,with Mayor Buck and Councilors Afghan,Corrigan,
Mboup, Rapf,Verdick,and Wendland voting`aye', (7-0).
Councilor Wendland said he would like Staff to review whether there was flexibility within the size
parameters for equipment boxes and to consider options for maximizing or adjusting them if needed.
The City Council recessed from 7:19 p.m.to 7:27 p.m.
11. ADJOURNMENT,CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Buck adjourned the City Council Meeting at 7:27 p.m.
12. CALL TO ORDER, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
Chair Buck called to order the Redevelopment Agency meeting at 7:27 p.m.
13. BOARD BUSINESS
The City Council met as the Redevelopment Agency Board.
14. ADJOURNMENT, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY(LORA)
Chair Buck adjourned the Redevelopment Agency Meeting at 7:41 p.m.
15. CALL TO ORDER,CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Buck called to order the City Council meeting at 7:41 p.m.
16. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL
Mayor Buck recognized Laural Hawkins,the new City Recorder, and thanked Kim Ono for her services as
Interim City Recorder.
Councilor Afghan reported that the Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board (CHRAB), as part
of its formation process,was reviewing its mission statement and defining its role and responsibilities.
The group planned to finalize some refinements and bring them to the City Council for approval.
17. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 17 of 18
September 16, 2025
City Manager Bennett requested Council discussion and authorization to submit a letter to the
Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) regarding its proposal to eliminate the endangerment finding,
which serves as the foundation for linking climate change to human health and supporting related
regulatory actions.
Sustainability Program Manager Amanda Watson explained that the letter concerned the EPA's
proposal to rescind the 2009 endangerment finding, which determined that greenhouse gases threaten
human health and should be regulated under the Clean Air Act.The proposed rule would remove federal
greenhouse gas standards for motor vehicles and limit the EPA's authority to regulate emissions from
transportation and power plants, leaving state and local governments unable to act in their place.The
City's draft comment letter opposed the proposal because it would undermine Lake Oswego's adopted
Climate Action Goals.The letter cited the growing scientific consensus on climate change, described
local impacts such as extreme heat and severe winter storms, and stressed the importance of reducing
transportation-related emissions.The letter would also join those from other jurisdictions and
sustainability networks, helping to build the administrative record urging the EPA to retain its regulatory
authority.
Mayor Buck confirmed the Council's support for sending the letter to the EPA.
18. ADJOURNMENT,CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Buck adjourned the City Council Meeting at 7:47 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Laural Hawkins, City Recorder
Approved by the City Council on November 4, 2025.
Joseph M. Buck, Mayor
City Council Meeting Minutes Page 18 of 18
September 16, 2025
8.1
V
o� 0
E 0 COUNCIL REPORT
�
—
GREGO�
Subject: Resolution 25-45, Approving the 2026 Solid Waste and Recycling Rates
Meeting Date: November 4, 2025 Staff Member: Amanda Watson, Sustainability
Program Manager
Report Date: October 24, 2025
Department: City Manager's Office
Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation
❑X Motion ❑ Approval
❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial
❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded
❑X Resolution ❑X Not Applicable
❑ Information Only Comments:
❑ Council Direction
❑ Consent Agenda
Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 25-45, approving 2026 rates for solid waste
and recycling collection services provided by Republic Services.
Recommended Language for Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 25-45, Approving 2026
Solid Waste and Recycling Collection Service Rates.
Project/ Issue Relates To: Solid Waste Franchise; Sustainability
Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question):
❑Council Goals/Priorities ❑Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑X Not Applicable
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL
Adjustment of Republic Services' solid waste and recycling collection rates.
BACKGROUND
Garbage and recycling collection services in Lake Oswego are provided by Republic Services,
operating under a 10-year exclusive franchise with the City of Lake Oswego (Ordinance No.
2901). As part of the City's regulation of solid waste collection, City Council is responsible for
ensuring that rates are just, reasonable, and adequate to provide necessary public service. The
Respect Trust. cam,.:
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 2
City's 2022 franchise ordinance provides for an annual service rate adjustment to provide the
franchisee with a target return of 10%, within an acceptable range of 8— 12%. The process for
establishing service rates is outlined in Ordinance 2901, Subsection 8(ii)(b), and specifies:
"In determining the appropriate rate to be charged by the Franchisee, the City Council
shall consider:
a. The cost of performing the service provided by the Franchisee, including any
additional costs (or savings) resulting from recycling.
b. Anticipated increases in the cost of providing the services.
c. The need for equipment replacement and the need for additional equipment to
meet service needs; compliance with federal, state and local law, ordinances and
regulations; or technological change.
d. The investment of the Franchisee and the value of its business and the necessity
that the Franchisee have a reasonable rate of return or fair operating margin.
e. Rates in other cities in this metropolitan area.
f. Other factors deemed relevant by the City Council."
At the October 7 City Council meeting, staff presented results from the annual financial review
and analysis conducted by Bell &Associates and recommendations for updates to the 2026
solid waste collection service rates. Based on the review, staff recommended keeping the
majority of service rates the same in 2026 (no general rate adjustment needed) and making a
few targeted updates including changing the structure of bulky waste rates, limiting some
additional fees for commercial customers, eliminating unneeded rates and fees, and adding in
previously approved rates missing from the rate schedule.
Based on City Council direction, Resolution 25-45 includes the following updates to 2026 rates:
• Updates bulky waste fee schedule, adopting the same structure and rates as used in
Washington County.
• Limits Extra Yardage fee to apply only to garbage, not recycling containers.
• Eliminates contamination fees for recycling containers (commercial service).
• Removes Summary Billing Rates for cart service, which are no longer used.
• Eliminates Reinstatement Fee, which is captured in Cart Redelivery Fee.
• Adds in Lock Fee and Late Payment Fee that were missing from 2025 rate sheet.
RECOMMENDATION
Move to adopt Resolution 25-45, Approving 2026 Solid Waste and Recycling Collection
Service Rates.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution 25-45
2. Exhibit A—2026 Republic Services Rate Schedule for Garbage, Recycling, Yard Debris,
and Organics Collection
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION 25-45
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO APPROVING 2026 SOLID
WASTE AND RECYCLING COLLECTION SERVICE RATES.
WHEREAS, Ordinance 2901, adopted on October 18, 2022, grants Rossman Sanitary Services Inc.,
doing business as Allied Waste of Lake Oswego, now doing business as Republic Services of Lake
Oswego ("Franchisee"), an exclusive franchise for solid waste collection services within the City
limits, and reserves to City Council the right to establish and modify service rates charged by the
Franchisee; and
WHEREAS, Ordinance 2901 provides that rates shall be approved by the City Council by
resolution, and that, in determining the appropriate rates, the City Council Shall Consider:
1. The cost of performing the service provided by the Franchisee, including any additional
costs or savings) resulting from recycling;
2. Anticipated increases in the cost of providing the services;
3. The need for equipment replacement and the need for additional equipment to meet
service needs; compliance with federal, state and local law, ordinances and regulations, or
technological change;
4. The investment of the Franchisee and the value of its business and the necessity that the
Franchisee have a reasonable rate of return or fair operating margin;
5. Rates in other cities in this metropolitan area;
6. Other factors deemed relevant by the City Council.
WHEREAS, the City contracted with a rate consultant to review the Franchisee's 2024 Lake
Oswego Annual Report, determine the need for an annual service rate adjustment, and make
recommendations on adjustments as needed; and
WHEREAS, the Franchisee submitted additional detailed cost and operational information to be
considered in a report by the City's contracted rate consultant; and
WHEREAS, upon reviewing the report of the City's contracted rate consultant and careful
consideration of the interests of the public and the Franchisee, and receiving direction from the
City Council, staff recommends a rate adjustment for the Franchisee per Exhibit A.
NOW,THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego that:
Section 1. Effective January 1, 2026 the rate schedule attached as Exhibit A is approved and
adopted for the solid waste collection franchise pursuant to Ordinance 2901.
Section 2. November 4, 2025. This Resolution shall take effect upon passage.
Considered and enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego on
the 4th day of November, 2025.
Resolution 25-45
Page 1 of 2
AYES:
NOES:
EXCUSED:
ABSTAIN:
Joseph M. Buck, Mayor
ATTEST:
Laural Hawkins, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney
Resolution 25-45
Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT A
O�vik EoJ'
Nta
U �� 0
OREGOx4
City of Lake Oswego
Republic Services Rate Schedule for Garbage, Recycling, Yard Debris,
and Organics Collection
Effective January 1, 2026
ROLL CART SERVICE RATES
Residential Single-Family Dwelling Garbage Cart Service Rate per
Weekly pick up. Includes garbage cart, recycling cart, glass recycling bin, and Month
mixed organics (yard debris +food waste) cart service. The garbage cart size
determines the rate paid.
20 gallon $29.20
35 gallon $39.54
65 gallon $58.90
90 gallon $62.37
Up the Drive Rate— up to 50 feet' $10.83
Up the Drive Rate—for each additional 50 feet $1.17
'Up the Drive service is available free of charge to customers with disabilities.
Multifamily and Commercial Cart Service Rate per
Service includes trash, recycling, and food waste. Month
35 gallon $34.77
65 gallon $50.56
90 gallon $54.23
Alternative Collection Services and Miscellaneous Charges Rate
35 gallon Monthly Service (includes trash, recycling, and mixed organics) $23.05
35 gallon On Call Garbage Only (per each pick-up/service; minimum once every $14.84
2 months)
65 gallon Recycling Only (weekly with 65 gal. cart and bin) $8.73
65 gallon Mixed Organics Only (monthly fee; 1 month minimum service) $10.17
Additional 65 gallon Mixed Organics Roll Cart $7.75
Recycling & Mixed Organics Only (monthly fee; 1-month minimum service) $16.48
EXHIBIT A
p�� City of Lake Oswego
o Republic Services Rate Schedule
U
...m.
OREGo'
Lost or Damaged Garbage Cart (new replacement cart) $79.93
Lost or Damaged Yard Debris Cart (new replacement cart) $79.93
Lost or Damaged Recycling Cart (new replacement cart) $79.93
Lost or Damaged Recycling Bin (new replacement cart) $13.52
Return-trip Fee same day $21.55
Return-trip Fee outside of normally scheduled route $34.68
Extra Can/Bag/Box (each) -Trash $8.67
Extra Can/Bag/Box (each) -Yard Debris $6.41
Contaminated Recycling Cart $15.85
Contaminated Yard Debris Cart $8.00
Gate or Enclosure Opening and Roll-out Container (monthly) $19.68
Roll Cart Washout/Exchange (one free per year) $36.87
Cart Redelivery Fee (when cart is picked up for stopped service and service is $36.63
restarted within 12 months)
Late Payment Fee: Accounts that are 45 days past due from the billing date are subject to
finance charges computed at 1.5% over the past due balance or a minimum of$5.00.
Temporary Clean-Up Container Rate
3 yards maximum volume for 4 days of use
Delivery & Removal of Container $140.50
Extra Dump $112.31
Daily Container Rental Charge Past 4 Days (per day) $21.78
COMMERCIAL CONTAINER SERVICE RATES
Front Load Trash Container Service-Rate per Month2
Weekly Collection Frequency(#Collections Per Week)
Container Size 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 yard3 $172.52 $307.51 $454.77 $602.15 $749.50 $896.87
Multiple $138.02 $246.01 $363.82 $481.72 $599.60 $717.50
1.33 yard3 $193.85 $373.15 $549.69 $734.76 $889.65 $1,045.33
Multiple $155.08 $298.52 $439.75 $587.81 $711.72 $836.28
1.5 yard3 $217.09 $420.83 $624.55 $828.29 $1,032.04 $1,235.83
Multiple $173.67 $336.66 $499.64 $662.63 $825.63 $988.66
2
EXHIBIT A
0`�
N � City of Lake Oswego
0 Republic Services Rate Schedule
U �� 0
OREGo .
2 yard $272.70 $532.02 $791.32 $1,050.66 $1,310.01 $1,569.32
Multiple $218.16 $425.62 $633.06 $840.53 $1,048.01 $1,255.46
3 yard $366.45 $711.45 $1,056.44 $1,401.43 $1,746.44 $2,091.41
Multiple $311.48 $604.73 $897.97 $1,191.22 $1,484.47 $1,777.70
4 yard $464.03 $906.55 $1,349.08 $1,790.93 $2,234.18 $2,676.70
Multiple $394.43 $770.57 $1,146.72 $1,522.29 $1,899.05 $2,275.20
6 yard $638.79 $1,182.76 $1,869.16 $2,343.67 $3,099.13 $3,504.63
Multiple $574.91 $1,064.48 $1,682.24 $2,109.30 $2,789.22 $3,154.17
8 yard $781.04 $1,538.53 $2,296.04 $3,053.55 $3,811.07 $4,568.59
Multiple $702.94 $1,384.68 $2,066.44 $2,748.20 $3,429.96 $4,111.73
2 Commercial container service includes garbage, recycling, and food waste collection.
Per Resolution 22-27, all Lake Oswego School District facilities and private school facilities
(grades 1— 12) receive a 50% discount on all regular collection services.
3As of September 1, 2015, 1-yard and 1.33-yard front load containers have not been available
to new customers. Current customers with these containers will be allowed to continue service
with them at the approved rates.
Miscellaneous Charges Rate
Compacted containers charged at 2.2x the loose rate.
Extra Service/Trip on Container 33% of Monthly
Rate
Extra Yardage (garbage only- material beyond the capacity of the $36.01
container, charged per yard) _
Food Waste Frontload Container Contaminated Load Fee, per yard $12.50
Lock $29.92
Hourly Handling Fee (1 Truck+ 1 Driver): Charged for non-routine services $114.04
related to the collection of waste, such as wait times in excess of 15
minutes, enclosure cleanouts, or bulky waste pick-ups of extra-large items
_that require additional personnel to handle safely.
Late Payment Fee: Accounts that are 45 days past due from the billing date are subject to
finance charges computed at 1.5% over the past due balance or a minimum of$5.00.
3
EXHIBIT A
p�� City of Lake Oswego
o Republic Services Rate Schedule
U
......
OREGoC�
INDUSTRIAL DROP BOX AND COMPACTOR SERVICE RATES
Drop Box/Compactor Haul Rates. Disposal billed at 105% plus scale fee. Rate
10-29 yard Drop Box $180.00
30 yard Drop Box $180.00
40 yard Drop Box $180.00
Drop Box Delivery Fee $75.00
Relocate Drop Box (on site) $99.00
Dry Run $121.00
Compactor Rate $247.00
Additional Drop Box Fees
Drop Box Rent Per Day (rent starts 48 hours after delivery)3 $12.00
Drop Box Rent Per Month $99.00
Lidded Box Rental (per month) $120.00
Over Weight Fee (per ton, if over 10 tons) $76.45
Liner $50.00
Washout Fee $35.94
Minimum Haul Fee (fee for less than 2 hauls per month) $25.00
Mileage Fee (after 20 miles)4 $4.70
Landfill Surcharges $48.00
3Rent charged is the lesser of the daily or monthly rent total.
4Mileage Fee is assessed for drop box/compacter hauls exceeding 20 miles from the point of
collection to the disposal facility.
5Landfill Surcharge is for special waste that must be hauled directly to landfill or other disposal
location instead of to the transfer station.
Additional Recycling Services for Multi-Family Roll Off Compactor Customers
Number of Units Rate per Unit
5-199 $3.33
200-299 $2.81
300-399 $2.54
400+ $2.46
4
EXHIBIT A
0�� F�s� City of Lake Oswego
U 0 Republic Services Rate Schedule
.1o~
OREGo�
SUPPLEMENTAL SERVICE RATES
Bulky Waste Collection Rates
Type of Service Rate
Extra-large items: (entertainment center, sectional couch, king size mattress $39.00
including box spring) _
Large Items: (recliner, dresser, couch, other size mattress including the box $27.00
spring)
Medium Items: (desk, bookshelf, chair) $15.00
Small items: (pallet, end table, bicycle) $11.00
Appliance items—coolant containing: (freezer, refrigerator, portable air $26.00
conditioner)
Appliance items: (BBQ grill, stove, washer, dryer) $16.00
Electronics: (television, laptop, printer) $10.00
Tire: (passenger vehicle, tire off the rim) $23.00 first tire,
each additional
is $15.00
Pick Up Fee * applies to each service request $16.00
Pick Up Fee is applied as a flat rate regardless of the number of items for disposal.
Pick Up Fee is billed regardless of whether the item(s) are onsite at time of agreed upon pick
up. Standard Call Back rates apply if the customer does not set out as directed.
Hourly Handling Fee (1 Truck + 1 Driver): Charged for non-routine services $114.04
related to the collection of waste, such as wait times in excess of 15 minutes,
enclosure cleanouts, or bulky waste pick-ups of extra-large items that
require additional personnel to handle safely.
Contact Republic Services to confirm schedule availability and pricing. Items not listed will be
billed Standard Pick Up Fee and a Cost Per Item Rate based on the size/material type.
5
8.2
o�� E 0 COUNCIL REPORT
V � 0
—
GREGO�
Subject: Ordinance 2972, Adopting the Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board
charge statement as recommended by the Board
Meeting Date: November 4, 2025 Staff Member: Maria Bigelow, Adult Community
Center Manager
Report Date: October 13, 2025
Department: Parks & Recreation
Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation
❑X Motion ❑X Approval
❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial
❑X Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded
❑ Resolution ❑ Not Applicable
❑ Information Only Comments: Charge statement drafted and reviewed
❑ Council Direction by the Community Health and Resiliency Advisory
❑ Consent Agenda Board
Staff Recommendation: Adopt Ordinance 2972 to approve the Community Health and
Resiliency Advisory Board charge statement.
Recommended Language for Motion: Move to adopt Ordinance 2972
Project/ Issue Relates To: N/A
Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): Finalizing the transition of the 50+Advisory
Board to the Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board
❑X Council Goals/Priorities ❑Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑Not Applicable
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL
Adopt Ordinance 2972 updating the charge statement for the Community Health and Resiliency
Advisory Board.
BACKGROUND
As a part of the 2025 City Council goals, the City Council adopted an initiative to "redefine the
Respect Trust. cam,.:
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 2
50+Advisory Board as the Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board."
During the April 1, 2025 City Council meeting, the City Council adopted Ordinance 2960 to
modify LOC 12.51.065 to redefine the 50+Advisory Board as the Community Health and
Resiliency Advisory Board.
During the June 17, 2025 Council meeting, the City Council appointed the new Community
Health and Resiliency Advisory Board members (Resolution 25-06). Staff began onboarding the
new members in July.
DISCUSSION
The preliminary charge statement, developed by staff, dictates that the Community Health and
Resiliency Advisory Board shall:
a. Advise the City Council as to how best prepare the community for emergencies,
especially seniors and people with disabilities.
b. Advise the City Council as to how to promote healthy lifestyle options.
c. Provide recommendations to the City Council on ways to educate and inform the
community about emergency management operations and resiliency.
d. Provide recommendations to City Council for City events related to Community Health
and Resiliency, such as the City's Emergency Preparedness Fair, and programs focused
on community health.
One of the phases identified in the redefinition of the newly-charged advisory board was to
review the charge statement and propose modifications. To thoroughly evaluate the board's
charge statement, the newly formed Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board spent a
significant amount of time understanding the vision of the Mayor and Council, reviewing the
charge statement language, and developing a refined charge statement for Council
consideration.
On October 9, 2025, the Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board finalized the
recommended charge statement below for City Council consideration:
a. Advise the City Council on strategies to strengthen the community's ability to prepare
for, withstand, and recover from emergencies
b. Provide recommendations to the City Council on ways to foster community health and
well-being through policies, programs, and partnerships that respect individual choices
while providing support for social connectedness and equitable access to community
resources
c. Advise the City Council on effective approaches to inform and engage residents about
emergency management and community health resources
d. Provide recommendations for City events, policies, and programs that strengthen
community resiliency and health —such as preparedness fairs, wellness initiatives, and
opportunities that build neighborhood connections.
Respect. Excel'enEe. Trust. Service
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 3
NEXT STEPS
Once the Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board charge statement is finalized and
adopted by Council, the board will spend the next several months developing a deeper
understanding of current City programs, policies, and practices that support this work, as well
as make recommendations for opportunities and improvement for both City operations and
community-led efforts.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Ordinance 25-46 finalizing the Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board charge
statement, which will be updated and reflected in Lake Oswego Code 12.51.065.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Ordinance 2972
Respect. Trust
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
ATTACHMENT 1
ORDINANCE 2972
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO AMENDING LOC
12.51.065 TO REFLECT THE UPDATED COMMUNITY HEALTH AND RESILIENCY ADVISORY
BOARD CHARGE STATEMENT.
WHEREAS, as part of the 2025 City Council goals, the City Council adopted an initiative to
"redefine the 50+ Advisory Board as the Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board";
and
WHEREAS, during the April 1, 2025 City Council meeting, the City Council adopted Ordinance
2960 to modify LOC 12.51.065, officially redefining the 50+ Advisory Board as the Community
Health and Resiliency Advisory Board; and
WHEREAS, a draft charge language was developed and reviewed by board staff to guide the
new board's mission and duties; and
WHEREAS, one of the first Board functions was to evaluate the draft charge statement and
develop a refined charge statement for Council consideration; and
WHEREAS, the Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board has completed its review and
recommends enacting the charge language in Exhibit A to formally define its scope, duties, and
responsibilities.
The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows:
Section 1. The Lake Oswego Code is hereby amended by adding the section and text shown
in bold, double-underlined type and deleting the text shown in strikcthrough type as set forth
on Exhibit A. (Section or subsections within the Lake Oswego Code that are not marked for
deletion or addition are neither amended nor deleted by this Ordinance.)
Section 2. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are severable. If any portion of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance.
Enacted at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on the 4th day
of November, 2025.
[signatures on next page]
AYES:
Ordinance 2972
Page 1 of 2
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Joseph M. Buck, Mayor
ATTEST:
Laural Hawkins, City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney
Ordinance 2972
Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT A
§ 12.51.065 Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board
1. Creation; Membership; Term.There is hereby created a Community Health and Resiliency Advisory
Board of the City of Lake Oswego consisting of seven regular members appointed for three-year terms,
plus two members who are in high school or less than 18 years old at the time of appointment who shall
be appointed for one-year terms.
2. Qualifications. No less than a majority of the members of the Community Health and Resiliency
Advisory Board shall be residents of the City of Lake Oswego. Any members not residing in the City shall
reside within the City's Urban Services Boundary or own a business located within the City or be
employed full-time within the City.
3. Duties. The Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board shall:
a. Advise thc City Council as to how best prepare the community for emergencies, especially seniors and
people with disabilities.
b. Advise the City Council as to how to promote h althy lifestyle options.
c. Provide recommendations to thc City Council on ways to educate and inform thc community about
emergency management operations and resiliency.
d. Provide recommendations to City Council for City events related to Community H alth and Resiliency,
a. Advise the City Council on strategies to strengthen the community's ability to
prepare for,withstand and recover from emergencies.
b. Provide recommendations to city council on ways to foster community health
and wellbeing through policies, programs and partnerships that respect
individual choices while providing support for social connectedness and
equitable access to community resources.
c. Advise the City Council on effective approaches to inform and engage
residents about emergency management and community health resources
d. Provide recommendations for City events, policies and programs that
strengthen community resiliency and health—such as preparedness fairs,
wellness initiatives,and opportunities that build neighborhood connections.
Staff Comment: Updated charge statement drafted and recommended by the newly-formed
Community Health and Resiliency Advisory Board.
9.1
E s4_ COUNCIL REPORT
v AN o
�REGON
Subject: Ordinance 2967, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (LU 25-0001)
Meeting Date: November 4, 2025 Staff Member: Erik Olson, Long Range Planning
Manager
Report Date: October 24, 2025
Department: Community Development
Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation
❑X Motion Z Planning Commission Recommends Approval
❑X Public Hearing ❑ Denial
❑X Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded
❑ Resolution ❑ Not Applicable
❑ Information Only Comments: Council held a study session with a
❑ Council Direction general overview of Affirmatively Furthering Fair
❑ Consent Agenda Housing on July 15, 2025.
Staff Recommendation: Conduct a public hearing on Ordinance 2967 to amend the
Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing a City policy.
Recommended Language for Motion: Move to tentatively approve Ordinance 2967, with
code amendments dated August 26, 2025, and direct staff to return on November 18, 2025,
with a final version of the ordinance, including findings and conclusions, for LU 25-0001.
Project/ Issue Relates To: Council Initiative to, "Begin implementation of the near-term
strategies in the Housing Production Strategy Report, including... amending the
Comprehensive Plan to adopt a fair housing policy."
❑X Council Goals/Priorities ZComprehensive Plan ❑Not Applicable
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL
The Council will hold a legislative public hearing for LU 25-0001, a proposal to update the
Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) a City
housing policy, consistent with the City's Housing Production Strategy (HPS).
BACKGROUND
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act, also known as the federal Fair Housing Act (codified at 42 U.S.C.
3601-3619) makes it unlawful to discriminate against people seeking to obtain housing, and covers
a wide range of housing-related activities including renting, selling, lending, zoning and providing
insurance. The law includes provisions related to AFFH, requiring entities who receive federal
funds to use a fair housing lens in viewing all their activities — including zoning, land use, code
{00973900; 1 }
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 2
enforcement, and sustainability planning. The intent is to ensure that none of these activities will
have a negative impact on protected classes, diversity, and inclusion, while also eliminating any
remaining patterns of housing discrimination.
The State of Oregon further requires all cities with populations over 10,000 to integrate AFFH into
their land use and housing plans, including requirements to develop an HPS specifically intended
to address segregation and disparities (ORS 197A.100(2)). This state-level mandate is tied closely
to the state's implementation of House Bill 2003 (2019), and expands upon federal law by
requiring cities to apply AFFH principles to land use planning to better ensure an equitable
distribution of housing and community assets.
On November 19, 2024, the City Council approved Resolution 24-36 to adopt the Housing
Production Strategy (HPS) to meet the requirements of ORS 197A.350 and OAR 660-008-0075
[Oregon House Bill 2003 (2019)]. While this collection of strategies, taken as a whole, is intended
to bolster the City's outcomes related to AFFH, the HPS also specifically identifies Fair Housing
Policy and Education as a strategy (Strategy 13). This includes the adoption of legislative
amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make AFFH a City policy in the near-term (by
the end of 2026), and ongoing outreach and education to increase access to fair housing
information over the medium-term (by the end of 2028).
DISCUSSION
The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment would fulfill the City's near-term commitment in
the HPS to formalize AFFH as City housing policy. Per the HPS, the Fair Housing and Education
strategy (Strategy 13) is intended to benefit priority populations—including low-income
households, people of color, people with disabilities, seniors, and other state or federal protected
classes— by:
• Formalizing the City's commitment to fair housing goals;
• Facilitating a better understanding of fair housing issues in the community; and
• Educating City staff, housing stakeholders, and community members about fair housing
laws and residents' rights.
Though the City is required to comply with state and federal fair housing laws regardless of
whether an AFFH policy is formally adopted, the strategy is nonetheless anticipated to provide
additional protections against housing discrimination and bolster the City's focus on prioritizing
housing equity and affordability in its housing programs and investments.
The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment is included in Attachment 2 to Ordinance 2967,
Exhibit A-1. The proposed amendment would add a new policy— Policy B-5 —to the Housing
Choice and Affordability section of the Complete Neighborhoods and Housing chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make AFFH a City Housing Policy, as follows:
8-5. Employ strategies to affirmatively further fair housing by fostering inclusive
communities, overcoming disparities in access to community amenities, and enhancing
{00973900; 1 }
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 3
housing choice for populations including, but not limited to, people in classes protected under
state and federal fair housing regulations.
While the draft amendment is similar to the version discussed at the Council's July 15 work
session, the revised version addresses direction from the Planning Commission at their study
session on July 28 to clarify that AFFH policies are not limited in applicability to protected classes,
and must be applied to other populations as well. More specifically, the resulting change modifies
the language at the end of the policy from, "for protected classes" to, "for populations including,
but not limited to, people in classes protected under state and federal fair housing regulations."
Staff notes that, while the adoption of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment will allow
the City to fulfill its HPS commitment for the first phase of the Fair Housing and Education
strategy, the second phase of the strategy will necessitate further efforts to bolster education and
outreach around AFFH as part of a longer-term effort.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council tentatively approve LU 25-0001 and direct staff to
return on November 18, 2025, with a final version of Ordinance 2967, including findings and
conclusions.
EXHIBITS
A. Draft Ordinance
A-1 Ordinance 2967, draft 08/26/2025
Attachment 1: Reserved for City Council Findings (not included)
Attachment 2: Comprehensive Plan Amendments, draft 08/04/2025
B. Findings, Conclusions and Order
B-1 Planning Commission Findings, approved 09/22/2025
C. Minutes
C-1 Planning Commission Minutes (Draft)— Public Hearing 09/08/2025
D. Staff Reports
D-1 Staff Memo, dated January 16, 2025, for the Planning Commission Work Session
on January 27, 2025
D-2 Staff Memo, dated May 16, 2025, for the Planning Commission Work Session on
May 28, 2025 (regarding PP 22-0005)
D-3 Staff Memo, dated July 18, 2025, for the Planning Commission Work Session on
July 28, 2025
{00973900; 1 }
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 4
D-4 Staff Report, dated August 28, 2025, for the Planning Commission Public Hearing
on September 8, 2025
E. Graphics/Plans [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
F. Written Materials [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
G. Letters [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
Staff reports and public meeting materials that were prepared for these Comprehensive Plan
amendments can be found by visiting the project webpage for LU 25-0001. Use the link below to
visit the City's "Project" page.
https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/all-projects
(Under "Search" enter LU 25-0001, then press "Enter")
{00973900; 1 }
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
EXHIBIT A-1
DRAFT: 08/26/2025
ORDINANCE 2967
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO AMENDING THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS
AND HOUSING CHAPTER OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO ADD A POLICY AFFIRMATIVELY
FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING;AND ADOPTING FINDINGS (LU 25-0001).
WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing for consideration of this Ordinance was duly given in the
manner required by law; and
WHEREAS, on September 8, 2025, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to
consider a City-initiated proposal to amend the Comprehensive Plan to make Affirmatively
Furthering Fair Housing a City Housing Policy, at which the staff report, testimony, and evidence
were received and considered; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has recommended that LU 25-0001, with Planning
Commission recommended Comprehensive Plan amendments dated August 4, 2025 be
approved by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing on LU 25-0001 was held before the City Council of the City of Lake
Oswego on November 4, 2025, at which the staff report, testimony, and evidence were
received and considered; and
WHEREAS, the Council finds that the Comprehensive Plan should be amended for consistency
with the inclusion of a strategy to introduce a policy to affirmatively further fair housing in the
City's Housing Production Strategy (HPS), which was adopted on November 19, 2024 to
promote the development of needed housing identified in the adopted Housing Capacity
Analysis pursuant to ORS 197A.100;
The City of Lake Oswego ordains as follows:
Section 1. The City Council hereby adopts the Findings and Conclusions (LU 25-0001), attached
as Exhibit B.
Section 2. The Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan is hereby amended by adding the new text
shown in underlined type and deleting text shown in strikcthrough type in Attachment 2, dated
August 4, 2025.
Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this ordinance are severable. If any portion of this
ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this ordinance.
Enacted at the meeting of the Lake Oswego City Council of the City of Lake Oswego held on the
day of , 2025.
Ordinance 2967 (LU 25-0001) EXHIBIT A-1/PAGE 1 OF 2
EXHIBIT A-1
DRAFT: 08/26/2025
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Joseph M. Buck, Mayor
Dated:
ATTEST:
Kim Ono, Interim City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney
Ordinance 2967 (LU 25-0001) EXHIBIT A-1/PAGE 2 OF 2
Draft: 8/4/2025 ATTACHMENT 2
(Ordinance 2967)
City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan
Complete Neighborhoods and Housing
///
B. Housing Choice and Affordability
8-1. Provide and maintain zoning and development regulations that allow the opportunity to
develop an adequate supply and variety of housing types, and that accommodate the needs
of existing and future Lake Oswego residents.
8-2. Provide and maintain land use regulations that allow secondary(accessory) dwelling
units, subject to standards that ensure compatibility with existing residences and residences
on adjoining lots.
8-3. Provide and maintain land use regulations and standards consistent with state law that
allow opportunities for siting of special needs housing in all zones where residential uses are
allowed.
8-4. Preserve and enhance the habitability of existing housing through code inspection and
enforcement, and with housing safety programs.
8-5. Employ strategies to affirmatively further fair housing by fostering inclusive
communities, overcoming disparities in access to community amenities, and enhancing
housing choice for populations including, but not limited to, people in classes protected under
state and federal fair housing regulations.
///
Commentary: Proposed new Policy B-5 in the Housing Choice and Affordability section of the
Complete Neighborhoods and Housing chapter of the Comprehensive Plan is intended to
explicitly make affirmatively furthering fair housing a City housing policy. This amendment
represents a "surgical" approach that allows the City to demonstrate its commitment to
affirmatively furthering fair housing in the short term, while still providing space to conduct
the public outreach and research necessary for a more thorough amendment to the
Complete Neighborhoods and Housing chapter at an appropriate time.
Following a work session with the Planning Commission on July 28, 2025, the language at the
end of the policy was modified from, "for protected classes" to, "for populations including,
but not limited to, people in classes protected under state and federal fair housing
regulations." This change was intended to clarify that affirmatively furthering fair housing
policies are not limited in applicability to protected classes, and must be applied to other
populations as well.
LU 25-0001 Attachment 2 (Ordinance 2967)/Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT B-1
APPROVED: 09/22/2025
1 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
2 OF THE
3 CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
4
5 A REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE ) LU 25-0001
6 COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOODS AND HOUSING ) (CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO)
7 CHAPTER OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR ) FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & ORDER
8 THE PURPOSE OF ADDING A POLICY
9 AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING AND
10 ADOPTING ORDINANCE 2967
11
12 NATURE OF APPLICATION
13
14 The City of Lake Oswego is requesting approval of a legislative amendment (Ordinance 2967) to
15 the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan (Plan) for the purpose of adding a policy affirmatively
16 furthering fair housing. The proposed amendment is to the Housing Choice and Affordability
17 policies within the Complete Neighborhoods and Housing chapter of the Plan.
18
19 HEARINGS
20
21 The Planning Commission held a public hearing and considered this application at its meeting
22 on September 8, 2025.
23
24 CRITERIA AND STANDARDS
25
26 A. Oregon Statewide Planning Goals
27 Goal 2: Land Use
28 Goal 10: Housing
29
30 B. Metro Urban Growth Management Functinal Plan [Metro Code 3.07]
31 Title 7: Housing Choice [Metro Code 3.07.710 - .740]
32 Title 8: Compliance Procedures [Metro Code 3.07.810 - .870]
33
34 C. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan
35 Complete Neighborhoods & Housing
36 Policy B-1
37 First Addition — Forest Hills Neighborhood Plan
38 Housing, Land Use, and Neighborhood Character Policy 7
39 Lake Grove Village Center Plan
40 Land Use Policy 4.2
41
42 D. City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code
43 LOC 50.07.003.3.c Notice of Public Hearing
44 LOC 50.07.003.4 Hearings before a Hearings Body
LU 25-0001 Exhibit B-1/Page 1 of 3
EXHIBIT B-1
APPROVED: 09/22/2025
1 LOC 50.07.003.16.a Legislative Decision Defined (Quasi-judicial Comp. Plan Map, Zone
2 Map, and CDC Amendments to be processed via Major
3 Developments Procedures)
4 LOC 50.07.003.16.c Required Notice to DLCD
5 LOC 50.07.003.16.d Planning Commission Recommendation Required
6 LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision
7
8 CONCLUSION
9
10 The Planning Commission concludes that the recommended Comprehensive Plan Amendments
11 in Attachment 2 (dated August 4, 2025) of proposed Ordinance 2967 are in compliance with all
12 applicable criteria.
13
14 FINDINGS AND REASONS
15
16 The Planning Commission (Commission) incorporates the Staff Report, dated August 28, 2025
17 (with all exhibits attached thereto), on LU 25-0001 as support for its decision.
18
19 ORDER
20
21 IT IS ORDERED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION of the City of Lake Oswego that:
22
23 1. The Planning Commission recommends that proposed Ordinance 2967, Exhibit A-1 of the
24 staff report (with Attachment 2, dated August 4, 2025) [LU 25-0001] be approved by the
25 City Council.
26
27 //
28
29 //
30
31 [Signatures on Next Page]
32
33 //
34
35
36
37 //
38
39
40
41
42
LU 25-0001 Exhibit B-1/Page 2 of 3
EXHIBIT B-1
APPROVED: 09/22/2025
1 I CERTIFY THAT THIS ORDER was presented to and APPROVED by the Planning Commission of
2 the City of Lake Oswego.
3
4 DATED this 22 day of September, 2025.
5
6
7
8
9 /s/ Don Mitchell, Chair
10 Don Mitchell, Chair
11 Planning Commission
12
13
14
15 PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATION - September 8, 2025
16
17 AYES: Bruce, Guiney, Mitchell, Moreno, Sly, Thwing
18 NOES: None
19 ABSTAIN: None
20 ABSENT: Naujock
21
22 ADOPTION OF FINDINGS AND ORDER - September 22, 2025
23
24 AYES: Bruce, Guiney, Mitchell, Moreno, Sly, Thwing
25 NOES:
26 ABSTAIN:
27 ABSENT: Naujock
LU 25-0001 Exhibit B-1/Page 3 of 3
DRAFT: 09/30/2025 EXHIBIT C-1
PLEASE NOTE THAT THESE DRAFT MINUTES HAVE NOT BEEN REVIEWED
OR APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISION.
oVA E �J, CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
"� Planning Commission Minutes
v September 8, 2025
1
2 1. CALL TO ORDER
3 Chair Mitchell called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m., in the Council Chamber of City Hall, 380 A
4 Avenue, Lake Oswego, OR 97034.
5
6 2. ROLL CALL
7 Members present were Chair Don Mitchell, and Commissioners Diana Moreno, Bryan Guiney,
8 Jeremy Slyh,Jim Thwing, and James Bruce. Vice Chair Rachel Naujock was absent. Council Liaison
9 Aaron Rapf was not present.
10 Staff present were Erik Olson, Long Range Planning Manager; Christopher Crean, Consulting Counsel
11 (with Beery, Elsner& Hammond, LLP); and Iris McCaleb, Administrative Assistant.
12
13 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
14 3.1 August 25, 2025
15 Commissioner Bruce moved to approve the Minutes of August 25, 2025, as written. Commissioner
16 Guiney seconded the motion and it passed 6:0.
17
18 4. PUBLIC COMMENT- Regarding issues not on the agenda
19 None.
20
21 5. COMMISSION FOR CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT(CCI) -GENERAL UPDATES
22 Chair Mitchell shared that the Lake Grove Neighborhood Association will hold their general meeting
23 on Thursday, September 18, 2025, at 7:00 p.m., at the Lake Grove Presbyterian Church.
24
25 6. PUBLIC HEARING
26 6.1 Fair Housing Policy and Education (LU 25-0001)
27 The Commission held a hearing to consider a request from the City of Lake Oswego for amendments
28 to the Complete Neighborhoods and Housing chapter of the Comprehensive Plan to make
29 affirmatively furthering fair housing a formal City policy. Staff coordinator was Erik Olson, Long
30 Range Planning Manager.
31 Chair Mitchell opened the public hearing. Mr. Crean introduced himself, then outlined the
32 applicable criteria and procedures (there being no citizens in attendance, the testimony guidelines
33 were skipped). There were no declarations of financial conflicts of interest.
34
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
EXHIBIT C-1
1
2 Staff Report
3 Mr. Olson detailed aspects of the following outline as part of his presentation of the staff report.
4
5 Overview
6 1. Description of the Fair Housing Act's inception,federal rules, and Oregon Housing Laws.
7 2. Project Overview:
8 • November 2024: Lake Oswego's Housing Production Strategy (HPS) was adopted and
9 approved.The Fair Housing Policy component must be completed by the end of 2026,
10 and the Education component must be completed by the end of 2028.
11 • Benefits, burdens, magnitude, and impact of the proposed amendments.
12 • Review of the proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment to the Complete
13 Neighborhoods and Housing chapter(new Policy B-5).
14 3. Next Steps:
15 • Adoption of Planning Commission Findings scheduled for September 22, 2025.
16 • City Council Public Hearing on November 4, 2025.
17 • Adoption of City Council Findings on November 18, 2025.
18 • Additional development of the Educational component through 2028.
19
20 Questions of Staff
21 Commissioner Guiney asked how the effectiveness of Affirmative Furthering of Fair Housing would
22 be measured. Mr. Olson replied that most of the findings would be qualitative over quantitative
23 (e.g., concepts such as fostering inclusive communities and overcoming disparities in access to
24 amenities are not easy to discuss numerically) and that they will have a better sense of what may be
25 done upon the completion of the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing that will be required for
26 the next Housing Needs Analysis cycle. Commissioner Thwing inquired how the City planned to
27 adjust to the constant rise in the cost of housing. Mr. Olson answered that these amendments
28 showed how the City was trying to be proactive by implementing strategies within the purview of
29 what they could do as a City (not having the ability to change the market or to dictate pricing).
30 Commissioner Thwing asked if the City was running into resistance with the changes seeking to
31 establish fair housing. Mr. Olson acknowledged that the City may hear of some resistance to the
32 proposed changes but that was not the case with this amendment thus far.
33
34 Commissioner Moreno inquired whether the lack of an existing plan was the reason for the
35 developments taking place in Lake Palisades (5,000-square-foot mansions being built in the
36 footprint of a demolished ranch-style home). Mr. Olson relayed that the City was unable to prevent
37 those developments because of State regulations in place that preclude additional barriers to
38 housing and further clarified that the Palisades residents had already adopted a Neighborhood Plan.
39
40 Going back to his first inquiry (quantitative measurement), Commissioner Guiney asked if the
41 Education component would include landlord recruitment campaigns. Mr. Olson agreed that there
42 were many opportunities to quantify the effectiveness of the Educational campaign along the way,
43 but that the proposed amendment would primarily improve the City's effectiveness in addressing
44 the potential policy implications related to fair housing for future Comprehensive Plan and
45 Community Development Code amendments).
46
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Minutes of September 8, 2025 Exhibit C-1/Page 2 of 3
EXHIBIT C-1
1 Commissioner Bruce requested clarification over the potential legal risk to the City over the
2 adoption of this policy (i.e., a resident claiming negative impact). Mr. Olson opined that this policy
3 would limit risk, as they would bring the City into further compliance with the State's requirements;
4 however, anyone could make a Fair Housing complaint. Mr. Crean added that the City was presently
5 compliant with all Federal laws regarding housing (eliminating risk exposure).
6
7 Chair Mitchell closed the public hearing.
8
9 Deliberations
10 Chair Mitchell listed the three options available: vote to adopt as written; vote to adopt with
11 revisions; or vote not to adopt.
12
13 Commissioner Thwing stated that the City would eventually need to develop a vision that was
14 acceptable to the entire community and that this was a good start, in his view. Commissioner Bruce
15 agreed with Commissioner Thwing's comments.
16
17 Commissioner Moreno moved to recommend approval of the proposed Fair Housing Policy and
18 Education amendments as written. Commissioner Slyh seconded the motion and it passed 6:0. Chair
19 Mitchell directed staff to return with the written Findings, Conclusion, and Order on September 22,
20 2025.
21
22 7. OTHER BUSINESS
23 None.
24
25 8. SCHEDULE REVIEW
26 Mr. Olson reviewed the schedule.
27 Action Items:
28 • Members will consider the Findings of LU 25-0001 and will hold a work session on the Rezoning
29 for Housing project on September 22, 2025.
30
31 • Members will hold a quasi-judicial Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning Map Amendment
32 hearing for 4000 Kruse Way Place and will hold a work session on the City's exemption from the
33 mandatory adjustments required under SB-1537 on October 27, 2025.
34
35 • Members will consider the Findings on the quasi-judicial Comprehensive Plan Map and Zoning
36 Map Amendments hearing for 4000 Kruse Way Place and will hold their second work session on
37 the Tree Regulation amendments on November 10, 2025.
38
39 9. ADJOURNMENT
40 There being no further business, Chair Mitchell adjourned the meeting at 7:08 p.m.
City of Lake Oswego Planning Commission
Minutes of September 8, 2025 Exhibit C-1/Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT D-1
p4 E�s� MEMORANDUM
C3REG )
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Erik Olson, Long Range Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Fair Housing Policy and Education (LU 25-0001) Work Session#1
DATE: January 16, 2025 MEETING DATE: January 27, 2025
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY&ACTION REQUESTED
This memo provides background for the Commission's January 27 work session, which will
include an overview of Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) policy from Samuel
Goldberg, Public Policy Manager at the Fair Housing Council of Oregon (FHCO). Fair Housing
Policy and Education was identified as a strategy in the City's recently-adopted Housing
Production Strategy (HPS) (Attachment 1), and a public hearing to consider the adoption of
Comprehensive Plan amendments to explicitly make AFFH a housing policy is tentatively
scheduled for May 12.
BACKGROUND
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act, also known as the federal Fair Housing Act (codified at 42 U.S.C.
3601-3619), was enacted by the United States Congress in April of 1968 and has been further
clarified by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in subsequent
rules (FHCO Website). As amended, the law, "prohibits discrimination in the sale, rental, and
financing of dwellings, and in other housing-related transactions, based on race, color, national
origin, religion, sex, familial status (including children under the age of 18 living with parents or
legal custodians, pregnant women, and people securing custody of children under the age of
18) and disability" (Attachment 2, p. 8).
Generally speaking, the laws, "help identify which issues can be legally addressed when
community concerns arise, and which infringe upon the rights of others not yet living in the
neighborhood or community" (Attachment 2, p. 6). The intent is to, "achieve a balance
between existing neighbors' concerns and the right of all people to access a range of housing
options and not be discriminated against."
On November 19, 2024, the City Council approved Resolution 24-36 to adopt the HPS as a
component of the Comprehensive Plan to meet the requirements of ORS 197.296 and OAR 660-
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 1 OF 174
503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
EXHIBIT D-1
Page 2 of 5
008-0050 [Oregon House Bill 2003 (2019)] (Attachment 1). The HPS identified Fair Housing
Policy and Education as a strategy for near-term adoption, including both the adoption of
legislative amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make AFFH a Housing Policy as
well as education and other actions to increase access to fair housing information.
Per the HPS (Attachment 1), the Fair Housing and Education strategy (Strategy 13) is intended
to benefit priority populations—including low-income households, people of color, people with
disabilities, seniors, and other state or federal protected classes—by:
• Formalizing the City's commitment to fair housing goals;
• Facilitating a better understanding of fair housing issues in the community; and
• Educating City staff, housing stakeholders, and community members about fair housing
laws and residents' rights.
Though the City is required to comply with federal fair housing laws regardless of whether an
AFFH policy is formally adopted, the strategy is nonetheless anticipated to provide additional
protections against housing discrimination and bolster the City's focus on prioritizing housing
equity and affordability in its housing programs and investments.
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING OVERVIEW
The federal Fair Housing Act makes it unlawful to discriminate against people seeking to obtain
housing, and covers a wide range of housing-related activities including renting, selling, lending,
zoning and providing insurance. The law includes provisions related to AFFH, requiring, "entities
who receive federal funds to use a fair housing lens in viewing all their activities — including
zoning, land use, code enforcement, and sustainability planning" (FHCO Website). The intent is
to ensure that none of these activities will have a negative impact on protected classes,
diversity, and inclusion, while also eliminating any remaining patterns of housing
discrimination.
Per the FHCO Website, AFFH includes taking steps to:
• Address significant disparities in access to community assets;
• Overcome segregated living patterns and support and promote integrated communities;
• End racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty; and
• Foster and maintain compliance with civil rights and fair housing law.
Protected Classes
Fair Housing laws protect individuals in "protected classes" from housing discrimination. Per
Attachment 2, protected classes in Oregon include:
• Race; • National origin;
• Color; • Religion;
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 2 OF 174 — Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-1
Page 3 of 5
• Disability; • Gender identity;
• Sex (includes pregnancy); • Age; and
• Sexual orientation; • Marital status.
The City could also choose to add additional protected classes, such as ancestry, ethnicity, or
occupation.
Types of Discrimination
Per Attachment 2, fair housing law protects against three kinds of discrimination:
1. Direct Evidence:Actively and openly limiting access to housing on the basis of protected
class. An example of direct evidence would be the refusal to rent to someone solely
because he was born in Saudi Arabia and is Muslim. That would represent discrimination
on the basis of national origin and religion.
2. Unequal Treatment: Treating people differently based on protected class status;for
example, requiring a renter with two children to pay twice the security deposit of a
renter without children is discrimination on the basis of familial status.
3. Disparate Impact: Having a discriminatory effect on a protected class while appearing to
treat everyone the same. For example, giving preference to renting to households with
people who don't work in the local fish cannery would have a disparate impact on the
Latino population if the vast majority of cannery workers are of Hispanic national origin.
Disparate Impact and Land Use Laws
Per Attachment 2, p. 9, "a practice does not need to be intentionally discriminatory for it to be
in violation of fair housing laws":
One of the complicated realities of American culture is that discriminatory practices—
practices that have disproportionately negative effects based on protected class—have
occurred for decades before fair housing laws were adopted. Discriminatory practices
are so deeply imbedded in our institutions, traditions and ways of doing business that it
can be hard to identify and isolate them. We continue those institutions and practices,
unwittingly perpetuating their negative effects.
As is relevant to the purview of the Planning Commission, the concept of disparate impact can
often affect neighborhood quality through zoning ordinances and land use practices. Again, per
Attachment 2, p. 9:
In the past, deed restrictions were used to prohibit the sale of homes in certain areas to
people of color and, in some cases, people from specific national origins. Upheld as legal
by a Supreme Court decision in 1917(Buchanan v. Warley, 245 U.S. 60(1917)), such
restrictions are now null and void by virtue of the Fair Housing Act of 1968.
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 3 OF 174 — Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-1
Page 4 of 5
Despite the fact that zoning ordinances and practices that have a disproportionately negative
effect based on protected class are no longer lawful, there are still numerous contemporary
examples of disparate impact in housing policy. One such example is described in Attachment
2, p. 9:
A recent example of disparate impact and jurisdictional involvement is the Mount Holly
v. Mount Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, Inc., in which the Township of Mount Holly
planned to tear down existing housing to build higher-end housing. The citizens who
lived in the existing housing protested, saying that they would not be able to afford to
live in the new housing and this would have a disparate impact on the township's
minority population. The citizen group sued the jurisdiction under the Fair Housing Act,
citing disparate impact. The case was settled in favor of the citizen group before it
reached the Supreme Court.
Reasonable Accommodation for People with Disabilities
Though fair housing laws generally do not convey special privileges or rights to an individual
based on their membership in a protected class, there are exceptions that allow special
accommodations for people with disabilities to ensure that they have equal access to housing
opportunity. Per Attachment 2, p. 10:
The Fair Housing Act requires housing providers respond to requests for reasonable
accommodations. These are exceptions to rules, policies, practices or services to enable
people with disabilities to live in the residence. This includes physical modifications to
make the residence accessible. Local officials are also required to consider reasonable
accommodations to zoning, building codes and ordinances.
Free Speech and Public Decisions
Fair housing laws also apply to public decisions about housing developments by prohibiting
such decisions to be made based on the race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status,
or disability of the residents. Fair housing laws also prohibit, "public decisions and policies that
have a disproportionate impact on members of one or more protected classes" (Attachment 2,
p. 10).
It is important to note that, while community members have a free speech-protected right to
express their opposition to a project based on any factor (as long as it does not constitute illegal
intimidation), "land use and other public decisions may not be made on the basis of concerns
based upon discriminatory assumptions" (Attachment 2, p. 11). Effectively, this means that
local officials and staff are only allowed to make their decisions based on, "fact-based, non-
discriminatory factors".
(Staff Memo continues on the next page)
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 4 OF 174 — Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-1
Page 5 of 5
PROJECT SCHEDULE
The proposed project schedule to adopt Comprehensive Plan amendments to explicitly make
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing a Housing Policy is included below:
Overview of Affirmatively Furthering Planning Commission Work Session#1 Jan 27, 2025
Fair Housing Policy
Review of Draft Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Work Session #2 Mar 24
Amendments
Adoption of Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Public Hearing May 12
Amendments
Planning Commission Findings May 28
City Council Public Hearing Jun 17
City Council Findings Jul 1
Effective Date: Aug 1, 2025
Per the Implementation Timeline in the HPS (Attachment 1), the educational component of the
Fair Housing Policy and Education strategy is scheduled to begin and be completed in the
medium-term (approximately 2027-2028).
ATTACHMENTS
1. Lake Oswego Housing Production Strategy, 11/19/2024
2. FHCO Guide for Elected Officials— Finding Common Ground Inclusive Communities
Toolkit, 07/2014
3. FHCO Guide for Elected Officials— Building Inclusive Communities, Winter 2024
Additional Information for Reference Only
FHCO— Policymakers and Planners website: https://fhco.org/get-involved
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 5 OF 174 Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
ATTAUFi1Vl E R 1
Off" FQ
0
V O
HOUSING OREGOPRODUCTION
STRATEGY
LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON
ADOPTED VERSION - NOVEMBER 19, 2024
R
, , .0, ..,
404744 .... A ' ,Nik g,,'
, ::;
1. =- 'I -7..--\'; •. <N it
it - ,1,
ram, r
Lu 25 1 FXHIg�-C �/PAG pF 74 _ �`}y t :'-:
Cv 3 :0801 ATTACHIVIAIT 17PA�E 'f OP 103
EXHIBIT D-1
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
CITY COUNCIL HOUSING PRODUCTION STRATEGY TASK FORCE
Mayor Joseph M. Buck Mayor Joseph M. Buck, City Council Liaison (non-voting)
Ali Afghan Philip Stewart, Planning Commission Liaison (non-voting)
Trudy Corrigan Douglas Corder, 50+Advisory Board Representative
Massene Mboup Kasey Adler,Transportation Advisory Board
Aaron Rapf Representative
Rachel Verdick Bruce Poinsette, Development Review Commission
Representative (builder)
John Wendland
At-large Members:
Sarah Walker(affordable housing developer)
PLANNING COMMISSION
David Tangvald (real estate broker)
Diana Moreno
Phil Bertrand (real estate broker)
Don Mitchell
Kyrsten Baumgart (resident)
Rachel Naujock
Yoko Kinoshita (resident)
Miles Rigby
Logan Bryck(resident)
Dave Schenone
Cara Kao-Young (resident)
Philip Stewart
Rebecca Lane (resident)
James Thwing
John E. Pauley (resident)
Rosalie Nowalk (resident)
CITY STAFF
Pat Ginn (resident)
Erik Olson, Long Range Planning Manager
Diana Howell (resident)
Jessica Numanoglu, Community
Development Director John Turchi (resident)
PROJECT TEAM
Matt Hastie, MIG
Kate Rogers, MIG
Andrew Parish, MIG
Katie Vickers, MIG
Brendan Buckley,Johnson Economics
EU 25-8881 AM8511A 17PAkE 9F0 7fo3 ego Housing Production Strategy
EXHIBIT D-1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
PROJECT OVERVIEW 3
Project Purpose and Background 3
Lake Oswego's Housing Needs 4
Engagement Summary 5
STRATEGIES AND ACTIONS 7
1. Code audit and amendments 11
2. Remove or reduce minimum parking requirements 13
3. Rezone land 14
4. Evaluate accessible design incentives or mandates 16
5. Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE) 20
6. Pre-approved plan sets for ADUs 22
7. Modify System Development Charge (SDC) fee schedule 23
8. Nonprofit Low-Income Housing Tax Exemption 26
9. Low-Income Rental Housing Tax Exemption 27
10. Public-private partnerships for affordable housing 29
11. Use Tax Increment Financing (TIF) to support affordable housing development 30
12. Affordable housing preservation inventory 32
13. Fair Housing policy and education 33
ACHIEVING FAIR AND EQUITABLE HOUSING OUTCOMES 35
MONITORING PROGRESS AND OUTCOMES 39
LIST OF APPENDICES 41
APPENDICES
A. Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment
B. Engagement Summary
C. Pre-HPS Survey Results
EU 25-8881 ATTACAllal M 3 FOF7fo3
EXHIBIT D-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
OVERVIEW
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 10 requires cities to plan for the housing needs of all community members. As a
city within the Portland Metro area, Lake Oswego must complete a Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) every six
years as well as a Housing Production Strategy (HPS)to implement specific actions that address the identified
needs.
Lake Oswego's Housing Production Strategy outlines a range of strategies the City plans to implement to address
housing needs within the community.The HPS prioritizes current and future housing needs identified in the HNA
and outlines actionable policies, actions, and implementation steps to encourage the production of housing.
These include things like changes to how the City zones land and regulates development of housing,financial
incentives,funding sources, partnerships, and other tools and policies.
This HPS Report includes information about the City's critical housing needs and summarizes public engagement
activities that informed and shaped the housing strategies recommended for implementation.The document
also summarizes how the HPS will help achieve fair and equitable housing outcomes for the Lake Oswego
community—especially for low-income households, communities of color, people with disabilities, and other
state and federal protected classes. Lastly,this document describes how the City of Lake Oswego will monitor
the implementation and progress of the strategies recommended in the HPS.
RECOMMENDED STRATEGIES AND ACTIONS
On the next page is a summary of the strategies and actions recommended as part of Lake Oswego's HPS.The
strategies are organized by the primary housing need that they address. However, some strategies address
housing needs across multiple categories.
EH 3 :8881 ATTACfiga 17PAEE 2'bV4O3 d Housing Production Strategy I 1
EXHIBIT D-1
OVERALL HOUSING Increase housing production to meet the City's overall long-term
PRODUCTION AND SUPPLY housing need.
Enable and encourage production of housing that can meet a full
INCREASED HOUSING range of household needs and preferences.This includes a wider
CHOICES variety of housing types and sizes, and housing to meet particular
needs such as aging in place and accessibility.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
FOR LOWER-INCOME Facilitate development of government-subsidized housing that
meets the needs of low-and moderate-income households.
HOUSEHOLDS
The strategy in this category (Fair Housing policy and education)
OTHER does not easily fit under the other headings, but supports equitable
implementation of all recommended housing strategies.
More details about the implementation time frames and cost/effort estimates in the table below are provided in
the Strategies and Actions section of this report.
Implementation Time Frame
Strategy Begin Complete Cost Effort
Overall Housing Production and Supply
1. Code audit and amendments Near Term Medium Term $$$$ • • •
2. Remove or reduce minimum parking requirements Near Term Near Term $$$$ • 0 0
3. Rezone land Near Term Medium Term $$$$ • • •
Increased Housing Choices
4. Evaluate accessible design incentives or mandates Longer Term Longer Term $$ ,. • •
5. Evaluate Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption Longer Term Longer Term $$` • •
6. Pre-approved plan sets for ADUs Longer Term Longer Term $$$$ • • •
7. Modify System Development Charge fee schedule Near Term Medium Term $$$$ • • •
Affordable Housing for Lower-Income Households
8. Nonprofit Low-Income Housing Exemption Already Complete $ •
9. Low-Income Rental Housing Tax Exemption Near Term Near Term $$ • •
10. Public-private partnerships for affordable housing Near Term Ongoing $$ • • •
11. Use Tax Increment Financing to support Near Term Longer Term $$$$ • • •
affordable housing development
12. Affordable housing preservation inventory Medium Term Medium Term $ • •
Other
13. Fair Housing policy and education Near Term Medium Term $ • •
i;;z :1 :81 ATTACHMENT 7/RX-GE 50d 103 ego Housing Production Strategy
EXHIBIT D-1
PROJECT OVERVIEW
PROJECT PURPOSE AND BACKGROUND
Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 10 requires cities to plan for the housing needs of all community members. As a
city within the Portland Metro area, Lake Oswego must complete a Housing Needs Analysis (HNA) every six
years as well as a Housing Production Strategy(HPS) to implement specific actions that address the identified
needs.
The Lake Oswego City Council adopted an updated HNA in October 2023.The HNA looks at the community's 20-
year housing needs and whether there is enough residential land in the city to meet those needs. Under Goal 10,
the City is required to adopt measures that will increase the likelihood that development of needed housing will
occur and to work towards addressing any deficiencies in land capacity necessary to meet its housing needs.As
a Metro jurisdiction, Lake Oswego is also part of a regional process that ensures there is a 20-year supply of land
to accommodate future growth in the region.
The Housing Production Strategy outlines a range of strategies the City of Lake Oswego plans to implement to
address housing needs within the community. The HPS prioritizes current and future housing needs identified in
the HNA and outlines actionable policies, actions, and implementation steps to encourage the production of
needed housing.These include things like changes to
how the City zones land and regulates development of
housing,financial incentives, funding sources, _
partnerships, and other tools and policies.
The HPS process focuses on strategies related to the '" •es
"�
production of new housing, recognizing the significant � - , k.0 �,
shortfall of housing produced in Oregon during the last r •
two decades. However, it also will be important for the ►!It J y� : •°
City to work with its community partners to help ' e;-
conserve, maintain, and rehabilitate existing housing in a �.' .. '
Lake Oswego, particularly where such housing also is .
affordable to people with low and moderate incomes.
EU 25-8881 ATTACHMENT 1/lifGE Ad 43 Housing Production Strategy 13
EXHIBIT D-1
LAKE OSWEGO'S HOUSING NEEDS
The project team used the findings from the HNA, as well as additional information from the Census, other data
sources, and from stakeholders involved in housing production in the city, to put Lake Oswego's housing needs
into context with current demographic and development trends. Below are some key findings from the HNA and
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment (Appendix A).
Current nieeas
• While Lake Oswego is generally considered an affluent community, not all
households are wealthy. Over 40%of households in the city earn less than
$100k and nearly 20%of households earn less than $50k per year. o
O
• Homeownership costs have increased significantly in Lake Oswego,
consistent with national trends. The median home sale price in Lake Oswego
has more than doubled over the past 10 years, from $395k in 2012 to $860k Nearly 20% of
in 2022. households earn less
than $50k per year
et • There is very little existing housing available to
**Ur 1't • '" !*I fr those in lower income segments. Around 2/3 of existing housing units (both rental
' `, �h'�• and ownership units) are unaffordable to those earning less than $100k per year,
'IP
! t 14.4 and over 90% of existing units are unaffordable to those earning less than $50k per
*70 rk• ifTwo year.
Nearly half of renters are • Nearly half of renter households in Lake Oswego are considered housing cost
cost burdened burdened, meaning they pay more than 30%of their income for housing.
Future Needs
• Lake Oswego will need nearly 2,000 new housing units by 2043 to meet - •
projected demand. Housing will need to be produced across the income
spectrum to meet these needs. fifr
• A wide range of housing types are needed to meet the range of household
sizes and incomes. The majority of new needed homes (61%) are projected
to be attached housing—this includes 27%as middle housing units 2,000 new housing
(townhomes and "plexes" with two to four units) and 34%as multi-family units needed
housing (e.g., apartments).
•More than 1/3 of new housing units over the next 20 years will be needed by
MIN "low-income" households—those earning at or below 80%of the median family
income (MFI)for Clackamas County.
•The private market will not deliver housing that is needed by low-income
households on its own. Housing that is affordable to those earning below 80%
27% of new needed units MFI typically requires government subsidy and partnerships with affordable
are middle housing housing providers.
Cv 25-8881 ATTACHMENT 1/lifGE P8d 103 J Housing Production Strategy 14
EXHIBIT D-1
• There is a shortage of buildable residential land across all zone types
(low-to high-density)to meet the 20-year housing need in Lake Oswego Shortage of
(a deficit of 86 total acres,or 642 total units). �� residential
land
Key Housing Gaps
The following housing types have been identified by stakeholders involved in
local housing production as key gaps in Lake Oswego's housing market.The HPS will work toward meeting these
housing needs and filling these gaps.
• Affordable housing for low-and moderate-income households.
• Greater housing choices within neighborhoods, including middle housing(e.g.,townhomes, duplexes,
cottage clusters).
• Opportunities for aging in place—More than 20%of the population is over 65.
• Options for more attainable homeownership (e.g., condos and middle housing).
• Apartments with family-size units (2-3 bedrooms)—Nearly 1/3 of current households in the city have
children.
• Multi-family housing outside the Town Center.
ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY
The City of Lake Oswego is committed to reaching a broad range of community members to consider all
perspectives related to housing within the city.The City values openness and transparency, recognizing that
successful public engagement leads to better local decisions and outcomes.
The public engagement for the Lake Oswego HPS allowed community members, stakeholders, and interested
parties to share their perspectives and input.This project was developed through a collaborative process among
the community, City staff and decisionmakers, stakeholders, and consultants to ensure that multiple points of
view were considered and understood. Below is a summary of engagement activities and outcomes for the HPS.
More detail is provided in Appendix B.
Public engagement was split into three phases:
Phase 1: HNA Phase 2: HPS Phase 3: HPS
(Dec 2022 - Oct Development
(Oct 2023 -Jul Adoption
2023) 2024) (Aug - Nov 2024)
EU 35-8881 AYNNWIIRN-MGle gd 103 d Housing Production Strategy 15
EXHIBIT D-1
OUTREACH METHODS INCLUDED:
O O Housing Production Strategy Task Force.This advisory group included a variety of housing
(^Li^) stakeholders, producers, and consumers.This included realtors, housing development
industry members, homeowners, renters, and representatives of the City's Planning
Commission, City Council, 50+Advisory Board, and Transportation Advisory Board, among
others.
The Task Force was instrumental in shaping the City's approach to the HPS and the
strategies ultimately selected.They reviewed materials created by the project team at
each step of the process and provided important information and feedback.This was
especially beneficial in informing decisions by the Planning Commission and City Council.
O O Stakeholder Interviews.The project team interviewed stakeholders involved in various
ctiV aspects of housing production, including affordable housing producers as well as
developers or designers of market-rate multifamily, middle housing, and single-family
housing.
The feedback received from housing stakeholders influenced the strategies included in the
HPS. For example,the code topics addressed in the Code Audit and Amendments strategy
were refined to address the barriers identified by housing developers and producers. Also,
incentives and other strategies that support affordable housing development (tax
abatements,TIF funding, partnerships)were shaped by these interviews.
Virtual Forums and Surveys.The City hosted two virtual community forums—on April 6,
2023 to discuss housing needs as part of the HNA, and on March 14, 2024 to review the
strategies being considered for the HPS.The HPS forum used live polling to get feedback in
I I real-time to supplement the discussion.The City also hosted two online surveys/online
open houses that corresponded with the virtual forums.
The HPS community forum and online survey were used to gauge community support for
various strategies under consideration for the HPS.
Presentations to Boards and Commissions. City staff presented to the following groups:
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Advisory Board; 50+Advisory Board; November 2023
Mayor's Roundtable event; and Fall 2023 Kruse Way Economic Forum
O O 0 City Council and Planning Commission meetings. The project team held work sessions
On�' with the City Council and Planning Commission at key points in the project.Adoption
hearings with both bodies were held in fall 2024.
Planning Commission and City Council provided important direction to the project team at
key points in the HPS development. Work sessions with both bodies were used to review,
refine, and prioritize specific strategies included in the HPS. Ultimately,the Planning
Commission and City Council provided direction on which strategies to include in the draft
HPS and approved the final HPS via adoption hearings.
EH 3 :8881 AYNNWIIRNT 7/RX-GleAO 103 d Housing Production Strategy 16
EXHIBIT D-1
TEGIES AND ACTIONS
The Housing Production Strategy identifies strategies and actions that the City of Lake Oswego and community
partners can take to promote housing development that meets the needs of the community. All strategies
recommended in this report were supported by the HPS Task Force, City Council, and Planning Commission.
The strategies are organized by the primary housing need that they address. However, some strategies address
housing needs across multiple categories.
OVERALL HOUSING Increase housing production to meet the City's overall long-term
PRODUCTION AND SUPPLY housing need.
Enable and encourage production of housing that can meet a full
INCREASED HOUSING range of household needs and preferences.This includes a wider
CHOICES variety of housing types and sizes, and housing to meet particular
needs such as aging in place and accessibility.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
FOR LOWER-INCOME Facilitate development of government-subsidized housing that
meets the needs of low-and moderate-income households.
HOUSEHOLDS
The strategy in this category (Fair Housing policy and education)
OTHER does not easily fit under the other headings, but supports
equitable implementation of all recommended housing strategies.
ire ► .:
=
IT
die !! � -
•
p
, f .1_.. �-
Cv 35-0881 ATTA ligaiT 17PAEE 1 U F0 71403, Housing Production Strategy 17
EXHIBIT D-1
The HPS report summarizes key information for each of the recommended strategies and identifies steps
needed for implementation.The summary of each housing strategy includes the following information:
Description What is the strategy? How can the strategy work to address identified housing needs in
Lake Oswego?What are potential outcomes?
Considerations What potential options, funding needs, challenges, etc. are applicable to the strategy?
Are there potential trade-offs or negative externalities to consider? How feasible is this
strategy, given other considerations?
Recommendation Identifies specific actions recommended for implementation. (Not applicable to all
strategies).
Anticipated What is the anticipated impact of the strategy?The following types of impacts are
Impact considered:
• Housing need addressed—Housing need identified in the HNA that is addressed by
the strategy
• Populations served by the strategy
• Income levels addressed by the strategy
• Benefits and burdens that"priority populations" may receive from the strategy.
"Priority populations" include low-income households, people of color, people with
disabilities, seniors, and other state or federal protected classes.
• Housing tenure (either owner or renter)
• Magnitude of the action for producing new housing:
Low impact=The strategy is unlikely to meet the relevant housing need. A low
impact strategy does not mean an action is unimportant. Some actions are
necessary or beneficial, but not sufficient on their own to produce new housing.
Moderate impact=The strategy either may have a moderate impact on meeting
the relevant housing need or be designed to target that need.
High impact=The strategy may directly benefit a certain housing need and is
likely to be most effective at meeting that need relative to other strategies.
Time Frame Implementation: When does the City expect to begin implementation, and when will the
action to be adopted and implemented?Strategies are identified as Near Term (1-3
years), Medium Term (within 3-5 years), and Longer Term (>5 years) actions.
Impact: Over what time period will the impact occur?
Implementation What actions will the City and other stakeholders need to take to implement the
Actions strategy?
Lead & Partners Who will be responsible for implementing the strategy?What partnerships might be
necessary or beneficial to the strategy?
EU 35:O981 ATTACHIVIAT 17PAE 1'f FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
SUMMARY OF STRATEGIES AND IMPLEMENTATION
Strategies are identified as Near Term (1-3 years), Key
Medium Term (within 3-5 years), and Longer Term Cost Effort
(>5 years) implementation time frames. A matrix $ Minimal Investment • 0 Minimal Effort
shows each strategy with the time frames, relative $$ Moderate Investment • • 0 Moderate Effort
cost, and level of effort. $$$ Significant Investment • • • Significant Effort
$$$$ Major Investment
A general implementation timeline follows on the
next page.
Implementation Time Frame
Strategy Begin Complete Cost Effort
Overall Housing Production and Supply
1. Code audit and amendments Near Term Medium Term $$$$ • • •
2. Remove or reduce minimum parking requirements Near Term Near Term $$$$ • 0 0
3. Rezone land Near Term Medium Term $$$$ • • •
Increased Housing Choices
4. Evaluate accessible design incentives or mandates Longer Term Longer Term $$$$ • • o
5. Evaluate Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption Longer Term Longer Term $$$$ • • o
6. Pre-approved plan sets for ADUs Longer Term Longer Term $$$$ • • •
7. Modify System Development Charge fee schedule Near Term Medium Term $$$$ • • •
Affordable Housing for Lower-Income Households
8. Nonprofit Low-Income Housing Exemption Already Complete $ •
9. Low-Income Rental Housing Tax Exemption Near Term Near Term $$ • •
10. Public-private partnerships for affordable housing Near Term Ongoing $$ • • •
Use Tax Increment Financing to support
11. affordable housing development Near Term Longer Term $$$$ • • •
12. Affordable housing preservation inventory Medium Term Medium Term $ • •
Other
13. Fair Housing policy and education Near Term Medium Term $ • •
EU 35-0881 ATTACOM17PAE 712 FOF71 O3d Housing Production Strategy 19
EXHIBIT D-1
IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE
2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030
1. Code audit and amendments
r
2. Remove or reduce min. Parking requirements
3. Rezone land* Non-Residential Low-Density Res.
4. Evaluate accessible design incentives or mandates
5. Evaluate Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption
6. Pre-approved plan sets for ADUs
7. Modify SDC fee schedule* cottage SDC Methodology
Cluster
8. Nonprofit Low-Income Housing Exemption Pir
9. Low-Income Rental Housing Tax Exemption
10. Public-private partnerships for affordable housing Ongoing
11. Use TIF to support affordable housing
12. Affordable housing preservation inventory
13. Fair Housing policy and education* Policy Update Education
*Refer to the strategy description for details about phasing.
*N Z'ille i dir
A
r ��-
.4 '' 'WIMP ' . 11%;
ICI
rt
" 1 M
" h ._•`:p ie..I ti. ti , ,,,,, ., , .4,,-,,,,,,,..„5,,,,, ,..,,t,,,.,, .,..,,,,, .,
k .... - ..-. `�' .�.9. 1.•i -
� ,.._ ,.
rl,_,.. A
_'r` _l 5 :fits
r "� ems. �n� Tl9 t1L !4J11
i
-.'----
Eli
3g:0881 ATTAC igail 17PA 3 13 FOF71403
EXHIBIT D-1
STRATEGIES TO BOOST OVERALL HOUSING PRODUCTION AND SUPPLY
The following strategies are intended to increase housing production in Lake Oswego.The HNA indicates that
nearly 2,000 new housing units will be needed by 2043. This includes approximately 950 units for higher-income
households and over 1,000 units for middle-and lower-income households. Increasing housing production will
not only help meet these needs, it can also slow increasing housing costs by helping balance housing supply and
demand.
1. Code audit and amendments
Description Undertake a comprehensive audit of the Community Development Code (CDC)to
identify barriers to housing production and implement code amendments to address
those barriers.
The CDC audit and amendments are recommended to address:
• Barriers to accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and middle housing;
• Ways to facilitate smaller units;
• Procedural requirements that add cost and delay to land use approvals;
• Open space requirements in high-density zones;
• Barriers to residential development within mixed-use districts;
• The impact of neighborhood and design district overlays, restrictive siting
standards, or other regulatory provisions; and
• Other identified Code barriers.
The CDC amendments could also incorporate recent changes to state law related to
affordable housing and lower-cost housing choices.These statutory provisions apply
whether or not the City adopts them locally, but amending the Code could facilitate
easier interpretation by staff and applicants. Recent changes to Oregon Revised Statutes
(ORS) include:
• ORS 197A.445(2) (Senate Bill 8, 2021): Allows affordable housing with density
and height bonuses.
• ORS 197A.445(3) (House Bill 2984, 2023): Allows conversion of commercial
buildings into housing.
• ORS 197A.430 (House Bill 3395, Sections 16-19, 2023):Allows single room
occupancies in all residential zones.
Considerations • This strategy could help reduce or eliminate some of the major code and procedural
barriers identified by housing stakeholders.
• The strategy could be shaped to prioritize housing types identified as most needed in
the city, based on the City's recently adopted HNA and stakeholder input, such as:
o Middle housing (e.g., townhomes, duplexes, and cottage clusters)
o Apartments with family-size units (2-3 bedrooms)
o Multi-family housing (of any size)
o Smaller homes
CU 35:O981 ATTACHIVIAT 17PAEE-12FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
• Simply removing code barriers will not lead to housing development.This strategy
should be paired with others that directly influence housing production.
• There may be neighborhood resistance to this strategy, particularly for any code
amendments intended to modify existing neighborhood overlays or neighborhood
planning efforts. Extensive community engagement would be necessary.
Anticipated • Housing need addressed: General need for increased housing production and
Impact increased housing choices.This strategy could also specifically address the needs for
multi-family housing, middle housing, and smaller units such as ADUs.
• Population served: Low to higher-income households
• Income level:All income levels
• Benefits and Burdens:This strategy is broad, and therefore difficult to evaluate in
terms of benefits and burdens for priority populations. However, it does give the
opportunity to target efforts in beneficial areas such as reducing barriers to
affordable development or housing that is more attainable to low-and moderate-
income households(e.g., multi-family and middle housing); facilitating smaller
housing options such as ADUs, which could benefit seniors; and other areas aimed at
helping priority populations. In addition, increasing overall housing supply can help
keep housing costs down by balancing supply and demand,which benefits all
residents, including priority populations.
However, because the strategy is intended to increase housing production overall, it
has the potential to primarily benefit upper income households. Implementation
should include a focus on meeting the needs of housing types that benefit low-and
moderate-income households, seniors, and other priority populations.
• Housing tenure: For rent or sale
• Magnitude: Moderate—This strategy could have a moderate impact on new housing
production given the limited remaining inventory of buildable residential lands.The
low inventory and relatively high land prices in Lake Oswego incentivize making more
intensive use of remaining sites, if the code permits it.
Time Frame Implementation: Begin in Near Term; Complete in Medium Term.
Impact:The action can begin to have impact after it is implemented in the CDC.
However, the impact on housing development is expected to be longer-term.
Implementation • Identify priorities for the code audit,focusing on high-priority housing needs.
Actions • Potentially seek a technical assistance grant from DLCD or other sources to support a
code audit project.
• Conduct a comprehensive CDC audit, potentially with support from a consultant.
• Work with developers/housing stakeholders and residents to vet potential CDC
amendments.
• Work with Lake Oswego's Planning Commission and City Council to adopt code
amendments.
• City Council Action: Legislative CDC text amendments.
EH 35-8881 ARENA Ai 14)9EE-15 FOF7403
EXHIBIT D-1
Lead & Partners Lead: Lake Oswego Community Development
Partners: Developer and housing stakeholders
2. Remove or reduce minimum parking requirements
Description As required by the State of Oregon's Climate-Friendly and Equitable
Communities (CFEC) program,the City is currently undertaking Citywide Parking
Reform efforts to develop regulations that comply with the CFEC rules.This
includes requirements to remove parking mandates in certain areas (near
transit, Downtown, and in the Lake Grove Village Center).The City is also
required to take additional steps to reduce parking requirements. For example,
the City could consider removing parking mandates citywide as a part of this
work.
While the CFEC-related parking reform efforts were not initiated as part of the
HPS, reducing parking mandates benefits housing production in several ways. It
provides the opportunity to reduce the amount of lot area used for pavement
and storage of vehicles and provides more space for housing and open space. It
also offers greater flexibility to site housing and reduces costs associated with
providing parking.The City is choosing to recognize the value of this work in
facilitating housing development by including in the HPS.
More information about the Citywide Parking Reform project is available here:
www.ci.oswego.or.us/planning/pp-22-0001-citywide-parking-reform.
Considerations • Parking mandates are often cited as a major barrier for market-rate multi-
dwelling and regulated affordable housing.
• Developers often choose to provide parking, even if not required.
Lenders/investors may require some parking to ensure marketability of
units.
• There could be community opposition to removing all parking mandates, due
to the potential for higher usage of on-street parking and the potential for
parking overflow from commercial areas to residential neighborhoods.
Anticipated • Housing Need Addressed: General need for increased housing production.
Impact This strategy would especially benefit production of multi-family and
government-subsidized affordable housing.
• Population served: Especially beneficial to low-to moderate- income
households
• Income level:All income levels—especially 30-120%AMI
• Benefits and Burdens:This strategy has the potential to benefit low-income
households and people of color by removing parking mandates as a barrier
to development of affordable housing.
Access to convenient parking has been raised as an important need for
people with disabilities;therefore, removing parking mandates could
potentially burden those populations if parking is not provided.The City
could consider encouraging property owners to provide parking for people
I_d 25-0881 ATTACHIla 17PAEEl16 FoF74o3 Housing Production Strategy I 13
EXHIBIT D-1
with disabilities and set policy on when on-street parking designated for
people with disabilities is appropriate. On the other hand, some people with
disabilities are unable to drive and could benefit from removing additional
costs associated with parking.
• Housing tenure: For rent or sale
• Magnitude: High—This action is likely to have the most impact on market-
rate multi-family and regulated affordable housing. Parking mandates are
often cited as a major barrier for those types of development. Reduced
parking often allows for greater density(i.e., additional housing) on a site,
improving the financial feasibility via replacing the sunk cost of building and
maintaining the parking area, with additional revenue-generating space.
Reduced parking also allows developers to be more creative with site
planning and design features in general, often improving the aesthetics and
functionality of a property as well.
Time Frame Implementation: Begin and Complete in Near Term
Impact:The action will begin to have impact as soon as the parking mandates
are removed. Impacts to housing production are expected to be longer term.
Implementation • Conduct outreach and education related to parking mandates.
Actions . Work with Lake Oswego's Planning Commission and City Council to adopt
code amendments.
• City Council Action: Adopt Development Code text amendments.
Lead & Partners Lead: Lake Oswego Community Development
Partners: N/A
3. Rezone land
Description This strategy involves rezoning commercial, mixed-use, or other non-residentially
zoned properties for residential uses, especially multi-family housing. It could also
involve updating zoning districts to allow housing where not currently allowed or
rezoning lower-density areas to allow higher-density housing.
The HNA identified a need for additional residential land across all zone types to meet
the 20-year housing need in Lake Oswego (a deficit of 86 total acres, or 642 total
units).As such,there may be a need to add to the city's capacity of residential land to
meet the housing need. Rezoning is one way to help address this issue.
Recommendation Prioritize rezoning in areas with the greatest potential for higher density multifamily
housing—including areas where nonresidential uses are underutilized. Potential zoning
districts to consider for this strategy include the Mixed Commerce District (MC) and
Industrial District (I). Consider a phased approach that first looks at nonresidential
zones,then looks at upzoning lower-density areas in a later phase. Some of this work
could coincide with the Code Audit and Amendments work under Strategy 1.
CO Z5-13881 ATTACAlIaT 17PAEP17 FoF74o3
EXHIBIT D-1
Considerations • If nonresidential land is considered for rezoning, it would be important to ensure
there is still adequate land available for employment and commercial/industrial
needs in the city. Lake Oswego's Economic Opportunities Assessment identifies the
city's future employment land needs.
• In considering the most appropriate locations for City-initiated rezoning of land,
the following criteria or factors should be considered:
o Proximity to existing residential and higher-density areas.
o Proximity to services (e.g.,transit, schools, parks, etc.).
o Size and ownership—larger properties will be more attractive for
development.
• There may be neighborhood resistance to rezoning, especially"upzoning" single-
family residential areas.This strategy would need significant community
engagement.
Anticipated • Housing need addressed: Rezoning would address the shortage of land for
Impact housing, and the overall need for housing production in the city. Depending on
how it is implemented,this strategy could also address the shortage of higher-
density land by rezoning lower-density land.
• Population served: Low to higher income households
• Income level: All income levels
• Benefits and Burdens: Rezoning can increase the availability of land zoned for
residential development. Additional capacity for more housing development can
include opportunities for multi-family housing that is generally more affordable to
low-and moderate-income households.
A potential burden from this strategy is the possibility of lower-income households
being displaced if rezoning leads to increased development pressures or increased
property values. Rezoning commercial areas, or impacts of increased property
values, can also lead to commercial displacement of small businesses. Rising
commercial rents or pressures to redevelop for residential uses may have a larger
impact on small-scale entrepreneurs and immigrant or minority-owned businesses.
The characteristics of areas being considered for rezoning should be carefully
considered as part of implementation to avoid displacement impacts.
• Housing tenure: For rent or sale
• Magnitude: Moderate to High—The impact of rezoning might be relatively high
given the limited supply and high demand for buildable residential land in the
community.The effectiveness of rezoning will depend on the physical and
infrastructure characteristics of the rezoned land for residential use.The density of
housing under the new zone will also depend on the physical constraints (e.g.,
steep slopes) that might limit the buildable portion of a site.
Time Frame Implementation:
• Non-Residential Zones: Begin in Near Term, Complete in Medium Term.
• Low-Density Zones: Begin and Complete in Medium Term.
Impact: Land inside city limits will become available for development immediately
after rezoning. Land outside city limits can also be developed, but will need to
I_d 35-8881 ATTACHIVIAT 17PAE 18 FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
overcome the additional hurdle of annexation. The impact on housing development is
expected to be long-term.
Implementation Initial steps will include outlining the rezoning process, researching potential rezoning
Actions areas, and contacting owners of large properties in those areas to gauge interest.This
will take place in the first year of implementation,with remaining steps taking place in
subsequent years.
• Use the criteria listed above to identify and evaluate potential areas for rezoning.
Prioritize sites with the best potential for housing production and access to
services.
• Consider the demographic characteristics of potential rezoning areas to avoid
potential displacement impacts.
• Engage with property owners as well as the broader community in targeted areas.
• Work with Lake Oswego's Planning Commission and City Council to adopt Zoning
and Comprehensive Plan Map amendments.
• City Council action: Legislative Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Map amendments
and CDC and Comprehensive Plan text amendments.
Lead & Partners Lead: Lake Oswego Community Development
Partners: Property owners
STRATEGIES TO INCREASE HOUSING CHOICES
The following strategies are intended to meet a full range of household needs and preferences.This includes a
wider variety of housing types and sizes, and housing to meet particular needs such as aging place and
accessibility.
4. Evaluate accessible design incentives or mandates
Description This strategy involves evaluating incentives or mandates to increase
development of housing that is accessible for seniors and people with disabilities
or mobility challenges.
Potential incentives could include:
• Bonuses for height, density, lot size, or floor area ratio.
• Tax abatements, e.g., MUPTE (see Strategy 5).
Potential mandates could include:
• Requiring visitability in single-family and middle housing development—
this would ensure that anyone using a wheelchair can visit the subject
homes. Visitability is most relevant for buildings with fewer than four units,
townhouses, and detached homes that aren't subject to ADA requirements.
• Requiring housing that receives public funding to provide more accessible
units or more universal design features than required under federal
standards.This could mean applying the standards to a higher percentage of
I_d 35-0801 ATTACHIVIT 17PAEE419 FOF7103 Housing Production Strategy 116
EXHIBIT D-1
units than would otherwise be required (above 5%) and/or requiring units to
meet higher Universal Design or Lifelong Housing Certification standards.
• Requiring elevators in some or all multi-story buildings. Currently,the
Building Code only requires elevators to reach common spaces (such as
exercise rooms) or units that are federally required to be accessible.
Requiring elevators in one or more multi-family buildings would provide
access to all levels of that building. It would also make all units "covered"
units under the Fair Housing Act, meaning all units would need to have
baseline accessibility features.
Accessibility Standards:
A small number of units in multifamily buildings are already required to have
accessibility features under federal law and Oregon's state building code. This
strategy would go beyond those minimums by either requiring or incentivizing
additional units that provide accessibility features, or targeting housing not
subject to these requirements (e.g., single-family homes and middle housing).'
Potential accessibility standards include:
• Building Code Standards. Oregon's building code provides specifications for
"Accessible Units" (with features such as wider than Type B doorways and
fully accessible bathroom and kitchen facilities), "Type A units" (less
accessible than "Accessible Units" and adaptable for additional accessibility),
and "Type B" units (fewer accessibility features than Type A). Relying on
these existing statewide code standards would be a relatively
straightforward approach.
• Universal Design is a building concept that incorporates design layouts and
characteristics into residences to make them usable by the greatest number
of people and respond to the changing needs of the resident. Universal
Design incorporates standards for features such as hallways, doorways,
bathrooms, and kitchens that make these features usable for people with
disabilities or adaptable for that purpose.'
• Visitability is a design approach for new housing that allows anyone who
uses a wheelchair or other mobility device to visit the home. A visitable
home typically includes:
o A zero-step entrance;
o Wide interior doors; and
o A half bathroom on the main floor.
' Multi-family developments are subject to the Fair Housing Act; for buildings with an elevator, all units must be
Type B units, per the building code; for those without an elevator, all ground floor units must be Type B.At least
2% but not less than one dwelling unit in a multi-family site with more than 20 units must be Type A units.
Housing projects receiving public funding are subject to federal laws (Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of
1973 and/or Title II of the ADA),which require 5%of units to be mobility-accessible. Sources: Portland Code
Guide,Accessible Design. https://www.portlandoregon.gov/bds/article/514247; Disability Law Handbook,
Southwest ADA Center. http://www.southwestada.org/html/publications/dlh/housing.html.
2 Universal Design Standards, West Virginia Housing Development Fund. https://tinyurl.com/yx63h792
EU 25-81381 ATTACHIVI T 17PAE 20 FbV10 Housing Production Strategy 1 17
EXHIBIT D-1
Considerations • This strategy would help address housing disparities for people with
disabilities and provide more options for aging in place.
• Strategies to promote accessible housing received support from the Middle
Housing Code Advisory Committee as part of the House Bill 2001 code
updates.
• Accessibility features can add to the cost of construction for a development,
which can make affordable housing projects less financially feasible.
Elevators, in particular, add significant cost to a project.
• While mandates may provide more accessible units,they could prevent
some affordable housing projects from being developed.
• Incentives must be calibrated effectively to be attractive to both a nonprofit
and for-profit developer.The benefit of using the incentive should outweigh
the costs associated with implementing accessible design features.
• A more general strategy to utilize zoning bonuses was not recommended for
inclusion in the HPS due to concerns expressed during project outreach that
additional floor area, height, or lot coverage could conflict with existing
neighborhood character. Zoning bonuses to incent accessible units may be
met with similar opposition.
Anticipated • Housing Need Addressed: Housing for people with physical disabilities and
Impact mobility challenges.The HNA indicates that an estimated 8%of the
population of Lake Oswego, or 3,140 people, report having some form of
disability, including 2.9%with an ambulatory disability. However, the
number of people that would benefit from physical accessibility in housing—
especially amongst the senior population—likely exceeds these numbers.
Also, housing stakeholders identified this as a notable gap in the local
housing market.
• Population served: Seniors; people with disabilities
• Income level:All income levels
• Benefits and Burdens:This strategy is anticipated to benefit seniors and
people with disabilities by increasing the stock of accessible housing units in
the city. However, a potential trade-off of mandating accessibility features—
especially for subsidized housing—is that it would reduce the total number
of units that could be provided in a building (because bathrooms and other
areas would need to be larger). While this may provide more accessible
units, it could make some affordable housing projects less feasible.This
could be a potential burden on low-income households by limiting the
opportunity for production of housing they can afford. Incentive-based
strategies would not carry the same burden.This will be an important
consideration for implementation.
• Housing tenure: For rent or sale
• Magnitude: Moderate—Depending on how the strategy is structured, it
could lead to production of a significant number of new units with
accessibility features. However, the strategy could also have the effect of
deterring housing production if requirements are too onerous.To improve
feasibility, requirements may be applied to some but not all of the units in
I_d 25-0881 ATTACHIVIAT 17PAEE62'f FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
new multi-family development. New elevator requirements may significantly
deter new development, due to high cost.
Time Frame Implementation: Begin and Complete in Longer Term
Impact:The action can begin to have impact after it is implemented in the CDC
or adopted as a financial incentive.The impact on housing production is
expected to be longer-term.
Implementation • Potentially seek a technical assistance grant from AARP or other sources to
Actions support implementation efforts.
• Code bonus.
o Evaluate a potential new height/FAR bonus with input from housing
stakeholders and community members to determine whether—and
how—it should be implemented.
o A potential accessibility bonus should be carefully considered in
conjunction with any other potential incentives for accessible housing
(see Strategy 5).
o Consult with developers and housing providers to determine their level
of interest.
o Work with Lake Oswego's Planning Commission and City Council to
consider potential code approaches, and if directed,to adopt code
amendments.
o City Council Action (if directed): Legislative CDC text amendments.
• Code requirement.
o Evaluate potential new accessibility requirements, working closely with
non-profit and market-rate housing developers to understand how their
projects might be impacted.
o Conduct a pro forma analysis to evaluate potential impacts to project
costs.
o Implement via CDC updates, if directed.
• Financial incentive.
o Evaluate an incentive program (e.g., MUPTE, Strategy 5)to increase the
number of dwelling units designed accessibly.
o Work with developers to gather feedback on program parameters and
interest.
o Implement incentive program through Council action, if directed.
Lead & Partners Lead: Lake Oswego Community Development
Partners: Home Building Association of Greater Portland; Fair Housing Council of
Oregon; AARP; non-profit and for-profit housing developers.
EU 25-8881 ATTA8550s- F4ME722 FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
5. Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE)
Description This tax exemption can be used to encourage multi-family or middle housing
with particular features or at particular price points by offering qualifying
developments a partial property tax exemption for 10 years (or longer,for
housing subject to affordability agreements). It can be offered to new
development or existing housing that is converted to meet the eligibility criteria.
MUPTE is a flexible tax abatement that can be used in various ways to encourage
needed housing.The City has broad discretion as to how to structure the
program. Eligibility criteria could include requirements for affordability,
accessibility/universal design, unit size, or other desirable features.
The City must designate specific areas where the MUPTE applies, unless
including affordability as a criterion, in which case the whole city could be
eligible.
(Authorized by ORS 307.600-637)
Recommendation Evaluate adoption of the MUPTE program with criteria that would make it
available to housing with either accessible design (see Strategy 4) or moderate-
income units affordable at 80-120%AMI. Also consider using this strategy to
preserve affordability for existing lower-cost housing—i.e.,focus the incentive
on rehabilitation projects. As such,this strategy could follow implementation of
Strategy 12: Affordable housing preservation inventory.
Considerations Applicable to all tax exemption programs:
• Tax exemptions apply only to the tax levy of a governing body that adopts
the exemptions. In order for the full property tax to be exempted,the City
must seek approval from partner jurisdictions that,together with the City,
make up at least 51%of the overall tax levy. Lake Oswego would need to
secure agreement from either the School District or County or both.
• The City and participating taxing districts will lose property tax income for
the duration of any tax exemption, reducing revenue for City services and
revenue for participating taxing districts. Such taxing districts may express
resistance to new tax abatement or exemption programs that involve
reduced revenue, particularly for programs intended to produce market-rate
housing.
Applicable to the MUPTE under consideration:
• The City should consider what income criteria would best fill the gaps in the
local housing market. If the program targets rent levels for households
earning up to 120%AMI, developers may be able to charge market-rate
rents,which may not be more affordable than they would otherwise charge.
A lower income target such as 100%AMI may be more effective at achieving
lower-cost units.The local rental market and household income levels
should be carefully evaluated as part of the City's analysis of this program.
Anticipated • Housing Need Addressed:This strategy has the potential to increase
Impact development of multi-family housing in targeted areas of the city.
EH 3. :8881 ATTACHIVIAT 17PAEE-23 FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
Stakeholders in the HPS process identified a particular need for more multi-
family housing outside the Town Center. Targeting the program to accessible
units would help meet the needs of seniors and people with disabilities (see
Strategy 4 for estimates of total need).Targeting the program to households
earning 80-120%AMI would help meet the needs of moderate-income
households.The HNA indicates that 16%of new needed housing units over
the next 20 years will be needed by those earning 80-120%AMI.
• Population served: Moderate-income households, seniors, and people with
disabilities.
• Income level: Depends on how the program is structured.
• Benefits and Burdens:This strategy has the potential to benefit various
priority populations by encouraging housing needed by those communities
(accessible units, moderate-cost units, etc.).The City could also target a
MUPTE program to specific geographies to target housing development in
neighborhoods where it is most needed.A challenge for the City will be to
determine how best to balance those various needs to determine what
housing types or features are most appropriate to include as criteria for the
MUPTE abatement.This should be considered in the broader context of the
HPS to ensure that the City's actions benefit all priority populations in
equitable ways.
No burdens on priority populations are anticipated for this strategy,
provided it is implemented in the ways described above.
• Housing tenure:Typically for-rent.
• Magnitude: Moderate—This strategy could encourage production of more
multi-family units that meet housing needs not currently being met by the
private market. As noted above, to make this program effective at
encouraging lower-cost units, the City should carefully consider what income
criteria would best fill the gaps in the local housing market.
Time Frame Implementation: Begin and Complete in Longer Term
Impact:The MUPTE can be used once it is adopted, and for as long as the City
offers the exemption.The impact on housing supply is expected to be longer-
term.
Implementation • Further evaluate the various options for structuring the MUPTE program to
Actions determine whether—and how—it should be implemented.
• Consult with developers and housing providers to determine their level of
interest.
• Determine desired eligibility criteria (e.g., affordability, accessibility, etc.).
• Seek input from overlapping taxing districts on their willingness to support
the exemption.
• City Council Action: Adopt tax exemption program by resolution or
ordinance.
Lead & Partners Lead: Lake Oswego Community Development
Partners: Lake Oswego Finance Department; overlapping taxing jurisdictions
EH 3. :8881 ATTACHIVIAT 17PAEE-22FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
6. Pre-approved plan sets for ADUs
Description Pre-approved (or permit-ready) plan sets have been reviewed in advance for
conformance with zoning and building codes. Permit-ready plan sets can reduce
housing development costs by reducing design and permit process times and
fees.This strategy could be used to encourage more development of accessory
dwelling units (ADUs).
Permit-ready plans can reduce costs in three main ways:
• Streamlining permit processes—Permitting times are frequently cited by
market-rate builders as a major barrier to housing production, as delays
in permitting often translate into increased costs.
• Reducing permit fees—The Building Department may decrease permit
review charges for applicants because of the simplified review.
• Reducing design fees—The builder would pay less in professional
services to architects, etc.
ADUs are a type of housing located on the same lot (and sometimes in the same
structure) as a primary dwelling unit.They are generally smaller in size
compared to the primary home and come in a number of different
configurations. In Lake Oswego,there may be one ADU per primary home.ADUs
offer opportunities for multigenerational living,with family members living on
the same site but in a separate dwelling.ADUs can also be rented out, allowing
the homeowners to supplement their income.
Considerations • This strategy potentially lowers site and building design costs, which could
lead to an increase in new ADU units and increase rental stock.
• There are upfront costs associated with developing the pre-approved plans,
including paying design fees for architects that develop the base plans, and
dedicating staff time for working with the architects and reviewing the plans.
• The City could partner with a university, design institution, or develop a
competition to produce plans. For example,the City of Eugene has
partnered with several design firms to offer low-cost ADU plans, each of
which is available for only$500. Eugene also offers a free ADU plan
developed in-house.'
• ADUs are a good candidate for this type of program due to their small size
and relative simplicity. Also, homeowners wanting to build an ADU may be
especially interested in pre-made designs, as compared to experienced
homebuilders.
Anticipated • Housing Need Addressed: Increased housing choices within existing
Impact neighborhoods. Increased rental opportunities. Options for
multigenerational housing. Opportunities for aging in place. Many of these
were mentioned by stakeholders in the HPS process as a gap in the local
market.
City of Eugene. Pre-Approved Accessory Dwelling Unit Program. https://www.eugene-or.gov/4707/Pre-
Approved-Accessory-Dwelling-Unit-Pro
EU 3. :8881 ATTAC55Ai 17ai°25 FOF7103 Housing Production Strategy 122
EXHIBIT D-1
• Population served: Moderate to higher-income households; seniors; people
with disabilities; multigenerational households; renters
• Income level: Likely 80%AMI and above
• Benefits and Burdens: ADUs are a popular choice for elders who wish to live
on the same property as their children/grandchildren (ADUs are sometimes
referred to as "granny flats"). As such, this strategy can offer benefits to
seniors and multigenerational households. Because ADUs are often single-
level, small homes, they may also benefit people with disabilities—with the
potential added benefit of enabling family to live nearby for assistance and
support.
No burdens on priority populations are anticipated.
• Housing tenure: For rent
• Magnitude: Moderate—This strategy would likely lead to more
development of ADUs in the city. Pre-approved plans can lower the logistical
barriers for prospective ADU builders, and can be paired with a faster,
cheaper permitting process.This could increase the number of available
rental properties and increase housing choices in existing developed
neighborhoods. However,the strategy would have a limited impact on
overall housing supply.
Time Frame Implementation: Begin and Complete in Longer Term. Could potentially be
implemented sooner if the City can use pre-approved plans that are already
developed.
Impact:The action is expected to have impact over the longer term.
Implementation • Develop ADU plans in collaboration with one of the partners listed below.
Actions • Work with the Building Department to ensure plans meet all City Code
standards, approve the plans, and adopt reduced fees for the plans.
• Work with the Building Department to implement a streamlined review
process.
Lead & Partners Lead: Lake Oswego Community Development(including Building Department)
Partners: Universities, design institutions, and/or design firms
7. Modify System Development Charge (SDC) fee schedule
Description SDCs are one-time charges assessed on new development to pay for the costs of
expanding public facilities to serve new development.The City of Lake Oswego
charges SDCs for water,sewer, parks, and transportation (affordable housing
meeting certain criteria is eligible for an exemption to SDCs).The Lake Oswego
School District also charges a construction excise tax(effectively an SDC)for new
construction in the city(except for affordable housing).
This strategy involves updating the City's SDC fee schedule so it is tied more
directly to dwelling size. Currently,the City charges the same rates for all single-
family homes regardless of size. Each unit of a duplex is also charged the same
EH 25-8881 ATTACHIVIRT 17PAE 126 FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
single-family fee. Multi-family housing(3 or more units) is charged a lesser fee
per unit.4 While cottage clusters are currently charged the single-family rate for
each unit, the City is planning to update the SDC fee schedule in the near term so
that cottage clusters are charged a lower rate per unit.
Scaling SDC fees to dwelling size would better match a development's charges to
its actual cost or impact on the system. Smaller housing units, including some
middle housing types, typically have less impact on water, sewer, or
transportation facilities,given the reduced average size and occupancy of these
units.This is not fully reflected in Lake Oswego's current SDC schedule, although
the current schedule does include lower fees for multi-family housing units.
The City could consider charging fees on a per-square-foot basis, rather than
per-unit.'
Considerations • This strategy would reduce barriers to construction of more affordable,
smaller-scale homes, including small single-family homes and middle
housing.
• The City sets its SDC fee schedule based on projected needs for system
construction and improvements. Modifying the SDC methodology would
likely increase fees for larger homes to make up for the reduced fees for
smaller units.
• As part of the current Parks Plan 2040 update project (completion expected
in 2025),the City will consider modifying its Parks SDCs to be scaled by
housing unit size.That could provide a jumping off point and a model for a
larger discussion about SDC schedules and potential future refinements to
SDCs for other services.
Anticipated • Housing need addressed:This strategy will facilitate development of
Impact smaller, more attainable housing units that may be affordable to moderate-
income and smaller households.The HNA indicates that 16%of new needed
housing units over the next 20 years will be needed by those earning 80-
120%AMI.
• Population served: Moderate to higher income households; first-time
homebuyers; single or two-person households; seniors
• Income level: 80%AMI and above
• Benefits and Burdens:This strategy can increase production of smaller and
lower-cost units which may benefit lower-income households, but is more
likely to benefit moderate-or higher-income households. Smaller unit sizes
may be of particular benefit to seniors due to lower maintenance and lower
housing costs.
No burdens on priority populations are anticipated. However, reducing SDCs
for smaller units would likely need to be offset by increased SDCs for larger
Lake Oswego Master Fees and Charges, 2024. https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/finance/master-fees-and-charges
' For example,the City of Newport, Oregon charges SDCs on a per-square-foot basis for single-unit dwellings.
https://newportoregon.gov/dept/cdd/documents/FYE24SDCRates.pdf.The City of Albany, Oregon scales its
sewer and streets SDCs for single-unit dwellings by dwelling size,with thresholds at 1,000 sq ft, 1,250 sq ft, and
3,000 sq ft. https://albanyoregon.gov/images/stories/cd/devicenter/fee guide city of albany oregon.pdf.
EH 3 :8881 ATTAC55Ai 1fai 27 FOF7103 Housing Production Strategy 124
EXHIBIT D-1
units, the cost of which would be passed onto homebuyers. It is anticipated
that homebuyers that can afford larger units would be less impacted by the
increased cost than moderate to lower income homebuyers.
• Housing tenure: For rent or sale
• Magnitude: Low to Moderate—Given current SDC incentives already
available,this tool may have a low to moderate impact in incentivizing
additional housing units. It may incentivize some projects to produce a
greater number of marginally smaller units,thus increasing density and unit
production somewhat.
Time Frame Implementation:
• Cottage cluster SDCs: Complete in Near Term.
• Overall SDC methodology: Begin and Complete in Medium Term.
Impact:The process of modifying a city's SDC methodology can be lengthy, as it
is necessary to analyze projected needs for system construction and
improvements and ensure that SDC revenues will be adequate to meet projected
needs. Once a new SDC schedule is implemented,the impact to housing
development is expected to be longer-term.
Implementation • Adopt SDC rates adjustments for cottage clusters, working with City Council
Actions and other City departments.
• Work with City Council, other departments (Public Works, Finance, Parks,
etc.), and development stakeholders on policy discussions around modifying
the SDCs.
• Potentially work with a consultant to develop an updated SDC methodology.
• City Council action: Adopt modified SDC schedule by resolution or ordinance.
Lead & Partners Lead: Lake Oswego Engineering
Partners: Development stakeholders
-
III V1
I
__ i
R - ,_ i ,- :i
Rendering of proposed Hacienda CDC affordable housing development in Lake Oswego
Cv 25-0881 ATTACHIVIaiT 17PAkE_28 FOF7103 Housing Production Strategy 125
EXHIBIT D-1
STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR LOWER-INCOME
HOUSEHOLDS
The strategies below are intended to facilitate development of regulated affordable housing (i.e.,government-
subsidized housing)that meets the needs of low-and moderate-income households.The HPS indicates that over
a quarter of new housing units needed by 2043 will be needed by lower-income households earning 80% or less
of the area median income.
8. Nonprofit Low-Income Housing Tax Exemption
Description This tax exemption benefits low-income residents by alleviating the property tax
burden on those organizations that provide this housing opportunity. In
particular, this strategy reduces ongoing operations costs and supports long-
term stability for affordable housing developments.
Eligible properties must be offered to low-income persons (at or below 60%AMI
for the initial year, and at or below 80%AMI for subsequent years), or held for
the purpose of developing low-income rental housing.The housing may be for
rent or for purchase, and could be new development or existing housing
acquired by a nonprofit for the purpose of converting it to income-restricted
affordable housing.Jurisdictions may adopt additional eligibility criteria for the
exemption, provided they don't conflict with state statutes.
Applicants must renew their tax exemption applications annually. As long as the
housing remains affordable to low-income residents, there is no time limit to the
tax exemption.
(Authorized by ORS 307.540-548)
Lake Oswego City Council chose to fast-track adoption of this strategy to make it
available to affordable housing projects being developed in 2024 (including the
Mercy Greenbrae development at Marylhurst Commons). The tax exemption
was approved by City Council as Ordinance 2945 in May 2024.6
Considerations • By reducing operating income, property tax abatement programs can be a
powerful tool to increase the feasibility of low-income housing, and perhaps
increase the number of units that are feasible in planned projects. Many
affordable housing developers cite abatements such as the Nonprofit
Housing exemption as an essential tool in helping make projects financially
feasible.
• See Strategy 5, MUPTE, for considerations related to all tax exemption
programs.
Anticipated • Housing need addressed: Government-subsidized affordable housing for
Impact low-income households.
• Population served: Low-income households
• Income level: 0-60%AMI (for residents' initial year of tenancy; after the first
year, up to 80%AMI)
6 https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/planning/pp-24-0003-nonprofit-corporation-low-income-housing-tax-exemption
EH 3 :8881 ATTAC55Ai 'faai429 FOF7103 Housing Production Strategy 126
EXHIBIT D-1
• Benefits and Burdens:This strategy would primarily benefit low-income
households by increasing the City's capacity to support production of
subsidized affordable housing.
No burdens on priority populations are anticipated.
• Housing tenure: For rent
• Magnitude: High—This abatement can have a large impact on making low-
income affordable housing more feasible to develop.The open-ended
nature of the abatement(as long as the project maintains affordability) can
offer very significant savings to the property manager over time and increase
the viability of offering affordable rents indefinitely.The property tax level in
Lake Oswego is roughly$20,000 per$1M in valuation per year. A mid-to
large apartment complex could expect a valuation of many millions of
dollars, amounting to potentially hundreds of thousands in taxes per year.
An abatement of these taxes is a strong incentive and improves feasibility
considerably.
Time Frame Implementation:Already Complete
Impact:The tax exemption can be used once it is adopted, and for as long as the
City offers the exemption.The impact on supply of affordable housing is
expected to be longer-term.
Implementation City Council action: Adopt tax exemption program by ordinance. (Already
Actions completed.)
Lead & Partners Lead: Lake Oswego Community Development
Partners: Lake Oswego Finance Department; overlapping taxing jurisdictions
9. Low-Income Rental Housing Tax Exemption
Description This is a 20-year tax exemption for any entity that provides income-restricted rental
housing, including nonprofits and for-profit developers. Eligible properties must be
offered for rent to low-income persons or held for the purpose of developing low-
income rental housing.Jurisdictions may adopt additional eligibility criteria for the
exemption, provided they don't conflict with state statutes. (Authorized by ORS
307.515-537)
Comparison of low-income housing tax exemption programs:
While these two exemption programs appear similar,they do have some key
distinctions.
Nonprofit Low-Income Low-Income Rental
Housing Housing
Housing Type Rental housing Rental housing
Income Levels Up to 60%AMI Up to 60%AMI
Eligible Developers Nonprofits only Nonprofit or for-profit
EU 35-13081 ATTACHIVI T 17PATaE-30 FoF7103 Housing Production Strategy 127
EXHIBIT D-1
New vs.Acquired New construction or New construction only
Housing acquisition of existing
housing
Annual Renewal Yes No
Required?
Time Limit No limit 20 years
Recommendation Consider supplementing the adopted Nonprofit Low-Income Housing Tax Exemption
with this additional exemption program to offer more options and flexibility.
Considerations • Key advantages of this abatement are that it is available to more than just non-
profits and it does not require annual renewal. This can significantly reduce an
organization's administrative burden in implementing the exemption.
• However,this abatement has less flexibility compared to the Nonprofit Exemption
because it cannot be used for acquisition of existing housing and is limited to 20
years.
• See Strategy 5, MUPTE, for considerations related to all tax exemption programs.
Anticipated • Housing need addressed: Government-subsidized affordable housing for low-
Impact income households.
• Population served: Low-income households
• Income level: 0-60%AMI (for residents' initial year of tenancy; after the first year,
up to 80%AMI)
• Benefits and Burdens:This strategy would primarily benefit low-income
households by increasing the City's capacity to support production of subsidized
affordable housing.
No burdens on priority populations are anticipated.
• Housing tenure: For rent
• Magnitude: High— Like the Nonprofit Exemption,this abatement can have a large
impact on new affordable housing production.As noted above, an abatement of
property taxes is a strong incentive and improves feasibility considerably. This
abatement is available to for-profit developers and therefore may generate more
new housing than the Non-Profit Exemption. While not open-ended, a 20-year
exemption matches the period in which a property would otherwise undergo
significant depreciation. However, at the end of the 20-year period,this housing
often reverts to market-rate status.
Time Frame Implementation: Begin and Complete in Near Term
Impact:The tax exemption can be used once it is adopted, and for as long as the City
offers the exemption. The impact on supply of affordable housing is expected to be
longer-term.
Implementation • Work with other taxing jurisdictions to gain approval.
Actions • Develop application standards and guidelines.
• City Council action: Adopt tax exemption policy by resolution or ordinance.
Lead & Partners Lead: Lake Oswego Community Development
Partners: Lake Oswego Finance Department; overlapping taxing jurisdictions
EH 3. :8881 ATTACHIVIAT 17PAEE-3'f FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
10. Public-private partnerships for affordable housing
Description Public-private partnerships (PPPs) are arrangements between public and private
entities to develop housing, especially affordable housing. PPPs have the capacity to
bring resources to the table that would otherwise not be available if each institution
were to provide housing on its own.
The City could partner with organizations to support their affordable housing efforts
in a variety of ways:
• Acquire land and/or donate city-owned land;
• Provide grants or low-interest loans for specific development or rehabilitation
projects;
• Provide direct funding; and/or
• Leverage federal, state, and regional resources.
Additionally,the City can pursue specific types of PPPs such as:
• Partnering to convert underutilized non-residential properties into housing.
The City could work with landowners to evaluate opportunities for adapting
vacant/underused buildings for new housing or mixed-use development.
• Utilizing surplus land owned by faith-based organizations for affordable
housing.The City could work with faith organizations to utilize their excess
land for affordable housing.
Recommendations The following specific partnership actions are recommended for implementation:
• Consider donating surplus city-owned land for affordable housing as it becomes
available.
• Work with faith organizations to utilize excess or underutilized land for affordable
housing. Assist with favorable zoning, permitting, and financial incentives.
• Continue to leverage federal, state, and regional resources—such as the Metro
Affordable Housing Bond—to fund affordable housing in Lake Oswego.
• If a new TIF district is established (Strategy 11), use TIF funds to support
affordable housing partnerships.This could include addressing infrastructure
deficiencies or contributing funding to affordable housing more directly.
Considerations • The City is pursuing this strategy with several ongoing projects.This includes
partnering with the Sisters of Holy Names of Jesus and Mary and Mercy Housing
NW in facilitating the Mercy Greenbrae at Marylhurst Commons affordable
housing development.
• PPPs are often opportunity-driven and may be spearheaded by the City or by
private developers or partner agencies.
• Cities are often asked to provide land, financial assistance, and/or technical
assistance,with potentially moderate costs. More significant financial assistance
would depend on a new funding source.
Anticipated • Housing Need Addressed: Government-subsidized affordable housing for low-
Impact income households.
EH 3. :8881 ATTACHIVIRT 17PAE 732 FoF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
• Population served: Low-income households
• Income level: 0-80%AMI
• Benefits and Burdens:This strategy is intended to benefit low-income
households by increasing the City's involvement in development of affordable
housing.
No burdens on priority populations are anticipated for this strategy.
• Housing tenure: For rent or sale
• Magnitude: High— Partnerships with private developers or non-profit housing
agencies are very often a key component of a City contributing to new housing
production. Few City governments directly build housing.The incentives and
funding offered are aimed at these partners, who undertake the projects often
with a development agreement to ensure the public goals are met. The
magnitude of impact is high, and in a sense these partnerships are necessary for
most successful City-based housing initiatives.
Time Frame Implementation: Begin in Near Term; Ongoing implementation
Impact:Timing of impact depends on the nature of the public/private partnership.
Given availability of funds, impact to housing production would be expected to occur
over the longer term.
Implementation • Work with nonprofit,faith-based, or other organizations to discuss opportunities
Actions in Lake Oswego.
• Take action on partnership models and programs that best benefit the
organization and the City's financial and/or administrative capacity.
• Partnership activities depend on the project, organization, and available
resources.
Lead & Partners Lead: Lake Oswego Community Development
Partners: Possibilities include landowners and organizations with excess land, as well
as nonprofit affordable housing providers.
11. Use Tax Increment Financing (TIF) to support affordable housing
development
Description This strategy involves using TIF funds to support affordable housing development.This
could involve creating one or more new TIF districts and incorporating affordable
housing into new TIF district plans. For example,the City could create a TIF set-aside
for affordable housing development programs within the district.
TIF is a funding mechanism in which future tax revenues in targeted development or
redevelopment areas (TIF districts/urban renewal areas) are diverted to finance
infrastructure improvements and/or development.
At the time of adoption,the tax revenue flowing to each taxing jurisdiction from the
TIF district is frozen at its current level. Any growth in tax revenues in future years, due
to annual tax increase plus new development, is the "tax increment"that goes to the
EU 35-0881 ATTACHIVIAT 17PAEE-33 FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
district itself to fund projects in that area.TIF is a good tool to use in areas where new
development or redevelopment is anticipated.
While many different types of projects are eligible for TIF funds,for the most part,TIF
funds are used to pay for physical improvements in the district itself.These projects
can include participating in public/private partnerships with developers—including for
affordable,workforce, or market-rate housing—or can be used to complete off-site
public improvements that benefit and encourage new development in the area, or to
acquire key sites.TIF funds also can be used to purchase land.
TIF can be a direct source of funding for projects that meet public goals such as
providing affordable housing, increased density, or mixed-use buildings that might not
otherwise be feasible. In return for some public funding through TIF, private sector or
non-profit developers agree to provide these benefits. Urban Renewal can also be
used to purchase and reserve a key building site in the district to ensure that the
development that takes place there meets public goals.The site can be offered to a
development partner at reduced cost to provide the incentive.
Recommendation Incorporate affordable housing into the Urban Renewal Plan for the Foothills
Neighborhood.The Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency(LORA) is currently planning
to update the Foothills Refinement Plan, after which a new urban renewal district will
be established.The City must include affordable housing as an approved "project" in
the Urban Renewal Plan in order for it to be eligible for TIF funding.
Considerations • TIF results in foregone tax revenue for the City and any other overlapping taxing
districts for several decades, although it can (and should)grow the tax base in the
long-term by supporting development that would not otherwise have occurred.
• Once a new TIF district is established, it will likely be several years before there
will be sufficient revenue in the district to make significant investment in housing.
• Coordination and agreement with other taxing districts is also important.
Anticipated • Housing Need Addressed: Government-subsidized affordable housing.
Impact • Population served: Low-income households
• Income level: 0-80%AMI
• Benefits and Burdens:This strategy would primarily benefit low-income
households by increasing the City's capacity to support production of subsidized
affordable housing.
An intended outcome of urban renewal is increased property values and
redevelopment within the district. If not balanced by adequate investment in
housing production, urban renewal can lead to displacement of existing residents
facing increased property taxes and development pressures.This can be a burden
on existing low-income residents and should be considered carefully when
designating new TIF districts.
• Housing tenure: For rent or sale
• Magnitude: High—An extended TIF district or new programs focused on housing
have the potential to have a large impact on specific new projects with LORA
partners.The impact of an expanded TIF program on housing production will
depend on the revenue-generating potential of the district in question and the
prioritization of housing projects among the broader range of projects eligible for
I_d 35-0801 ATTACHIVIAT 17PAEE-32FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
urban renewal funding(e.g., general infrastructure projects, beautification,
economic development, etc.). If housing is prioritized for funding, and
development opportunities are available within the district, it can directly bring
about housing production.
Time Frame Implementation: Begin in Near Term; Complete in Longer Term
Impact:Analysis and planning for a new TIF district can take several years. Once a TIF
district is established, it is expected to take several more years before adequate
revenues are accrued to begin spending the urban renewal funds. The impact on
housing production is expected over the medium or longer term.
Implementation • Incorporate affordable housing policies in the update to the Foothills Refinement
Actions Plan.
• Incorporate affordable housing into the Foothills Urban Renewal Plan. Include
affordable housing as an approved "project" in the plan and consider a dedicated
set-aside to use TIF funds for affordable housing.
• City Council to adopt URA boundaries and plan via ordinance.
• Use TIF funds to support partnerships with affordable housing producers (Strategy
10).
Lead & Partners Lead: Lake Oswego Redevelopment Agency
Partners: Community Development Department, Development stakeholders
12. Affordable housing preservation inventory
Description This strategy involves preparing an inventory of subsidized and naturally
occurring affordable housing to support proactive policies intended to preserve
the affordable housing stock.The inventory would be used to target potential
properties for implementation of an affordable housing preservation strategy.
Considerations • This strategy could help offset some of the need for costly new construction.
• The strategy would be a good starting point if the City were to consider
future strategies to preserve affordable housing. Understanding the city's
stock of affordable housing could influence decision-making and
prioritization for a preservation strategy.
• The strategy would require staff time and resources to implement.
Anticipated • Housing Need Addressed: Housing for low-income residents.
Impact • Population served: Low-income households
• Income level: 0-80%AMI
• Benefits and Burdens:This strategy is expected to benefit low-income
residents by evaluating the city's stock of naturally occurring affordable
housing, in support of a low-cost housing preservation strategy.
No burdens on priority populations are anticipated.
• Housing tenure: For sale or rent
EU 3 :8881 ATTACHIVIAT 17PATaE-35 FOF7103 Housing Production Strategy 132
EXHIBIT D-1
• Magnitude: Low—This strategy will not contribute to new housing
production, but it will contribute to the preservation of existing affordable
housing, and aids in tracking performance metrics.
Time Frame Implementation: Begin and Complete in Medium Term
Impact:This strategy can provide information and influence decision-making
about housing preservation in the shorter term. However, impacts to the city's
housing inventory are expected to be longer term.
Implementation • Use Census data as a starting point.
Actions • Work with property owners to document housing costs.
• Update inventory on a regular basis.
Lead & Partners Lead: Lake Oswego Community Development
Partners: Property owners
OTHER
The strategy in this category does not fit easily under the other headings, but supports equitable
implementation of all recommended housing strategies.
13. Fair Housing policy and education
Description This strategy involves amending the Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing a Housing Policy. Fair Housing laws protect
individuals in "protected classes"from housing discrimination. Protected classes
in Oregon include race, color, national origin, religion, disability, sex(includes
pregnancy), sexual orientation, gender identity, age, and marital status.The City
could add additional protected classes, such as ancestry, ethnicity, or
occupation.
The City could also pursue the following types of actions to affirmatively further
fair housing and work to reverse historical patterns of discrimination and
exclusion in Lake Oswego:
• Create an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing.
• Conduct fair housing training for Council, Planning Commission, and other
relevant policymakers.
• 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.
In addition, other strategies identified in this list can also generally serve the
purpose of affirmatively furthering fair housing to the extent they expand
housing opportunities or choices for people in protected classes.
EU 25-8881 ATTACHIVIAT 17PAEil36 FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
Considerations • This strategy would not necessarily contribute to housing production except
when it is implemented through other strategies described in this document
that result in housing production. However, in all cases it would
demonstrate the City's commitment to working towards fair housing
outcomes.
• Training and education would require staff time and resources to implement.
Anticipated • Housing Need Addressed:This strategy would not directly address identified
Impact housing needs in most cases, but it would help prevent housing
discrimination against protected classes.
• Population served: Protected classes
• Income level:All income levels
• Benefits and Burdens:This strategy is intended to benefit priority
populations by formalizing the City's commitment to fair housing goals,
better understanding fair housing issues in the community, and by educating
City staff, housing stakeholders, and community members about fair housing
laws and residents' rights.
No burdens on priority populations are anticipated.
• Housing tenure: For sale or rent
• Magnitude: Low—Fair housing policy and education will not directly
contribute to housing production, but it could provide additional protections
against housing discrimination. It could also bolster the City's focus on
prioritizing housing equity and affordability in its housing programs and
investments.
Time Frame Implementation:
• Fair Housing Policy: Begin and Complete in Near Term.
• Education and Other Actions: Begin and Complete in Medium Term.
Impact: Impact on community understanding of fair housing can be in the short
term. Impact on fair housing outcomes is expected to be longer term.
Implementation • Policy adoption requires Legislative Comprehensive Plan text amendment.
Actions • Partner with organizations such as the Fair Housing Council of Oregon on
training.
• Develop informational materials.
• Provide training to current staff and new hires.
Lead & Partners Lead: Lake Oswego Community Development
Partners: Fair Housing Council of Oregon
CU 25-1881 ATTACHIVIAT 17a 3 FOF7103 Housing Production Strategy 134
EXHIBIT D-1
ACHIEVING FAIR AND
EQUITABLE HOUSING
OUTCOMES
This section summarizes how the housing strategies detailed in this report will help achieve fair and equitable
housing outcomes.As required by OAR 660-008, all the strategies have been evaluated for achieving the
different outcomes identified below. In addition,the City of Lake Oswego is already carrying out a range of
housing measures that support fair and equitable outcomes, as summarized in the Contextualized Housing
Needs Assessment (Appendix A).Those existing measures are also identified below.
Affordable Homeownership and Affordable Rental Housing
Many of the strategies included in the HPS support production of affordable rental housing and the opportunity
for wealth creation via homeownership—especially for low-and moderate-income households that have been
disproportionately impacted by past housing policies.As described in the Contextualized Housing Needs
Assessment(Appendix A), many racial and ethnic minorities statewide are less likely to own the homes they
occupy—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). The legacy of these barriers continues to hamper home
ownership for many minority households. Prioritizing affordable home ownership can begin to address these
patterns of exclusion. Also, by benefiting low-income households more broadly,these strategies are anticipated
to benefit populations with lower median household incomes — including certain racial and ethnic groups.
Strategies that address these needs include:
5. Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption—Provided the City includes income as an eligibility criterion.
8. Nonprofit Low-Income Housing Tax Exemption
9. Low-Income Housing Tax Exemption
10. Public-private partnerships for affordable housing
11. Use Tax Increment Financing(TIF)to support affordable housing development
12. Affordable housing preservation inventory
Existing Measures:
• Height/density bonus for affordable developments: Such bonuses are allowed within limited areas.
EH 3 :8881 ATTACHIVIAT 17a 38 FOF7103 Housing Production Strategy 135
EXHIBIT D-1
• Mandatory affordable housing in limited areas.
• Expedited permitting for affordable housing.
• Waived SDC fees for affordable housing.
• Surplus City-owned land/land banking for affordable housing.
• Utilizing surplus or underutilized land owned by faith-based organization for housing.
By implementing these affordable housing strategies, Lake Oswego can work to ensure equitable outcomes for
people with lower incomes.To further prioritize benefits for communities of color,the City can:
✓ Partner with culturally specific organizations or other organizations that often work with certain groups
(e.g.,faith-based organizations).
✓ Target programs to certain city areas with higher proportions of people of color (e.g.,tax abatements
within certain neighborhoods).
✓ Use equitable engagement strategies to reach diverse communities.
Gentrification, Displacement, and Housing Stability
Many of the actions included in this HPS increase housing stability for residents and mitigate the impacts of
gentrification and displacement.The strategies listed above promote the development of affordable rental and
ownership housing and when targeted to areas that are experiencing—or may experience—gentrification, can
help to counteract displacement. Strategy 1, Code Audit and Amendments, can also help by identifying the
housing types most needed, removing code and procedural barriers, and incorporating new state laws intended
to enable local housing development.
Strategies that work toward preservation of existing low-cost housing, such as Strategy 12 Affordable Housing
Preservation Inventory, can also help prevent displacement. However,the City would also need to focus other
efforts—such as public-private partnerships—towards preservation of existing housing.
It should be noted that some strategies have the potential to increase risks of displacement by enabling denser
or more intensive development in existing residential areas, which could increase redevelopment pressures and
in turn may drive up the value and cost of existing housing to some degree.This could include Strategy 1 Code
Audit and Amendments, Strategy 3 Rezone Land, and Strategy 11 Tax Increment Financing.These strategies can
benefit lower-income populations by supporting development of affordable housing, or more attainable housing
types, in areas of higher opportunity and access to services. However, as part of implementing strategies that
rezone properties or increase allowed development intensity,the City will need to assess potential displacement
risks and ensure that these strategies are paired with the anti-displacement strategies listed above,which
should be specifically targeted at the residents affected by zoning or code changes or increased investments.
Housing Choice
The following strategies will facilitate access to housing choice for communities of color, low-income
communities, people with disabilities, and other state and federal protected classes:
1. Code audit and amendments—Remove barriers to development of needed housing types, such as
multifamily housing, smaller units, ADUs, and middle housing.
2. Remove or reduce minimum parking requirements—Reduce parking mandates as a barrier to housing
development, especially multifamily housing.
EU 25-8881 ATTACHIVIAT 17PAEi439 FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
4. Evaluate accessible design incentives or mandates—Use requirements or incentives to encourage
housing that is accessible to people with disabilities.
5. Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE)—Target tax abatements to encourage accessible units
and/or moderate-cost units.
6. Pre-approved plan sets for ADUs—Facilitate ADU development through faster and less costly permitting.
7. Modify System Development(SDC)fee schedule—Encourage smaller housing units by scaling SDCs by
unit size.
Existing measures:
• Increased code flexibility for accessory dwelling units.
• Short-term rental regulations.
• Waived SDC fees for ADUs.
• Lot coverage bonus for housing within limited areas.
A potential trade-off of potential accessibility mandates in Strategy 4—especially for subsidized housing—is that
it could limit the number of units produced or prevent some projects from being developed.This is an important
consideration for implementation. Strategy 5, MUPTE, could help offset these concerns by offering a tax
incentive for projects that include accessible units.
The strategies listed above that promote more attainable homeownership opportunities (smaller units, middle
housing, condos) have the potential to benefit communities that have been disproportionately impacted by past
housing policies, especially communities of color.These strategies encourage a broader range of housing choices
that are more attainable for moderate-income households than typical single-detached housing.
Location of Housing
The strategies listed below can encourage housing in compact, mixed-use neighborhoods, helping to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and increasing opportunities to live in neighborhoods near needed services and
amenities.
1. Code audit and amendments—Remove barriers to multifamily housing and residential development
within mixed-use districts.
2. Remove or reduce minimum parking requirements—Reduce parking mandates as a barrier to denser
housing.
3. Rezone land—Rezone land in areas that are near existing higher-density or commercial areas, or other
amenities, such as parks and schools, and that have good access to transit and services.
5. Multiple Unit Property Exemption (MUPTE)—Incentivize multi-unit housing in targeted areas.
11. Use TIF to support affordable housing—Support housing development in a new urban renewal district
for the Foothills Neighborhood,just east of Downtown Lake Oswego.
Existing Measures:
• Increased density near transit stations.
• Use of urban renewal funds to support housing near Downtown.
• Conversion of underperforming commercial assets in Downtown.
EH 25-8881 ATTACHIVIAT 17PAE 40 FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
These strategies can increase allowances for higher density housing in residential and mixed-use areas that are
located near transit and that are within walking distance of a variety of businesses, services, public facilities, and
other amenities.This is a particular benefit to low-income households and people with disabilities, who are less
likely to own a car and may rely on transit and other modes to get around.The MUPTE program (Strategy 5) can
also be targeted to amenity-and service-rich parts of the city where residents would most benefit from
proximity.
Housing Options for Residents Experiencing Homelessness
The HPS does not include strategies that are specifically aimed at addressing homelessness or reducing the risk
of households becoming homeless. However, several of the HPS strategies that support affordable housing
development could be targeted to benefit extremely low-income households. For example, Strategy 10, Public-
private partnerships for affordable housing, could be targeted to housing that benefits those with incomes
below 30%AMI.This could be supported by regional or state funding sources. Also,the Nonprofit Low-Income
Housing Tax Exemption recently approved by City Council would benefit deeply affordable housing. In addition,
the City could work with Metro and Clackamas County to target some of the regional supportive housing
services funding(via Ballot Measure 26-210)to support services and housing within Lake Oswego.
Fair Housing
This section identifies how the City will use the HPS to affirmatively further fair housing for all state and federal
protected classes.This includes addressing disproportionate housing needs, patterns of integration and
segregation, and disparities in access to housing opportunity. Lake Oswego is committed to furthering fair
housing outcomes by including a fair housing strategy in the HPS (Strategy 13). Adopting a comprehensive plan
policy to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing would demonstrate the City's commitment to working towards fair
housing outcomes in the city and could also bolster the City's focus on prioritizing housing equity and
affordability in its housing programs and investments. Other actions identified in Strategy 13, including fair
housing training for City staff and policymakers and providing information to those involved with real estate
transactions, would also help ensure fair housing outcomes for the local housing market.
In addition, strategies that encourage affordable rental and homeownership housing, increase housing stability,
and increase housing choice are all part of supporting Fair Housing (see above).
EU 25-8881 ATTACHIVIRT 17PAE 4'f FOF7103
EXHIBIT D-1
MONITO RI N G PROGRESS
AND OUTCOMES
The City of Lake Oswego is required to monitor the implementation and progress of the strategies
recommended in the HPS and to report on progress to DLCD three (3) years after adoption.That progress report
must include:
• A summary of the actions already taken by the city to implement the strategies adopted in the HPS
Report. If the city has not implemented housing strategies per the schedule adopted in the HPS report,
the city must provide an explanation of the circumstances or factors that posed a barrier to
implementation and a plan for addressing the identified need that the strategy addressed;
• A reflection of the relative efficacy of implemented housing strategies adopted in the HPS; and
• A reflection of the efficiency of the actions taken in response to the Fair and Equitable Housing
Outcomes described previously in this report.
In addition, the City will provide a yearly summary as part of the overall report that details the above listed
items.This is expected to be a simplified version of the required three-year report that includes a more limited
set of key metrics.
PROPOSED MEASURES
Lake Oswego proposes the following measures to monitor the progress and impact of the HPS implementation:
Permitted/Constructed Housing Units
• Monitor and track housing development applications and building permits by housing type,
location/zone, density/lot size, and number of bedrooms. Use this information to estimate the
potential change in the mix and range of different types of housing developed over time.
• Specific tracked housing types should include single-detached,townhouse, duplex, triplex, quadplex,
cottage cluster, multi-dwelling, manufactured housing, accessory dwelling units, and mixed-use
residential developments/units.
• Track the number of new regulated affordable housing units and loss of regulated affordable
housing units.
o If affordable housing developments take advantage of any regulatory or financial incentives,
those should be noted.
EU 3 :8881 Ank85 M 17PAE 749FOF7103 Housing Production Strategy 139
EXHIBIT D-1
• Track the number of regulated affordable housing units that Lake Oswego contributed funding to,
including the sources of funding or tax exemption.
• Track the number of accessible housing units constructed and/or rehabilitated to enhance
accessibility. Note when those units are built pursuant to adopted City requirements or incentives.
• If MUPTE is adopted,track:
o Number of projects and units that qualify for the program.
o How many units are affordable (if this is a criterion that the City adopts) and at what level.
o Market rents (if possible), and any other features/public benefits they provide as part of
qualifying for the abatement (e.g., accessibility features).
• Identify successful partnership projects that resulted in housing production or housing stability for
identified groups in the HPS; include number of units built, preserved, or rehabilitated and the
number of people served by the partnership(s).
Economic and Demographic Data
• Track changes in the characteristics of Lake Oswego's population including changes in:
o Median household income
o Percent of population of color
o Percent of renters
o Percent of renter and owner households that are cost burdened and severely cost burdened
• Monitor changes in housing prices, median rents and median sales prices
Programs and Adoption Actions
Document the following:
• Successful adoption of Code Amendments related to the strategies identified in the HPS.
• City Council Ordinances related to the HPS strategies (e.g., tax abatement, etc.).
• Achievement of annual city work plan items related to strategies in the HPS.
Outreach
Summarize the following:
• Documented coordination with property owners in efforts to produce needed housing identified in
the HPS.
• Documented consultation with non-profit and market-rate housing developers, and other
community stakeholders to seek input on how implemented HPS strategies are working.
• Summary of continued housing engagement efforts and resulting actions.
The ability to report the progress described above will depend on the City's ability to obtain and evaluate readily
available data and information.Availability or lack thereof may necessitate refinements to monitoring
approaches.
EU 3 :8881 ATTACHIVI T 17PATaE-43 FOF7103 Housing Production Strategy 140
EXHIBIT D-1
LIST OF APPENDICES
Appendix A: Contextualized Housing Needs Memorandum
Appendix B: Engagement Summary
Appendix C: Pre-HPS Survey Results
Cv 35-8881 ATTACHIVIT 17PAME-4A FoF7103 Housing Production Strategy 141
EXHIBIT D-1
APPEN DIX A: LAKE OSWEGO
CONTEXTUALIZED HOUSI NG
N EEDS ASSESSM ENT
Lake Oswego Housing Production Strategy November 19, 2024
CONTENTS
Executive Summary 2
I. Introduction 7
II. Market Conditions 8
Housing Tenure 8
Market Conditions (For-Sale Housing) 8
Market Conditions (Rental Housing) 10
Ill. Socio-Economic and Demographic Trends Affecting Housing Needs 13
Family Households 14
Group Quarters Population 14
Diversity Trends 16
People with a Disability 18
Income Trends 20
Poverty 21
People Experiencing Homelessness 22
Households Needing Publicly Assisted Housing 23
Agricultural Workers 23
Veterans 23
IV. Barriers to Development of Needed Housing 25
V.Adopted Measures 27
Lu 25 Q ��jj Inc. I Lake Oswego Hous� c{o �tj�„ F i74 1
Cv 25-00d� A �1v 1 `°4�OF 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
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 residential uses and a projection 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 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.
To advance the City's planning efforts to encourage and allow for development of needed housing,the
City is in the process of creating a Housing Production Strategy(HPS),the purpose of which is to identify
a set of actions 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, particularly housing available to low-and moderate-income households—and particularly 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 conditions; housing affordability issues; barriers to meeting
identified housing needs, including the needs of traditionally underserved and disadvantaged
populations; and existing or previous programs implemented to address housing needs.
Data sources for this report include the US decennial census and 5-year American Communities Survey
(ACS)tables, CoStar, Regional Multiple Listing 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 during the last 12 months. The median square footage was 2,300 sq.ft. Attached
units and condominiums currently 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 effective rent in Lake Oswego is$2,038/mo. In the last decade,
rent growth has been 52%or 4.3% per year. By comparison, inflation has been 31%or 2.7% per
year for the same period. Rents peaked in 2022 and have moderated slightly since.
• 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. In addition, nearly half of
renter households in Lake Oswego are considered housing cost burdened (i.e., pay more than
30%of their income for housing).
LL 2255 Q�jj}}����jj Inc. I Lake Oswego
C� Z5-000� Hous�alaWitiMi42Fogto3 2
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
• Publicly Assisted Housing.The state tracks three current subsidized affordable housing
properties in Lake Oswego, with a total of 76 units in 2023.The majority(75) of these units are
offered for elderly residents.The Marylhurst Commons will offer an additional 100 affordable
units for families when it is constructed. Upon completion 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 Section 8 housing choice, some of which are used in Lake
Oswego. No agricultural worker housing exists currently in Lake Oswego.
Figure EX-1. Lake Oswego Home Sales (12 months,July 2022 to July 2023)
Home Sales by Unit Type Home Sales by Price Level
$900,000+ 319
$800,000-$899,000 66
20% $700,000-$799,000 67
$600,000-$699,000 56
8%
$500,000-$599,000 ■ 39
0
0 72% $400,000-$499,000 . 31
$300,000-$399,000 . 47
$200,000-$299,000 ■ 43
$100,000-$199,000 3
Detached Home Manuf. Home <$100,000 0
Attached Home Condo
0 100 200 300 400
Source: RMLS,Johnson Economics
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 when approximately 90%of the population was
white.
• Disability.There are roughly 3,140 individuals in Lake Oswego with one or more disabilities.
• Veterans.Veterans are 6%of the adult population. 63%are 65 and older. Veterans have lower
than average poverty levels, and 21% have some sort of disability.
LL 2255 Q�jj}}����jj Inc. Lake Oswego Hous� ct{M pF 174 3
CU Z5-000� A ��V 1ft� 47 OF 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
Figure EX-6. Population by Race
Share of Population by Race
100% .p •Lake Oswego(2010)
P.
80% ■Lake Oswego(2020)
60% ■Clackamas Co.
40% Oregon
20% .-e `e
`f,0% lllll—
J
Ol C O OJ C U Ol VI 0
CO C > _CO (2 u C
_C C CO tD NCO
CO N
Q V m ZCU Q N J V
b i - C O O
Y C N m m C O E U A
COc co
Q Q t CO -f b CO v 2
C3 ,O p O a_"
N
N i) I
I
SOURCE: US Census,Johnson Economics LLC; Census Tables: P1, P2 (2010, 2020)
Figure EX-7. Population with Disabilities
Share of Population
Population with a disability 7.8%
Hearing difficulty 2.4%
Vision difficulty 1.7%
Cognitive difficulty 2.7%
Ambulatory difficulty 2.9%
Self-care difficulty 1.1%
Independent living difficulty 2.3%
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
SOURCE: US Census,Johnson Economics LLC; Census Tables: DP02, (2020 ACS 5-year)
LL 2255 Q�jj}}����jj Inc. Lake Oswego Ho -MN' o tit 3 se g# 4
CU Z5-0001 A ��V 1ft� �`'48 OF 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
Existing Adopted Housing Measures
The City of Lake Oswego already implements a variety of measures intended to enable or facilitate the
production of needed housing. In combination 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 meeting its housing needs. Below is a brief summary of the key housing measures
adopted by the City, organized into the categories defined by DLCD.
Zoning Strategies
• Height/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 (ADUs) as to occupancy and size limits.
• Regulates short-term rentals to help preserve long-term rental opportunities regulations
• Requires affordable housing in limited areas of the city.
• Allows increased density near transit stations.
• Lot coverage bonus for housing within the Lake Grove Village Center Overlay(LGVCO).
Reducing Regulatory Impediments
• Removed parking mandates near transit.
• Expedites permitting for affordable housing.
Financial Incentives
• Waives system development charges (SDCs) and development review fees for affordable
housing and ADUs.
Financial Resources
• Uses urban renewal funds to support housing (recently with the North Anchor development).
Land Acquisition, Lease, and Partnerships
• Donates surplus City-owned land for affordable housing.
• Engages in public-private partnerships with non-profit organizations to produce affordable
housing units.
• Enables conversion of underperforming commercial assets into housing(recently with the North
Anchor site).
• Utilizing surplus land owned by faith-based organization for housing (recently with the
Marylhurst University Campus).
Barriers to Development of Needed Housing
Numerous factors contribute to the availability of housing in Lake Oswego—market factors, physical
conditions, regulations, public investments, etc. Some of these factors can serve as barriers to the
production 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 production in the city. Following are some of the key housing needs that the stakeholders
identified as gaps in the market:
LL 2255 �4j}i�t�j Inc. I Lake Oswego Hous�alaWitiKa449Fogf035
Z5-000�
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
• Affordable housing for low-and moderate-income households
• Middle housing (e.g., townhomes, duplexes, and cottage clusters)
• Housing options for seniors and opportunities for aging in place
• Options for more attainable homeownership (e.g., condos and middle housing)
• Apartments with family-size units (2-3 bedrooms)
• Multi-family housing outside the Town Center
Stakeholders identified the following barriers to meeting these housing needs, and to housing
production more generally:
• The high cost of land in Lake Oswego translates to high rental and sale prices, and makes deed-
restricted affordable housing especially challenging to pencil out.
• There are few large, developable sites within the City and urban service boundary to support
multi-family housing and other development types that typically rely on larger parcels of land.
• The City's Development Code can pose barriers to housing development. Stakeholders
identified issues such as highly-prescriptive Overlay and Design District standards,tree
protection/planting standards, and open space standards as particular challenges for housing.
• The City's development review and permitting processes can be lengthy and contribute to
housing costs.
• Neighbor opposition to affordable or higher-density housing can drag out the process and add
to costs.
A focus of the Housing Production Strategy will be to identify tools and strategies to remove or reduce
these barriers or help housing producers overcome them.
LL 2255 QQ���jj��11lnc. Lake Oswego Hous� ct{o �t 5 pF 174 6
CU Z5-0001 A ��fV 1ft� ��``''50 OF 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
I. INTRODUCTION
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 residential uses and a projection 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 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.
To advance the City's planning efforts to encourage and allow for development of needed housing,the
City is in the process of creating a Housing Production Strategy(HPS),the purpose of which is to identify
a set of actions 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, particularly housing available to low-and moderate-income households—and particularly low-
cost rental housing.
To provide context to Lake Oswego's housing needs,the memorandum uses data from the 2023 Housing
Needs Analysis, US Census, and other available sources describe in greater detail the context of socio-
economic, demographic trends, and market conditions.This memorandum also incorporates information
obtained though stakeholder engagement meetings with affordable housing producers and consumers,
landowners, and representatives of underrepresented communities, including people experiencing
homelessness, low-income households, renters, and non-profit and governmental organizations serving
those in need of housing.
j ,r
_4 .-er Itsf • - i— '<,
1 .�� I lip
�,; Jam=low
w
. . 14't‘ . I '! *7401111t l'."''' / --' ' It
/ • 01 •17 1
\ 0,irdi ' 0 - - --1_5 V) / - , qi-ii‘. . '
\* ' ,„,., t'i
EL 2255 Qi�iiM�j�1Inc. I Lake Oswego Hous� ct{o tX pF 174
C� Z5-0001 ��fV 1ft� 5'f OF 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
II. MARKET CONDITIONS
The information on housing market conditions provides a look into the way the housing market is or is
not meeting the needs of the residents of Lake Oswego.
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%).
Market Conditions (For-Sale Housing)
This section presents home sales data from the Regional Multiple Listing Service (RMLS)for the prior 12
months(July 2022 to July 2023). There were 671 home sales in Lake Oswego over this period, or an
average of 56 sales/month. Currently, RMLS tracks 181 active listings, or over three months of for-sale
inventory at the average rate of the prior 12 months (see Figure 1). Of these listings:
• The median sale price was$860,000.
• The average (mean) sale price was$1,075,000.
• The average price per square foot was$430/square foot
• The median square footage was 2,300 square feet
• Attached units and condominiums make up a significant share of home sales (28%).
• 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.
As shown in Figure 2,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%).
Mobility patterns and work-from-home trends during the COVID pandemic were the likely contributors
to this trend, as remote workers from more expensive markets such as California and Seattle were able
to relocate to attractive Oregon communities. Competition for limited housing inventory during those
years also contributed to rising prices.The price increases moderated in 2022, growing by only 2%from
2021.
LL 2255 QQ���j�1 Inc. I Lake Oswego Hous�alaWitiM759Fogto38
Z5-0001
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
Figure 1. Lake Oswego Home Sales (72 Months)
Home Sales by Unit Type Home Sales by Price Level
$900,000+ 319
$800,000-$899,000 - 66
20% $700,000-$799,000 — 67
$600,000-$699,000 - 56
8% $500,000-$599,000 ■ 39
0%0 72/ $400,000-$499,000 . 31
$300,000-$399,000 . 47
$200,000-$299,000 ■ 43
$100,000-$199,000 13
Detached Home Manuf. Home <$100,000 0
Attached Home Condo
0 100 200 300 400
Sources: RMLS,JOHNSON ECONOMICS
Figure 2. Median Home Sale Price (2070-2022)
Median Sale Price
$900,000
$800,000
$700,000
$600,000
$500,000
$400,000
$300,000
$200,000
$100,000
$0
y0 ' . titi y0) ), yh ti< tit ti( yoi ti0 L'• L',
19'
Sources: RMLS,JOHNSON ECONOMICS
L 2255 QQ���jj��11lnc. Lake Oswego Hous� ct{o �tXj�Q pF 174 9
CU Z5-0001 A �fV I ��`5 ( 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
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.
Market Conditions (Rental Housing)
Lake Oswego has experienced an uneven vacancy rate over the last two decades, according to data from
CoStar.The following figure shows that rental vacancy in the area fell in the prior decade to a low
vacancy of under 4%. By 2017,when new apartment inventory was built in Lake Oswego,vacancy
climbed temporarily and has been moderating ever since (see Figure 3).
Average rents have climbed steadily since 2011 (Figure 4 and Figure 5).The average rent in Lake Oswego
has nearly doubled over that period, increasing to roughly$2.20/square foot, or an average of
$2,050/month according to data from CoStar. Rents peaked in mid-2022 at an average monthly rate of
$2,200/month and an average $2.35/square foot.
Figure 6 presents the average annual rent growth since 2001. Rent growth has remained mostly positive
since the prior recession. After rents fell at the outset of the COVID pandemic, it reversed by 2010 and
growth was positive until the most recent quarters. Since the second quarter of 2023, average rents have
fallen an estimated 5%on a year-over-year basis.
Figure 3. Rental Vacancy In Lake Oswego (2000-2023)
Vacancy Rate
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%
off" ol, o'' o� o(o 01 0cb oc) titi titi ti ti° ti1 tib ti titi 1ti ,b 0-
o o o o p'VV , , VVdVVlVVVlVVlV ,b
o�
,y
Source:Costar,Johnson Economics
L 2255 QQ���jj��11lnc. Lake Oswego Hous� ct{o �tX F 174 10
CU Z5-0001 A �fV 1ft� 52( 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
Figure 4. Average Rent/Square Foot, Lake Oswego (2000-2023)
Effective Rent Per SF
$2.50
$2.00
$1.50
$1.00 —
$0.50
$0.00
6') ono-) 6" 6') 6') 6'' a 6" 6 6'' a 6') 6 6'' o-) o-' o-) o-) 6 6'' o- �°
0 , ti3 � w ti ti `' � 1, o-
0 °. o0000000titititidtitititid ° tiy ,
Source:CoStar,Johnson Economics
Figure 5. Average Monthly Rent, Lake Oswego (2000-2023)
Effective Rent Per Unit
$2,500
$2,000
$1,500
$1,000
$500
$0
oti oti o) o° 0 oA 0 0 titi N. N N ti° tiA N. N titi titi 0)
,yo
Source:CoStar,Johnson Economics
Glnc. Lake Oswego HousEU 3
55-N01 A-M �{V 5p FO 1403 11
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
Figure 6. Annual Rent Growth Rate, Lake Oswego (2000-2023)
Effective Rent % Growth/Yr
16%
12%
8%
4%
0%
-4% —
-8%
6) 6', 6', 6'' 6'' 6'' 6) 6, 6', ' 6'' 6'' 6) 6', 6', 6'' 6'' 6', 6') 6, 6'' 6'' •<°
o9, cc, oR °`, °ro 01 °4, °o, y0 yy yL y', tiR tih ti� tit tiw ti� ,y0 1y yti ��
yo yo yo yo yo yo yo 1, '1, yo yo yo yo yo yo yo yo yo yo yo "1, ,tioo
,yo
Source:CoStar,Johnson Economics
Affordability: Figure 7 shows the percentage of household income spent on gross rent'for rental
households. Roughly half of renter households in Lake Oswego spend more than 30%of their income on
rent—meaning that they are housing cost burdened. Further, an estimated 29%of renter households are
spending 50%or more of their income on housing and are considered severely housing cost burdened.
Figure 7. Percentage of Household Income Spent on Gross Rent, Lake Oswego Renter Households
35%
30% 29%
25%
- 25% 22%
0
a)
20%
15% 14%
°i 10% 7%
Ln
0%
010 c%) 010 �¢
°14- 01�o °I�o °1
,y0 ,LO ,SO a0 col°
_ %of Income to Gross Rent
Sources: US Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS
Census Table: B25070(2021 ACS S-yr Estimates)
'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.
LL C� Z554i�0t1 lnc. I Lake Oswego HoAus�ali:v.tAtti52Fogf03
12
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
III. SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS
AFFECTING HOUSING NEEDS
The following table (Figure 8) 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 during the same period. (US Census and PSU Population Research Center)
Figure 8. Lake Oswego Population, Households, and Income
POPULATION, HOUSEHOLDS, FAMILIES,AND YEAR-ROUND HOUSING UNITS
2000 2010 Growth 2023 Growth
(Census) (Census) 00-10 (PSU) 10-23
Population' 35,278 36,619 4% 41,550 13%
Households2 14,824 15,893 7% 17,481 10%
Families3 9,775 10,079 3% 11,842 17%
Housing Units4 15,668 16,995 8% 18,345 8%
Group Quarters Populations 163 222 36% 329 48%
Household Size(non-group) 2.37 2.29 -3% 2.36 3%
Avg.Family Size 2.93 2.88 -2% 2.97 3%
PER CAPITA AND MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME
2000 2010 Growth 2023 Growth
(Census) (Census) 00-10 (Proj.) 10-23
Per Capita ($) $42,166 $53,652 27% $74,600 39%
Median HH ($) $71,597 $84,186 18% $123,300 46%
SOURCE:Census,Metro Consolidated Forecast,PSU Population Research Center,and Johnson Economics
Census Tables: DP-1(2000,2010);DP-3(2000);S1901;S19301
1 From Census,PSU Population Research Center,growth rate 2010-2022 extended to 2023
2 2023 Households=(2023 population-Group Quarters Population)/2023 HH Size
3 Ratio of 2023 Families to total HH is based on 2021 ACS5-year Estimates
4 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-yearACSestimates 2017-2021
55-NGlnc. I Lake Oswego Hous ct{EU 3
01 A� bsWti1tf 5p FO103 13
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
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.
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. Figure 9 shows the rental/ownership split by
household size in Lake Oswego.
Figure 9. Household Size in Lake Oswego
7-or-more 0% Renter
6-person 1% Owner
2%
5-person 3�
4%
in
2 4-person 11% °
a 18/0
= 3-person 11%
19%
2-person 35%
38%
1-person 40%
20%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
Share of Households
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.
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
L 2255 QQ���jj��11lnc. Lake Oswego Hous� ct{o �tXj�� pF 174 14
CU Z5-0001 A B 1ft� t35 ( 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
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.
Age
Figure 10 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. 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.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 10. Age Cohort Trends, 2000-2021
25%
Lake Oswego(2000)
o N Lake Oswego(2021)
20%
-, ^ o o Clack.Co.(2021)
ti
o 0
15% ti m v
ti o
N N N
o , o �--I , o c-1
c-I O c-I c c 1
10% O,
ko o 0
Ln
5% v
o N N
c-I
0% ■
acc, acc, aty acc, acc, acc, acc, aty 5X
be' co �o ,co x9 �o ,co ,�o 4)
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 11 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.
Eli 2255 Q4�it�ji�1lnc. I Lake Oswego Hous�ali:v.tAtt459Fogto315
C� Z5-0001
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
Figure 11. Share of Households with Children/Population over 65 Years (Lake Oswego)
Share of Households with Children Share of Population Over 65 Years
40% 40%
31% 31%
30% 28% 30%
21%
20% 20% 18% 16%
10% 10%
0% 0%
Lake Oswego Oregon USA Lake Oswego Oregon USA
SOURCE:US Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC;Census Tables:B11005;S0101(2021 ACS 5-yr Estimates)
Diversity Trends
Figure 12 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 12. Racial and Ethnic Diversity, 2010—2020 (Lake Oswego)
100% Share of Population by Race
o Lake Oswego(2010)
co
80% •Lake Oswego(2020)
60% •Clackamas Co.
40% Oregon
20% o o co e o o. o
a1 C u
C CD a1 2 r
N t6 '6 n1cc O
Li
V (a Z
,_ VCl3 (a , aJ O sE O 2Y E v H
Q Q E n---
m O
v1
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.
EL 2255 QQ���jj��11lnc. Lake Oswego Hous� ct{o 'Att5 pF 174 16
CU Z5-0001 A ��fV 1ft� ��``''60 OF 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
Figure 13. Average Number of Persons per Household by Racial and Ethnic Category(Oregon)
Average Household Size by Race& Ethnicity(Oregon)
All Households 2.5
White alone 2.4
Black or African American alone 2.5
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 2.8
Asian alone 2.8
Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander 3.5
Hispanic or Latino 3.7
Some Other Race alone 4.0
Two or more races: 2.7
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0
Avg.Number of Persons per Household
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.
As shown in Figure 13, minority households tend to have a larger average household size than the
average of all households. (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 14)—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
L 2255 QQ���jj��11lnc. Lake Oswego Hous� ct{o �tX pF 174 17
CU Z5-0001 A a 1ft� 6'f ( 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
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 14. Home Ownership Rate by Racial and Ethnic Category(Oregon)
Owner-Occupied Households by Race& Ethnicity(Oregon)
All Households 63%
White alone 65%
Black or African American alone 36%
American Indian and Alaska Native alone 48%
Asian alone 63%
Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander 32%
Hispanic or Latino 45%
Some Other Race alone 43%
Two or more races: 50%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Ownership Rate
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.
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.")
Figure 15 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.
LL 2255 QQ4i���jj1�1lnc. I Lake Oswego Hous�ali:v.tAtt769Fogf0318
Z5-0001
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
Figure 15. Lake Oswego Share of the Population with Disability, By Type
Share of Population
Population with a disability 7.8%
Hearing difficulty 2.4%
Vision difficulty 1.7%
Cognitive difficulty 2.7%
Ambulatory difficulty 2.9%
Self-care difficulty 1.1%
Independent living difficulty 2.3%
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10%
SOURCE:US Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC;Census Tables:DP02,(2020 ACS 5-year)
Figure 16. Lake Oswego Population with a Disability, by Age
Share of Population with Disability by Age
Total population 7.8%
Under 18 years . 2.0%
18 to 64 years 5.8%
65 years and over 19.5%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
SOURCE:US Census,JOHNSON ECONOMICS LLC;Census Tables:DP02,(2020 ACS 5-year)
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.
LL 2255 QQ���jj��11lnc. Lake Oswego Hous� ct{o �tX t8 9F 174 19
CU Z5-0001 A ��fV 1f� ��`"'63 OF 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
Income Trends
As shown in Figure 17, 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$75,000. Median income has grown an
estimated 46% between 2010 and 2023, in real dollars. Inflation was an estimated 34%over this period,
so the local median income has well exceeded inflation. This is not the case in many regions and
nationally, where income growth has not kept pace with inflation.
Figure 17. Income Trends, 2000—2023 (Lake Oswego)
PER CAPITA AND MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME
2000 2010 Growth 2023 Growth
(Census) (Census) 00-10 (Proj.) 10-23
Per Capita ($) $42,166 $53,652 27% $74,600 39%
Median HH ($) $71,597 $84,186 18% $123,300 46%
SOURCE:Census,Metro Consolidated Forecast,PSU Population Research Center,and Johnson Economics
Census Tables: DP-1(2000,2010);DP-3(2000);S1901;S19301
Figure 18. Household Income Cohorts, 2021 (Lake Oswego)
Household Income Groups
$200,000 or more 27%
$150,000 to$199,999 12%
$100,000 to$149,999 20%
$75,000 to$99,999 11%
$50,000 to$74,999 11%
$35,000 to$49,999 6%
$25,000 to$34,999 4%
$15,000 to$24,999 4%
$10,000 to$14,999 2%
Less than$10,000 3%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
SOURCE: US Census,Census Tables:S1901(2021 ACS 5-yr Est.)
Figure 18 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%).Approximately 41%of households earn less than $100,000. Roughly 19%of
households earn less than $50k per year.
EL 2255 QQ���jj��11lnc. Lake Oswego Hous� ct{oititX F 174 20
CU Z5-0001 A ��fV 1ft� 62 OF 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
Poverty
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).2 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%. As shown
in Figure 19, 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 19. Poverty Status by Category(Lake Oswego)
Poverty Level of Subgroups
Under 18 years 3%
18 to 64 years 4%
65 years and over 5%
Employed 2%
Unemployed 7%
Less than high school 11%
High school 10%
Some college,associate's 7%
Bachelor's degree or higher 3%
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
SOURCE: US Census;Census Tables: S1701(2021 ACS 5-yr Est.)
z 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.
LL 2255 QQ���jj��11lnc. Lake Oswego Hous� ct{o �tX pF 174 21
CU Z5-0001 A ��fV 1ft� 65 OF 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
People Experiencing Homelessness
The Census makes 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 2023) Point-in-Time count of people experiencing homelessness and
households experiencing homelessness in Clackamas County'found 410 unhoused individuals on the
streets, in shelters, or other temporary and/or precarious housing.This is a 31%decrease from the 597
individuals counted in 2022, which was likewise a decline from the prior count.The estimated 410
unhoused individuals represent 0.1%of the county's total estimated population in 2023.
A detailed breakdown of the data from the 2023 count is not yet available.The following are some
demographic indicators from the 2022 count:
• An estimated 45%of individuals were in some sort of temporary shelter, while 55%were
unsheltered.
• Of those indicating a gender, 60%of those counted identified as men,40%women.
• Five percent of those counted were Hispanic or Latino compared to 9.5% in the general population.
• Approximately 51%, were counted as "chronically homeless".4
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.
Data on unhoused school-aged children is tracked in keeping with the McKinney-Vento Act.The
Department of Education reports that in the 2021/22 school year,there were 41 enrolled students
experiencing homelessness in Lake Oswego School District, and an estimated 304 children between the
ages of 5 and 17 living in poverty.
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.
Figures are for the entire County
• 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.
LL C� Z554i�0t1 lnc. I Lake Oswego HoAus�ali:v.tAsid2Fogf03
22
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
Households Needing Publicly Assisted Housing
Oregon Housing and Community Services(OHCS)tracks three currently operating subsidized 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 when constructed. Upon completion in 2024, the total 176 subsidized units in Lake Oswego will
represent 1%of the local housing stock. An additional 8 units of 80%AMI housing are also in the pipeline
as part of the North Anchor project.
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 Workers
Lake Oswego is not currently home to properties dedicated to agricultural workers. This population may
also be served by other available affordable units.
Veterans
This group is called out as a population with specific needs and which is often under-represented in
planning for future needed housing. In general,veterans often may have physical or mental health
disabilities resulting from injuries or stress experienced during their service.They also frequently have
fixed, lower incomes and need access to services provided by the US Veterans Administration or other
service providers. As a result,they share many of the same unmet needs described here for people with
disabilities, low-income households, and in some cases senior residents.
EH 25_ �11nc. Lake Oswego HoA�aduGti
Mt E 67 F( 03 23
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
Figure 20. Veterans in Lake Oswego
Individuals
Share of Adult
Population
Total Veterans 1,801 5.7%
Period of Service Share of Veterans
Gulf War(9/2001 or later)veterans 344 19.1%
Gulf War(1990 to 8/2001)veterans 335 18.6%
Vietnam era veterans 634 35.2%
Korean War veterans 140 7.8%
World War II veterans 83 4.6%
Other 265 14.7%
Veteran Age Share of Veterans
18 to 34 years 107 5.9%
35 to 54 years 335 18.6%
55 to 64 years 232 12.9%
65 to 74 years 474 26.3%
75 years and over 653 36.3%
Veteran Poverty Status 61 3.4%
Veterans with a Disability 375 20.9%
Source:Table 52101,ACS 2021 5-Year,Johnson Economics
L 2255 QQ���jj��11lnc. Lake Oswego Hous� ct{o �tXjr,� pF 174 24
CU Z5-0001 A �fV i 368 OF 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
IV. BARRIERS TO DEVELOPMENT OF NEEDED HOUSING
Numerous factors contribute to the availability and/or lack of needed housing in Lake Oswego—market
factors, physical conditions, regulations, public investments, etc. Some of these factors can serve as
barriers to the production 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 production 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 multi-family housing production; 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 identified as gaps in the market:
• Affordable housing for low-and moderate-income households
• Middle housing (e.g., townhomes, duplexes, and cottage clusters)
• Housing options for seniors and opportunities for aging in place
• Options for more attainable homeownership (e.g., condos and middle housing)
• Apartments with family-size units (2-3 bedrooms)
• Multi-family housing outside the Town Center
In terms of barriers to meeting these needs, and to housing production 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 multi-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 notion—finding a deficit of buildable land to meet future housing needs,
including lands zoned for high-density housing.
• Code barriers. Stakeholders identified a range of barriers to housing development in the Lake
Oswego Community Development Code. Stakeholders expressed that the City's code is
especially challenging to work with compared to some other jurisdictions.The following specific
code barriers were identified:
o Overlay and Design District standards are highly prescriptive,which can add to the cost
of development and limit flexibility. Stakeholders pointed to detailed architectural
standards as being a particular challenge—e.g., requirements for specific siding
materials adding to construction costs.
o Tree protection and tree planting and landscaping standards are also very prescriptive
and can be difficult to meet on constrained sites.
o Open space standards for multi-family housing are considered by stakeholders to be
excessive, limit the available space on a site for housing units, and don't necessarily lead
LL 325 Q4�it�ji�1lnc. I Lake Oswego Hous�ali:v.t4s469Fogto325
Z5-0001
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
to great outcomes.They note that open spaces can be smaller and more concentrated
while still providing appealing amenities for residents.
o Setbacks and other standards limit middle housing infill opportunities. Stakeholders
shared that siting standards can make it difficult for middle housing such as duplexes
and townhomes to fit on existing lots.
• Process barriers. Stakeholders also noted that Lake Oswego's development review and
permitting 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 particular:
o The design review process in Design Districts adds time and cost.
o Building permit review can also be slow.
o Due to prescriptive standards, applicants often need to apply for multiple variances,
which lengthens the process and adds uncertainty.
o Public improvements (e.g., road improvements and utilities) can be very costly.
• Neighbor opposition. A few stakeholders also noted that neighbor opposition to affordable or
higher-density housing can drag out the process and add to costs.
• Market trends.At the time of this analysis,there are some headwinds to development of new
housing regionally and nationwide.These include inflation in the cost of building inputs such as
labor, materials, and land. Increasing interest rates in recent years that haven't been offset by a
proportionate fall in property prices are another major impediment.
A focus of the Housing Production Strategy will be to identify tools and strategies to remove or reduce
these barriers or help housing producers overcome them.
LL 2255 QQ���jj��11lnc. Lake Oswego Hous� ct{o �MI-5 8F 174 26
CU Z5-0001 A �fV 1ft� �`"l�f OF 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
V. ADOPTED MEASURES
The City of Lake Oswego already implements a variety of measures intended to enable or facilitate the
production of needed housing.The City submitted a "Pre-HPS Survey"to DLCD in 2022, as required by
former subsection 2 of ORS 456.586,which includes an exhaustive list of the housing measures the City
has adopted and implemented. In combination 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 meeting 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.ft.for internal remodels
of primary dwellings.
• Short-term rental regulations—The City requires that short-term rental is a home occupation
where a resident lives on the lot. Short-term rentals are not permitted 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 portion of the Marylhurst Special District and a portion of the West
Lake Grove Design District(WLG-OC zone)where multifamily use is allowed.
• Increased density near transit stations—The mixed-use zoning that is in place near transit—
Metro 'town centers'—allows residential 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 Communities rules, the City does not apply minimum parking requirements within
1/2-mile of priority transit,which includes the entire 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 permitting for affordable housing—The City has a practice of expediting the
permitting process for deed-restricted affordable units.
Financial Incentives
• Waives fees for affordable housing and ADUs—The City has adopted regulations 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.
LL 2255 QQ���jj��11lnc. Lake Oswego Hous� c�t{M jE-6 9F 174 27
CU Z5-0001 A �fV 1f� �"7y(OF 103
EXHIBIT D-1
Contextualized Housing Needs Assessment 11/19/2024
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 Acquisition, Lease, and Partnerships
• Surplus City-owned land/land banking for affordable housing—The City does this with vacant
or underutilized sites, most recently the 1.4-acre construction 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 organizations 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.
• Utilizing surplus land owned by faith-based organization for housing—The City worked
collaboratively with the Sisters of Holy Names of Jesus and Mary (Sisters) when they were
considering reuse of the former Marylhurst University Campus. Ultimately,the Sisters entered
into an agreement with Mercy Housing NW for construction of 100 units of affordable family
housing.
Lu 25 Qt�jj Inc. I Lake Oswego Hous�MAAAre779F 17428
25-00d� OF 103
EXHIBIT D-1
APPENDIX B : PUBLIC
ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY
Lake Oswego Housing Production Strategy I November 19, 2024
Introduction
This memorandum summarizes public engagement activities that informed Lake Owego's Housing
Production Strategy(HPS).The summary includes the following:
• Summary of engagement during both Housing Needs Analysis and Housing Production
Strategy phases
• What activities took place
• Who participated (which stakeholders and other groups)
• Summary of community and stakeholder input
• How community and stakeholder input influenced the HPS
• Recommendations for future engagement—evaluation of how to improve housing
engagement practices going forward
Housing Needs Analysis Engagement
Winter 2022—Fall 2023
The first phase of this project was the Housing Needs Analysis (HNA),which included preparation of a
Housing Capacity Analysis(HCA) and Buildable Lands Inventory(BLI).The City provided multiple avenues
for engagement activities and events during this phase, as described below.
HNA Public Engagement Opportunities
• Online Open House/Virtual Neighborhood Forum.The City created an Online Open House to
(1) provide a summary of the project's draft findings to date, and (2) ask for feedback on those
materials, as well as participants' opinions and priorities related to housing in Lake Oswego.The
Online Open House was made available for public input from March 31 through April 24, 2023.1
• Neighborhood Forum.The City of Lake Oswego held a virtual neighborhood forum on April 6,
2023 at 5pm.2
• Housing Production Strategy Task Force.The City appointed a Task Force that included a variety
of housing stakeholders, including realtors, housing development industry members,
homeowners, renters, and representatives of the City's Planning Commission, City Council, 50+
1 For detailed survey results,see
https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=8&page=&repo=CityOfLakeOswego.
2 For a meeting summary,see
https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/WebLink/DocView.aspx?id=36&page=&repo=CityOfLakeOswego.
EU 3 - �nc. I Lake Oswego Ho Ara V41i1N E-73 FOF7103 1 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
Advisory Board, and Transportation Advisory Board, among others. The Task Force discussed the
following topics at their first three meetings:
o December 16, 2022—Project overview and work plan.
o March 24, 2023—Reviewed initial housing needs and BLI findings.
o June 23, 2023—Reviewed summary of engagement; reviewed updates to the BLI and
HCA; introduced the HPS.
• Planning Commission.The Lake Oswego Planning Commission discussed the HNA at work
sessions on January 23 and April 10, 2023.The Planning Commission recommended approval of
the HNA at a public hearing on August 28, 2023.
• City Council.The Lake Oswego City Council discussed the HNA at study sessions on February 21
and April 18, 2023. The City Council recommended approval of the HNA at a public hearing on
October 3, and approved the findings on October 17, 2023.The HNA was adopted via Ordinance
2934,which became effective on November 16, 2023.
HNA Key Themes and Topics of Discussion
Feedback from the HNA activities was incorporated into the HNA documents and also informed the later
HPS work—especially the City's focus on affordable housing strategies. Key themes related to housing
needs and housing production are summarized below.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING
As with many other communities, housing affordability is a key concern in Lake Oswego. "Housing
Affordability" and "Availability of housing for lower incomes" were the two greatest needs identified in
the Online Open House survey. In a separate survey question, "Housing specifically for people with lower
incomes"was the second highest choice for desired housing types. Other opinions heard include:
• Some of the more affordable housing today are older homes that might be considered
redevelopable by the analysis—redevelopment would likely result in more expensive homes in
those locations in comparison to some of the existing homes in those areas.
• The income breakdowns shown in the draft HNA seemed too focused on higher incomes, with
roughly half of new housing units being affordable to those below the highest income brackets.
• Providing large amounts of new affordable housing is not an appropriate role for the City.
• The market will set housing prices and the government should get out of the way.
When asked whether the City should play a strong role in supporting the development of housing for
lower income residents, survey respondents generally said yes.The community provided a variety of
opinions on the topic of what that role should entail, including:
• Multi-unit housing should be concentrated in specific areas, away from single-unit housing and
existing neighborhoods.
• Middle housing and multi-unit housing should be integrated into all neighborhoods.
• Entry-level homeownership units are needed.
• Rent control/tax on house flippers/inclusionary zoning is needed.
• Workforce housing is critical.A diverse community is a strong community.
• Government intervention only makes things worse.
• Consider tree canopy.
EU - �nc. I Lake Oswego Ho A E-7�rala4V FOF7103 2 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
• Preserving neighborhood character should be the top priority.
• Large single detached homes are being built; this is problematic.
• There are disparate impacts of development and construction across the city.
• The City has taken strides toward more affordable housing recently—keep it up.
AGING IN PLACE
"Availability of housing that supports aging in place"was identified as a key need for Lake Oswego in the
online survey.This generally means housing that has accessibility features for individuals with impaired
mobility, and that is located adjacent to amenities that support a high quality of life and/or provide
needed services.The affordability of housing is also a consideration, as older people who may be on
fixed incomes may find it more difficult to afford to live in the community.
MIDDLE HOUSING
Cottage homes, also known as "cottage cluster" housing, were the most frequently chosen housing type
that respondents would like to see more of in Lake Oswego.
Housing Production Strategy Engagement
Fall 2023—Fall 2024
In fall 2023,the City of Lake Oswego shifted its focus to the HPS process. Similar to the HNA phase,the
City provided multiple avenues for engagement activities and events for the HPS, as described below.
HPS Public Engagement Opportunities
• Housing Production Strategy Task Force.The HPS Task Force met five more times between fall
2023 and summer 2024.The Task Force was instrumental in shaping the strategies and
approaches that are included in the HPS.The Task Force discussed the following topics at these
five meetings:
o October 6, 2023—Reviewed findings from the Contextualized Housing Needs
Assessment and stakeholder interviews; reviewed existing housing measures and
provided input on an initial list of potential housing strategies.
o December 5, 2023—Engaged in group discussions focused on identifying housing
production strategies that could best address high-priority housing needs.
o February 16 and March 1, 2024—Discussed initial recommendations for strategies to
include in the HPS. At the March 1 meeting,the Task Force voted on which strategies to
recommend to the Planning Commission and City Council for inclusion.
o June 21, 2024—Reviewed the Draft HPS Report.
• Stakeholder Interviews. The project team interviewed stakeholders involved in various aspects
of housing production in September and October 2023. See below for the list of stakeholders
and key themes from those interviews.
• Community Forum. On March 14, 2024 at 5 PM,the City hosted a virtual community forum
using the Zoom videoconference platform to review the strategies being considered for the HPS.
A total of 15 attendees participated in the forum. The forum used live polling in Zoom to get
feedback in real-time to supplement the discussion to indicate their level of support. See Results
of Survey and Polling, below,for a summary of survey results.
EU - �nc. I Lake Oswego Ho A� Wilt- 75 FOF7103 3 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
• Online Survey.The City hosted an online survey from March 13—31, 2024 as a companion to
the virtual Community Forum. A total of 134 participants completed the survey.The survey
asked participants to indicate their level of support for various housing strategies being
considered for the HPS. Respondents provided general support for all strategies that ended up in
the final HPS. See Results of Survey and Polling, below,for a summary of survey results.
• Presentations to Boards and Commissions. City staff presented to the following groups:
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Advisory Board; 50+Advisory Board; Chamber of Commerce
Government Affairs Committee; November 2023 Mayor's Roundtable event; Fall 2023 Kruse Way
Economic Forum.
• Planning Commission.The Lake Oswego Planning Commission discussed the HPS at work
sessions on November 13, 2023 and June 24, 2024, as well as a joint study session with the City
Council on April 2, 2024. See below for a summary of results from straw polls taken at the April 2
joint study session.The Planning Commission recommended approval of the HPS at a public
hearing on September 23, 2024.
• City Council. In addition to the joint study session noted above,the Lake Oswego City Council
discussed the HPS at study sessions on November 7, 2023 and July 16, 2024.The City Council
held a public hearing for adoption of the HPS on November 5, 2024.The HPS was adopted via
Resolution 24-36.
Stakeholder Interviews
Stakeholders interviewed in fall 2023 included the following:
• Market-rate developers and architects—These included local professionals involved in
development of multifamily housing, middle housing, and single-family housing.
o Koble Creative
o Shorenstein Properties
o Keith Abel Design LLC
o Blue Palouse Properties
• Non-profit housing providers—These providers represented both the development community
and the lower-income households that may be served by their housing projects.
o Habitat for Humanity
o Mercy Housing Northwest
• City of Lake Oswego staff
o Community Development Director
o Long Range Planning Manager
o Redevelopment Manager
The project team asked stakeholders about the city's greatest housing needs, barriers to development of
needed housing, gaps in affordable housing, and tools and strategies that would be effective in
producing needed housing. Key themes from the stakeholder's responses are summarized below.
KEY HOUSING NEEDS AND GAPS IN THE MARKET
• Affordable housing for low-and moderate-income households
• Middle housing (e.g.,townhomes, duplexes, cottage clusters)
• Opportunities for aging in place
�� 20 Inc. I Lake Oswego Hou4rr rlim nFOF7103 4 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
• Options for more attainable homeownership
(e.g., condos and middle housing)
• Apartments with family-size units (2-3 bedrooms)
• Multi-family housing outside the Town Center
MAJOR HOUSING BARRIERS IN LAKE OSWEGO
• High cost of land in Lake Oswego
• Few large sites to support multi-family housing
• Neighbor opposition to affordable or higher-density housing can drag out the process, adding to
costs
• Code barriers:
o Design overlay standards are highly prescriptive—can add to cost, limit flexibility
o Tree protection/tree planting and landscaping standards
o Open space standards for multi-family housing
o Setbacks and other standards limit middle housing feasibility
• Process barriers:
o Design review process in design districts adds time and cost
o Building permit review can also be slow
o Often need multiple variances, lengthens process and adds uncertainty
• Public improvements (roads, utilities) can be very costly
POTENTIALLY EFFECTIVE STRATEGIES
• Density bonuses for providing public benefits, such as affordable housing or developing near
transit
• Code amendments to remove code barriers
• More flexibility for middle housing
• Streamline permitting
• Simplify design standards and guidelines
• Pre-approved plans
• Property tax abatements for affordable housing
• SDC waivers
• Tax Increment Financing to support affordable housing
• Land banking
• Partnerships with nonprofits and faith organizations
STAKEHOLDER IMPACT
The feedback received from stakeholders greatly influenced the strategies included in the Housing
Production Strategy. For example,the code topics addressed in the Code Audit and Amendments
strategy were refined to address the barriers identified by housing developers and producers. Also,
incentives and other strategies that support affordable housing development (tax abatements,TIF
funding, partnerships)were shaped by these interviews.
EU - �nc. I Lake Oswego Ho A� V 1 E77 FOF7103 5 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
Results of Survey and Polling
In March and April 2024, the City used various survey and polling tools to seek input on the strategies
under consideration for the HPS.This included the online survey,Zoom polling at the virtual Community
Forum, and straw polls taken at the March 1 HPS Task Force meeting and April 2 joint study session with
the Planning Commission and City Council. Input from these groups was based on information provided
in the Initial Strategy Recommendations Memo, and the results of the polls informed the strategies that
were eventually recommended for inclusion in the Draft HPS. A general summary of the results and
detailed online survey results are both included, below.
Strate Survey+ Task City PC Notes/ Follow-up
gy Forum Force Council Actions
Pro-Housing Policies [GENERAL] Support Support - - -
Recommended Strategies
Code Audit and Amendments (Z01) Support Support YES (7:0) YES (3:2) Include all strategies
in Draft HPS.
Property tax exemptions for housing Mild Support
Two
affordable to low-income households Support Commissioners
ong
oners
Public-private partnerships for Support Support
expressed concerns
affordable housing(F04)
about the pre-
Fair Housing Policy and Education (B14) Support Support approved plan sets
Rezone Land (Z02) Mild Support for ADUs strategy
Support
Evaluate accessible design incentives or Strong Support
mandates (A23) Support
Use Tax Increment Financing (TIF)to Split Support
support affordable housing
development (D10)
Affordable Housing Preservation Support Support
Inventory(F19)
Modify System Development (SDC)fee Support Support
schedule (CO2)
Pre-Approved Plan Sets for ADUs (A21) Support Support
Remove or Reduce Minimum Parking - -
Requirements (B01)
EU rc. I Lake Oswego Ho A� rlati 78 FOF7103 6 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
Strategies Needing Further Discussion
Zoning Incentives for Affordable Housing Mild Mild NO (1:6) NO (1:4) Do not include in
(A03) Oppose Support Draft HPS.
There was no interest
expressed by the PC
or CC in combining
this with the code
audit strategy; only
strategy opposed by
public.
Construction Excise Tax(CET) (D09) Mild Support NO (0:5) NO (0:7) Do not include in
Support Draft HPS.
Vertical Housing Development Zone Tax Mild Oppose NO (0:7) NO (1:4) Do not include in
Abatement (E03) Support Draft HPS.
Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption Mild Mild NO (3:4) YES (4:1) Include in Draft HPS,
(MUPTE) (E04) Support Support with criteria that
would only make it
available to housing
with either(1)
accessible design or
(2) units affordable at
80-120%AM I.
Pre-Approved Plan Sets for Middle Mild Mild NO (0:7) NO (0:5) Do not include in
Housing Typologies (A20) Support Support Draft HPS.
HPS Task Force only
recommended this if
paired with an
affordability
requirement.
Contingent Strategies
Housing Trust Funds (D03) - - - - Do not include in
Draft HPS.
Low-Interest Loans/Revolving Loan Fund PC/CC did not
(D13)
express interest in
Community Land Trusts (F03) these strategies.
Preserving Low-Cost Rental Housing to
Mitigate Displacement(F05)
Not Recommended
Homebuyer Opportunity Limited Tax - - - - Do not include in
Exemption (HOLTE) Draft HPS. PC/CC
were fine with
excluding this from
the Draft HPS.
EH 20 1nc. I Lake Oswego Hou4rr arli 4 9FOF7103 7 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
HOUSING STRATEGY SURVEY RESULTS
This section provides a summary of results from an online survey hosted by the City of Lake Oswego as
part of its Housing Production Strategy(HPS).The online survey was available from March 13—31, 2024
and asked participants to indicate their level of support for various housing strategies being considered
for the HPS. A total of 134 participants completed the survey, and additional participants responded to
portions of the survey.
Respondents provided a general level of support for all strategies that were included in the draft HPS.
1. Strategy: Update the Community Development Code to remove barriers to
housing production
Conduct a comprehensive review and update of the rules that guide housing development (the
Community Development Code),to identify and remove or revise regulations that may constrain housing
production.This strategy would focus on addressing requirements that overly limit flexibility, add to
housing costs, and/or delay project approvals. Potential focus areas include: removing barriers to
accessory dwelling units, middle housing, and multi-family housing; incentivizing smaller units;
streamlining requirements in design overlay districts; and facilitating housing development in mixed-use
areas.
Housing Need Addressed: General need for increased housing production and housing choices.
Magnitude: MODERATE—Could have a moderate, indirect impact on new housing production.
Value Percent Responses
Strongly Oppose 20.3% 29
Oppose 14.0% 20
NeutraL(neither support nor oppose) 14.7% 21
Support 26.6% 38
Strongly Support 24.5% 35
7 _
Totals:143
2. Strategy: Property tax exemptions for housing affordable to low-income
households
This strategy exempts property taxes from housing developments that are affordable to low-income
households(those earning less than 60%to 80%of the median family income for the area). By reducing
operating income, property tax exemptions can be a powerful tool to increase the feasibility of
producing low-income housing, and perhaps increase the number of lower cost units that are feasible
within a development.
Housing Need Addressed: Government-subsidized affordable housing for low-income households.
�� 35-itInc. I Lake Oswego Ho ArMrlima i ogto3 8 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
Magnitude: HIGH—Can have a large impact on making low-income affordable housing more feasible to
develop.
Value Percent Responses
Strongly Oppose 217% 31
Oppose 16.8% 24
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 14.7% 21
Support 23.8% 34
Strongly Support 23.1% 33
Totals:143
3. Strategy: Public-private partnerships for affordable housing
Public-private partnerships are arrangements between public and private entities (such as nonprofit or
for-profit housing developers) to build housing, especially housing affordable to people with lower
incomes or specific needs. Public-private partnerships can bring resources to the table that would
otherwise not be available if each organization were to provide housing on its own.
The City could partner with organizations to support their affordable housing efforts in a variety of ways:
• Acquire land and/or donate city-owned land;
• Provide grants or loans for development or rehabilitation projects;
• Provide direct funding; and/or
• Leverage federal,state, and regional resources.
The City is already pursuing this strategy with several ongoing projects, including partnering with Habitat
for Humanity on a project and also with the Sisters of Holy Names of Jesus and Mary and Mercy Housing
NW in facilitating the Mercy Greenbrae affordable housing development at Marylhurst Commons.
Housing Need Addressed: Government-subsidized affordable housing for low-income households.
Magnitude: HIGH—Partnerships are very often a key component of a city contributing to new housing
production.
Value Percent Responses
Strongly Oppose 15.0% 21
Oppose 11.4% 16
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 12.9% 18
Support 30.0% 42
Strongly Support 30.7% 43
Totals:140
�� 20 Inc. I Lake Oswego Ho ArMrlima 8'f FOF7103 9 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
4. Strategy: Fair Housing Policy and Education
Amend the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan—which guides the long-term development and growth of
the city—to explicitly make Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing an official City policy. Federal Fair
Housing laws protect individuals in "protected classes" from housing discrimination—in Oregon,
protected classes include race, color, national origin, religion, disability, sex(includes pregnancy), sexual
orientation, gender identity, age, and marital status.Adding this as a policy would demonstrate Lake
Oswego's commitment to reversing discrimination, exclusion, and concentrations of wealth in the city.
The strategy also involves other actions to educate staff and decision makers about fair housing issues,
and to provide fair housing information to residents, property owners, realtors, lenders, and others
involved in real estate transactions.
Housing Need Addressed:This strategy would not directly address identified housing needs in most
cases, but it would help prevent housing discrimination against protected classes.
Magnitude: LOW—Will not directly contribute to housing production but could bolster the City's focus
on equity and affordability in its housing programs and investments.
Value Percent Responses
Strongly Oppose 16.4% 23
Oppose 9.6% 13
ma
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 17.6% 24
Support 32.4% 44
Strongly Support 23.5% 32
Totals:136
5. Strategy: Rezone selected areas to support residential development
This strategy involves rezoning commercial or other non-residentially zoned properties to allow for
housing development in those areas, especially multi-family housing. It could also involve rezoning
lower-density areas to allow for higher-density housing. Areas to rezone typically would include land that
is close to existing high-density areas and/or existing services, and larger parcels of land. This strategy
addresses the fact that the city faces a shortage of residential land across all zone types to meet long-
term housing needs.
Housing Need Addressed: General need for increased housing production. Could also address the
shortage of higher-density land by rezoning lower-density land.
Magnitude: MODERATE TO HIGH—Might be relatively high given the limited supply and high demand for
buildable residential land in the community.
�� 3dlitInc. I Lake Oswego Ho ArMrlima789FOF7103 10 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
Value Percent Responses
Strongly Oppose 23.1% 31
Oppose 16.4% 22
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 12.7% 17
Support 24.6% 33
Strongly Support 23.1% 31
Totals:134
6. Strategy: Evaluate accessible design incentives or mandates
This strategy aims to increase development of housing that is accessible for seniors and people with
disabilities or mobility challenges through either incentives or requirements to develop this type of
housing. Potential incentives include height or density bonuses and reduced property taxes. Potential
mandates include requiring a certain number of units in a multi-unit development to have enhanced
accessibility.The City would need to further evaluate the feasibility and trade-offs associated with these
programs before implementing a particular action.
Housing Need Addressed: Housing for people with physical disabilities and mobility challenges, including
seniors.
Magnitude: MODERATE—Depending on how the strategy is structured, it could lead to production of a
significant number of new units with accessibility features.
Value Percent Responses
Strongly Oppose 9.6% 13
mi
Oppose 3.7% 5
■
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 18.5% 25
Support 42.2% 57
Strongly Support 25.9% 35
Totals:135
7. Strategy: Use Tax Increment Financing to support affordable housing
development
Tax increment financing, or TIF, is a way for the City to pay for projects or improvements within a certain
area (an "urban renewal area" or"TIF district"), like building roads, parks, or housing.These projects
make land in the area more valuable, and the City uses the extra revenue it gets from the higher
property taxes to reinvest in development or redevelopment within the area.TIF can be a direct source
of funding for projects that meet public goals such as affordable housing or mixed-use buildings that
�� 3dlitInc. I Lake Oswego Ho sirMar ima 83 FOF7103 11 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary (DRAFT) 6/14/2024
might not otherwise be feasible.The City has been considering expanding the use of urban renewal and
TIF in Lake Oswego—particularly in the Foothills neighborhood—and could make affordable housing a
priority in those efforts.
Housing Need Addressed: Government-subsidized affordable housing for low-income households.
Magnitude: HIGH —TIF funds would enable the City to acquire land, partner with housing providers,
contribute to public improvements, and take other actions that could have a big impact on development
of affordable housing in targeted areas.
Value Pcrccnt Responses
Strongly Oppose 34
Oppose 17.2% 23
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 14.2% 19
Support 25.4% 34
Strongly Support 17.9% 24
Totals:134
8. Strategy: Affordable Housing Preservation Inventory
Prepare an inventory of subsidized and other already existing affordable housing to support proactive
policies intended to preserve existing affordable housing. The inventory would be used to target
potential properties for implementation of an affordable housing preservation strategy.
Housing Need Addressed: Housing for low-income residents.
Magnitude: LOW—Will not contribute to new housing production but will contribute to the preservation
of existing affordable housing.
Value
Strongly Oppose
Oppose 6.7
MB
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 23.1%
Support 38.8%
Strongly Support 20.1%
12 of 27
300Inc. I Lake Oswego Housisirg apli ti98sr fo3
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
9. Strategy: Modify System Development Charge (SDC) fees so they area scaled
by unit size
SDCs are one-time charges on new development that help pay for the costs of expanding public facilities
to serve new development.The City of Lake Oswego charges SDCs for water, sewer, parks, and
transportation improvements. This strategy involves updating the way the SDCs are structured so they
are tied more directly to the size of a home.This also better matches the fees to the development's
impact on the system, since smaller housing units typically have fewer occupants and therefore less
impact on water, sewer, or transportation facilities.
Housing need addressed: Would facilitate development of smaller, more attainable housing units that
may be affordable to moderate-income and smaller households.
Magnitude: LOW TO MODERATE—This tool may enable some projects to produce a greater number of
smaller units, thus increasing production of more units and expand housing choices somewhat.
Value Percent Responses
Strongly Oppose 11.4% 15
Oppose 6.1% 8
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 18.2% 24
Support 35.6% 47
Strongly Support 28.8% 38
Totals:132
10. Strategy: Create pre-approved plan sets for accessory dwelling units (ADUs)
Pre-approved plan sets are building plans that have been reviewed in advance for conformance with
zoning and building codes.The City could make such pre-approved plans available for ADUs,which are
small homes located on the same property as a single-family home.ADUs offer opportunities for family
members to live on the same site but in a separate dwelling, or can be rented out, allowing the
homeowners to supplement their income. Pre-approved plan sets can make ADUs easier to build and
reduce costs through reduced design fees and faster permit timelines.The plan sets could also be
designed to be accessible (consistent with the accessibility strategy discussed earlier).
Housing Need Addressed: Increased housing choices within existing neighborhoods. Increased rental
opportunities. Options for multigenerational housing. Opportunities for aging in place.
Magnitude: MODERATE—Would likely lead to more development of ADUs in the city, which could
increase the number of available rental properties and increase housing choices in developed
neighborhoods.
�� 300,1nc. I Lake Oswego Ho sirMar ima 85 FOF7103 13 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
Value Percent Responses
Strongly Oppose 15.3% 20
Oppose 9.2% 12
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 17.6% 23
Support 32.8% 43
Strongly Support 25.2% 33
Totals:131
11. Strategy: Zoning bonuses for affordable housing
This strategy involves allowing additional building height, density, or floor area, or relaxing other zoning
standards for affordable housing.These types of bonuses allow affordable developers to make more
efficient use of land, fit more units into a development, and make their projects more financially viable.
The City already allows a limited height or density bonus for affordable developments in certain zones
and could consider enhancing or expanding this program or adopting a new bonus, such as reduced
open space for affordable housing.
Housing Need Addressed: Government-subsidized affordable housing for low-income households.
Magnitude: LOW TO MODERATE—Might lead to a small increase in the number or percentage of
affordable housing units.
Value Percent Responses
Strongly Oppose 26.0% 34
Oppose 20.6% 27
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 22.1% 29
Support 19.8% 26
Strongly Support 11.5% 15
Totals:131
12. Strategy: Adopt a Construction Excise Tax (CET) to fund affordable housing
projects and programs
This strategy applies a tax on construction projects, and the funds generated from the tax can be used to
fund affordable housing or other needed housing. Most cities using this program have adopted a CET tax
of up to 1%on construction projects. Cities have options to exempt certain types of development—such
as smaller units or multi-family housing—and affordable housing is already exempted. Some cities have
used CET to fund new affordable development, purchase property for affordable housing, provide
financial incentives, and provide down payment assistance for first-time homebuyers. CET is one of the
few available locally-controlled sources of money to help fund affordable housing.
�� 300,1nc. I Lake Oswego HousisirMrlimr82FOF7103 14 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
Housing Need Addressed: Government-subsidized affordable housing for low-income households.
Magnitude: HIGH—The revenue potential of a CET in Lake Oswego is potentially quite high and could
support a significant amount affordable housing development in the city.
Value Percent Responses
Strongly Oppose 19.2.5 25
Oppose 16.9% 22
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 16.9% 22
Support 25.4% 33
Strongly Support 21.5% 28
Totals:130
13. Strategy: Adopt a Vertical Housing Development Zone tax abatement in
targeted areas
This strategy is intended to encourage multi-story mixed-use development (ground-floor businesses with
housing above) and affordable housing in areas designated by the City.The program allows a property
tax reduction for 10 years, which can make mixed-use development more financially viable, as it is often
a challenging form of development. Projects earn additional tax reductions if they include housing units
that are affordable to low-income households.
Housing Need Addressed: High-density housing in targeted areas of the city. Increased housing choices
in areas with strong access to goods, services, and transit.
Magnitude: LOW TO MODERATE—This program has the potential to encourage some mixed-use
development in designated areas.
Value Percent Responses
Strongly Oppose 14.1% 18
Oppose 8.6% 11
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 28.1% 36
Support 36.7% 47
Strongly Support 12.5% 16
Totals:128
14. Strategy: Adopt a Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE)
This is a 10-year property tax exemption for multi-family or middle housing (e.g.,triplexes and
fourplexes)with particular features or at particular price points. MUPTE is a flexible tax abatement
EU - �nc. I Lake Oswego Ho sirMa4 r E87 FOF7103 15 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
strategy that can be used in various ways to encourage development of specific types of needed housing.
The City has broad discretion as to how to structure the program. Eligibility criteria could include
requirements for affordability, accessibility/universal design, unit size, or other desirable features.
Housing Need Addressed: More attainable housing choices, including multi-family and middle housing
options. Could also encourage apartments with family-sized units (2-3 bedrooms) and accessible housing
options for seniors and people with disabilities.
Magnitude: MODERATE—Could encourage production of more multi-unit housing that meets needs not
currently being met by the private market.
Value Percent Responses
Strongly Oppose 19.0% 21
Oppose 15.1% 19
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 23.8% 30
Support 34.1% 43
Strongly Support 7.9% 10
Totals:126
15. Strategy: Create pre-approved plan sets for middle housing types
This is similar to the strategy of pre-approved plan sets for ADUs, except this would encourage more
development of middle housing types, such as duplexes, triplexes, and cottage clusters. Pre-approved
plan sets can make these housing options easier to build and reduce costs through lower design fees and
faster permit timelines.This could attract developers that typically develop only single-family housing to
get involved in building middle housing. The plan sets could also be designed to be accessible (consistent
with the accessibility strategy discussed earlier).
Housing Need Addressed: Increased housing choices, including more attainable homeownership
options.
Magnitude: MODERATE—Would likely lead to more development of middle housing in the city, but cost
savings to builders wouldn't necessarily translate to reduced sale prices or rents.
�� 30 Inc. I Lake Oswego Ho ArMrlim d ogto3 16 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
Value Percent Responses
Strongly Oppose 15.6% 20
Oppose 18.0% 23
Neutral(neither support nor oppose) 19.5% 25
Support 31.3% 40
Strongly Support 15.6% 20
Totals.128
16. Strategy: Remove or reduce minimum parking requirements —no question
asked
17. Do you have any thoughts or concerns about any of the strategies
described in this survey that you would like to share with the City? (open ended
responses)
1. Removal of parking mandates is a bad idea.There is little rapid transit in town and individuals
must get to work. Cars will be forced to park on the street in areas where there is limited street
parking.
2. Don't allow developers to raze old buildings and build multi-million dollar homes making Lake
Oswego unaffordable to families who want to live there.
3. The city is already becoming overwhelmed we have seen a sharp increase in traffic, as the
population has increased, and this is puffing a drain on services - by simply adding more
affordable houses we increase the density and thereby further increase the strain on what was
once a comfortably sized small city.
4. What about allowing Tiny Houses on lots with alleys? They can be added or removed as needed.
A simple way to offer lower housing costs.
5. It will destroy the atmosphere and the character of the city and many people who lived here for
decades will move out
6. Stop taxing us.The people living here are trying to afford staying in their homes.The constant
bonds and taxes are making that very difficult.
7. Lake Oswego is a great place to live and if someone wants to live here they can find a way, like I
did. Like we all did. I am not rich,far from it. Where was our hand out?That is what you are
creating. Keep it fair,will you subsidize ALL of the lower income families in Lake Oswego?Will
you reduce my taxes when I retire and they become a massive burden? People need to work
harder and make it on their own. Sorry sometimes you need to live in an area you can afford.
The crying of unfairness is getting old, I want a new Lexus, but I don't ask the manufacturer to
reduce rates or give me a deal, I buy a Toyota.The city needs to stay far away from playing in the
real estate business let the private sector do that.
�� 3dlitInc. I Lake Oswego HousisirMrli a489FOF7103 17 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
8. It seems that the cities options for affordable house only consist of apartments or attached
houses. What about people who want to have a home that is standalone. Perhaps it would be
worth looking into all the developers who buy smaller affordable homes and turn them into
huge expensive monstrosity.They are literally taking affordable homes out of the hands of
people in Lake Oswego.
9. I would like to know if it's been taken in to account how all this construction will affect the
surrounding nature density? Is there a requirement for preserving our tree canopy?What is the
environmental impact of all this proposed construction?The natural beauty of this are is
important! Please consider an initiative regarding tree replacement! Perhaps a requirement that
if one is cut one, one must be planted.
10. The city should consider goal 5 (natural resources) and goal 1 (citizen input) of the comp plan as
it relates to the environmental impact of housing.These decisions cannot be made in a "silo".
The comp plan is mentioned once in this survey-in strategy number four relating to fairness in
housing.The city should not cherry pick portions of the comp plan to suit developers or appear
DEI-minded. If we have an environment with noise and air pollution, and increased heat, and
disconnection from trees and insects and birds, we can have all the houses in the world, but we
will be unhappy due to increased crime, reduced property values, and physical, mental, and
spiritual illness.
11. Either one can afford to live in a certain city or not. It's out of control to mandate government to
implement services/policies to accommodate those who can't. It's really that simple.
12. Concerns with loss of unique characteristics of neighborhoods. Loss of older homes and mature
tree canopy. New builds that lack character or charm and are built with low quality materials.
13. I really just would like to see more new housing of any type built in LO (this includes and is not
limited to any and all new apartment buildings of any visual appearance built anywhere in the
city). I have lived in LO my whole life, but as a college student about to enter the workforce, I'm
concerned I'll never be able to buy or rent anywhere in LO because of the rising costs(and while
I never expect LO to be a cheap place to live, I think it should be a possibility for people like me
making near the US median salary). I think increasing the supply of new housing should be the
#1 priority of the city with these plans, and I see cities like Austin,TX as success stories for
reducing the rent burden of their residents by allowing the building of tens of thousands of new
housing units — resulting in significant decreases in rent prices. I also see multi-unit dwellings
as a bonus for the City of Lake Oswego, because they add multiple new citizens to the city's tax
base, while requiring public service expenditures that are far less per citizen (than in a
comparable number of people in single family homes) because of the housing density.
14. Strategy#16 did not have a response option, although I support it fully, so long as the city
continues its commitment to regionally integrated mass transportation and bicycling lanes.
15. You can easily address housing issues for seniors on fixed incomes by providing property tax
discounts for people over 65 and provide homestead property tax exemption to encourage
home ownership rather than rental.
16. Do not reduce parking or build high rise buildings. Schools will be impacted by more families so
it is sometime to consider.As well as increased traffic.
17. This important project has s in the right track. Keep moving forward with a sense of urgency.
18. Na
�� 300,1nc. I Lake Oswego Ho ArMrlima a ogto3 18 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
19. 1.) I strongly support removing minimum parking requirements 2.)As a low income senior
dependent on Social Security,the burden of meeting my property taxes is becoming almost
impossible. I have owned my house for a long time and would like to age in place. I don't want
to be forced out of my home because I cannot afford the taxes.
20. Recommend changes to strict protections for trees in our city to allow home owners to build
more ADUs and middle housing on their land.
21. There needs to be more options for seniors so they can stay in LO.There is no real tax breaks for
seniors as the deferred property tax is just a loan that has to be paid back. I support housing for
low income/moderate income households. Start with the seniors,they have been paying
property taxes for 50 years and need a break to age in place.This state is very backwards on tax
breaks for seniors.
22. I think that the approach to most construction for existing homeowners is restrictive by the City.
For example,ADUs should not have the restrictions on them. The City should be working with
community members not making it impossible for anyone to modify their property as they feel
fit, obviously safely.
23. Removing parking is a mistake that will lead to increased engine idling due to congestion and
decreased pedestrian safety for a generation as businesses are choked through lack of customer
space. It will make the city less accessible to elders and families. Can the city designate
mandatory"waiting spaces"? It's already hard to pick up and drop off my children from dance,
which I certainly can't do by bicycle with my three other children under 10 in tow. Less space for
vehicular movement means less commerce and less tax revenue.
24. Reduced parking needs to be offset with enhancement to public transportation
25. I strongly disagree with reducing parking requirements as part of developing middle/affordable
housing. I also strongly disagree with the City's continuing to allow greedy developers (e.g.
Monogram and Renaissance) to purchase perfectly good, relatively affordable homes, destroy
the houses, and erect over-sized, highly-priced, mcmonster houses in their place.
26. Concerns- need to have parking to support multi family housing. Most residents living in these
units will have at least one car.Also concerned that traffic will increase significantly with these
plans. - LOSD class sizes are already too large; not sure how the schools can support big
increases in multi family housing especially if property tax exemptions are made. - preserving
our parks and green spaces needs to be a priority.
27. this last state mandate strongly concerns me as someone who is disabled
28. It's pretty simple, Lake Oswego is expensive. You can build 5 low income units in LO for the same
price you can build 20 elsewhere. Every measure proposed is increasing our density and
increasing costs of living for those in our community while infrastructure gets no improvements.
Those living here will reach a point they can longer afford to age in place forcing their sale of
what has been their family home. Traffic continues to increase with no additional roads or
improvement to roads occurs. The planning department and existing codes do not allow
homeowners to build what they choose due to a myriad of rules that will all be thrown out the
window if one chooses to add a home via ADU,why is this ok when you won't even allow a
second kitchen in a home? I am aware of the State's housing requirements but they DO NOT FIT
OUR COMMUNITY! People work hard and pay a fortune to live here, our property taxes alone
are higher than many pay for mortgage and everything you are proposing will simply increases
costs while reducing the quality of our community and the quality of life in our community.
�� 3dlitInc. I Lake Oswego Ho ArMrlima 9'f FOF7103 19 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
29. My family and many other community members are concerned about the city taking our parks,
like Springbrook and Waluga, and turning them into housing developments. Kids use
Springbrook to walk to school, explore, connect with nature, run trails during gym class, and
bike. It's also home to many animals. It's a treasured part of the community by kids and adults.
Our parks are a big part of what make LO unique and beautiful. Please don't take Springbrook
annd other parks away from the community.
30. The City is beholden to large developers of large houses because their construction generates
greater taxes, most of which (greater than 50%of my tax bill)go toward LOSD bonds. We would
have been wise to use some of the land in First Addition where older homes were demolished
and large new trendy homes were built, and devote them to multi-family dwellings like
townhomes. Public transit is almost non-existent in LO without driving to a transit mall or to a
neighborhood with a bus stop and on-street parking.Tri-Met schedules are infrequent,
inconvenient, and the rides are long.Affordable housing and/or middle-income housing doesn't
make sense unless they are near public housing, especially if we are required to reduce or
eliminate the already low parking inventory.Thinking logically,there are almost always 2 drivers
per household, and almost always 2 vehicles because, in order to afford housing costs,there are
2 workers per household.That means there needs to be 2 parking spaces per household or living
unit. If the household has student drivers with vehicles, you need more space. Through
eminent domain, the City forced out a couple of businesses so they could rebuild the water
treatment plant, which idea has since been scrapped. But the land is still being considered for
affordable/middle-income waterfront housing?Seriously?The large plats of land that are
available, and there aren't many, are in zoned industrial areas.This reminds me of the Projects of
Chicago, Detroit and New York, or"Planned Ghettos". In addition,we do not have the
infrastructure in place to handle our current population much less an increased one due to an
increased number of housing units. I understand the Governor has mandated changes and I
don't think she fully grasps the magnitude of the negative effect on Lake Oswego's livability. As
one of those people trying to "age in place", I fully appreciate what our current inventory lacks in
terms of places for me to move when the time comes. I can't afford to live anywhere other than
my mortgage-free 2-story home.The "creep" effect of our proximity to Portland has brought
more people to LO panhandling in parking lots and on sidewalks and generally undesirable-
looking people wandering around our neighborhoods.And by that description I mean a young
white male with falling jeans and bare chest stumbling down the hill near Kruse Way Place at
Boones Ferry Road (it was about 45 that day), or another young white male in a dark hoody and
extremely baggy pants grabbing his pants to keep from exposing himself. I have never seen this
type of thing in the 37 years I have lived here. I'd like to keep LO livable, and I'd like to continue
to feel safe here so whatever strategies the City ultimately adopts, I hope they don't negatively
impact my, and others' feeling of well-being. A challenge to be sure and thank you for the
opportunity to share my opinion.
31. I think the State mandated rule to "Remove or reduce minimum parking requirements" is an
extremely bad idea.This will push drivers to park in residential neighborhoods causing friction
between the neighborhood, businesses, pedestrians and future home owners. I see this as a first
step toward going to a permit system to park in front of my own house.
32. While I generally support increased housing for those in need, it is difficult to support an
increase in housing in Lake Oswego without also expanding our infrastructure to accommodate
�� 3dlitInc. I Lake Oswego Ho ArMrlima799FOF7103 20 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
an influx of 1000 people. This is a relatively small town, without amenities a large city offers.
There are regions in Oregon with expansive land...why aren't we creating new clusters of low
income housing in areas that can manage a massive influx of cars and people with daily living
needs? Why are we needing to cram everyone in to these area/towns with over loaded
capacity? I realize we can't reverse federal laws, but whatever can be done to minimize the
impact on Lake Oswegos charm and livability, should be prioritized. The Mercato Grove which
has "unaffordable" housing and is mixed use, is a complete eyesore because of its height and
grandiose size,and robs our city of its natural beauty. The parking area in the center should be a
piazza where people can gather. The strategies described in this survey all seem to diminish
quality of life in Lake Oswego. I am not sure what the answers are, but I lean towards cottage
clusters, built near downtown or Foothills,over massive apt buildings any day.
33. In general, I am opposed to government subsidy of new house, or rezoning to increase density. I
prefer seeing further development outside of Lake Oswego where the natural setting has already
been obliterated by suburban development.
34. Limit teardowns!
35. More affordable house typically leads to more litter,vandalism and crime. Lake Oswego doesn't
necessarily need to adopt liberal housing policies just because Portland does.
36. Of the 40 percent of current households with incomes less than $100K, how many are owned by
retired folks who are living in their homes with no mortgage. Protecting those generally older
homes and affordability for seniors should be an important consideration.
37. It's a mistake to reduce parking.There's not enough safe public transit. Even in Portland,the
MAX runs without transit police and when I commuted by MAX I felt unsafe on many occasions
and I'm no stranger to big cities. In LO we just have a few bus routes. We're a car-centric city.
38. Reduce property taxes for seniors living on fixed income, utility bills also!!!!
39. As a lifelong LO resident, I have no problem with encouraging more ADUs, low income
residences and bringing that diverse population into LO.
40. The parking issue is a major concern for me. The City cannot put its head in the sand and think
for one minute that people don't have cars. You MUST provide adequate parking for the housing
that is being built. This includes the hotel project at 1st and B. I believe that the City is ignoring
the impact on current residents when it is reducing the required number of parking spaces.
PLEASE WAKE UP AND CHANGE THIS WAY OF THINKING!!! I don't care that it costs more for
developers to build adequate parking. I don't care that you can't have as many housing units if
you also build parking. The people who live there NOW should be treated with more
consideration.
41. This type of social engineering always has more negative, if unintentioned, consequences than
benefits. It is a massive waste of resources that has no measurable benefits for current
resident/taxpayers and greatly expands the role of government in our lives. The primary roles of
local government are public safety, providing adequate and safe infrastructure,fair and effective
land use and ensuring a public environment where environmentally friendly space is made
available for recreation. The rest is mostly political ideology.
42. I like the idea of middle housing, but do not like the pre approved plans idea because I don't
want to see the same clusters all over town. I like them to be unique to the area and
neighborhood.
�� 3dlitInc. I Lake Oswego Ho ArMrlima 93 FOF7103 21 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
43. Based on my experience as a Lake Oswego homeowner and history of working with low income
populations I have a couple of thoughts: 1) increase/preserve starter homes that allow and
promote home ownership by low and moderate income families with children and a pathway to
our rich resources LO (parks, schools, etc.) 2) Identify what role developers can play beyond just
making a profit 3) Keep engaging residents
44. Well prepared proposals and survey!
45. Lake Oswego does not need more housing.
46. Turning Lake Oswego into Portland's Pearl District is a major concern for me, a 30 yr resident.
47. Builders need to build simple, homes with good bones. Cut out the granite countertops but keep
well insulated walls. No more flashy homes that are out of financial reach. &Yes we need
parking. 2 per unit. &charging stations in apartment complexes. Limit corporate ownership for
renting so more affordable to buy.
48. Lowering our existing home values, creating population density and infrastructure issues by
adding more people. I'm strongly opposed to these ideas which is basically trying to sell
overdevelopment in the. name of fair, affordable housing. Not everyone can afford everywhere,
it's ridiculous to make towns forced to add cheaper housing than the market allows
49. STOP BUILDING MULTI MILLION DOLLAR HOMES AND CONDOS. You all are complete idiots.
Stop building unaffordable e
50. Glad to see any and all housing in LO!
51. Our housing shortage is 100%due to 50 years of restrictive zoning. Open up all LO
neighborhoods to any development and stop nitpicking. Setbacks, FAR, driveway and garage
regulations? Gatekeeping, homogenous NIMBY BS. Throw away Euclidean zoning and let LO
change according to its needs NOW, not 50 years ago.
52. I feel that the current water rates are inequitable and don't align with LO's affordable housing
goals. One way to support affordable housing and lower income residents like myself would be a
reevaluation of water and sewer charges. I live alone, shower every other day, do 2 loads of
laundry per week, 3 dishwasher loads. I don't have a driveway and I live in a small townhome so
my surface/stormwater impact is minimal. I also don't water a lawn because I don't have a yard.
And yet my water bill is only$10 a month less than a family of 3 that I know who live on a
double lot with a home, garage and additional outbuilding. People like me are subsidizing the
water bills of more affluent people with huge stormwater impacts from long driveways and roofs
covering 5000 square foot homes. Plus their high water usage for pools, lawns and family water
needs barely moves up their water costs. Because the base rate is the same for all people
regardless of their property size, usage and income level,the system is set up to reward the
wealthy while putting an unfair burden on lower income people. I currently have zero incentive
to conserve water as I could let my tap run all day and my bill would hardly increase at all. I think
there needs to be a tiered base rate system that addresses property size, surface area for
stormwater runoff and income level. And an incentivized lower usage rate for people who's
usage falls below a certain amount.
53. Any incentives should only apply to affordable units, not market rate dwellings.There should be
a strategy to leverage regional and state resources and partnerships.
54. My biggest concern is control of security and crime. How do we ensure our city stays safe?And -
how do we ensure we avoid homelessness issues?
55. Please don't ruin our community!
�� 3dlitInc. I Lake Oswego Ho ArMrlima 9srog 03 22 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary(DRAFT) 6/14/2024
56. get rid of rent control. 98%of economists say it is a bad idea. Get rid of the tree code. It is
counter-productive to a healthy urban forest. becauseof it no one plants trees that will grow
large. with no new trees the forest will end.
57. This issue has been under discussion for decades. I hope this survey/project actually leads
to...something? Someday?
58. We struggle with finding parking as it is in Lake Grove, and you want to take that away? My
clients are seniors and had to walk two blocks just to eat at Gubanc's after the Vity took up the
parking,there has to be a better way.
59. Housing cost is extremely high. How about a rent break on taxes?
60. The location of high density needs to be where there is transportation and grocery options
61. Support services (schools, emergency services, grocery, restaurants, parking, more traffic
solutions and so much more) must be planned for with any new housing that may be
considered.
62. Reducing parking is a problem. It should only be done for housing along public transit lines.
63. I am concerned about losing the character of Lake Oswego for sake of new development. I'm
concerned that we will lose our natural beauty and spaciousness. More development means
more traffic, more strain on community systems, and ultimately, a more crowded place to live. I
oppose the assumption here that Lake Oswego needs to develop more housing. Development
control has more or less worked to preserve the small town feel and beauty here for years.
64. As many other Oregon cities have with Middle Housing and in general code, Lake Oswego needs
to include detached units (duplexes, etc) and encourage universal design.
Demographic Questions
1. What is your relationship to Lake Oswego? Check all that apply.
100
75
a) 50
a)
a
25
0 -
I live in I live in I live I work in I regularly
the City of unincorporated outside of lake visit Lake
Lake area near Lake Oswego Oswego
Oswego Lake Oswego for
Oswego reasons
other than
work
2. Do you rent or own your home?
�� 300,1nc. I Lake Oswego Ho A siMrAttenGiaP8d1t3 23 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary (DRAFT) 6/14/2024
Value Percent R, pon
I live in the City of Lake Oswego 95.2% 11"
I live in unincorporated area near Lake Oswego 2.4%
I live outside of Lake Oswego 1.6%
I work in lake Oswego 8.8%
I regularly visit Lake Oswego for reasons other than 3.2%
work
3. What type of housing do you currently live in?
Value Percent Responses
Rr_rt 1190 15
Own 88.1 '0 111
Totals:126
4. What is your age?
Value Percent Responses
Detached single-family home 75.8% 94
Duplex,triplex,or quadplex 4.0% 5
Townhouse(attached home on its own lot) 9.7% 12
Apartment or condo 10.5% 13
Totals:124
�� 3 -0,1nc. I Lake Oswego HouAsiMegitgOsVitate80
63 24 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary (DRAFT) 6/14/2024
5. What is your approximate household income (before taxes)?
Value Percent Responses
18-24 0.8 1
25-34 0.8% 1
35-44 21.0% 25
1
45-54 14.3% 17
55-64 22.7% 27
65 and older 40.3% 48
Totals: 119
6. What is your race/ethnicity? Check all that apply.
Value Percent Responses
White 87 9 94
Black or African American 0.9% 1
American Indian or Alaska Native 1.9% 2
Asian 1.9% 2
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 0.9% 1
Hispanic or Latino 1.9% 2
Other(please describe): 11.2% 12
�� igitc. I Lake Oswego HouAsicOgitgOsVitaip80
63 25 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary (DRAFT) 6/14/2024
Other (please describe): Count
American 1
Doesn't matter 1
Human 1
N/A 1
mixed 1
prefer not to disclose 1
why does it matter 1
Totals 7
7. What is the highest level of education you've received?
Value Percent Responses
High school degree or equivalent(e.g.GED) 2.5% 3
•
Some college 8.4% 10
Associate's degree 4.2% 5
■
Bachelors Degree 34.5% 41
Graduate Degree 50.4% 60
Totals:119
Engagement Evaluation
Even though this project included a thorough engagement effort, with various opportunities for
community members and stakeholders to participate, there are opportunities for improvement in future
engagement practices.
The city did include members of historically underrepresented groups and marginalized communities—
including renters and people of color—as part of the HPS Task Force, and also engaged these
communities through discussions with the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Advisory Board. However, the
City could make more efforts to more directly engage with these communities, for example, through
�� ittInc. I Lake Oswego Housic9e005Vitai080
43 26 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
Public Engagement Summary (DRAFT) 6/14/2024
targeted focus groups.The City could consider partnering with organizations that specialize in that type
of engagement—such as organizations that work with Hispanic and Latino or other culturally-specific
communities.
Also,the city lacks tools and platforms that make virtual/hybrid participation accessible and engaging for
everyone.The project incorporated some tools (e.g., the Alchemer survey platform and Zoom)to engage
community members virtually. However, in the future, a virtual engagement platform like Bang the Table
could make virtual engagement more accessible to those who cannot attend or commit to an
event/meeting at a set date and time, and could facilitate more robust community conversations.
�� ittInc. I Lake Oswego Ho G'HMENT E 9Tv0 43 27 of 27
EXHIBIT D-1
APPENDIX C:
PRE- HPS SURVEY RESULTS
EU 3 :888a ATTAC ga 17PAu "'Y63 Housing Production Strategy
EXHIBIT D-1
Encourage Reduce
Needed Increase
Housing? Affordability? rent
All Categories burden?
tt Strategy Comments(LO) Description
We allow ADUs,manufactured homes,and housing units of 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),
Zoning Changes to Facilitate the Use of all sizes in most residential zones.We allow multi-family 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
Ao2 yes Yes Yes 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
Lower-Cost Housing Types residential in high-denisty residential zones.We do not allow
the other housing types mentioned in the description. 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.
A03 FAR,Density,or Height Bonuses for yes Yes Yes We allow a limited height or density bonus for affordable 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
Affordable Housing developments in the WIG-OC and R-DD zones feasible.
A04 Housing Rehabilitation Codes Yes No No We administer the state building code that accomplishes this Housing rehabilitation codes(or rehab codes)are building codes designed to reduce the costs of renovating and rehabilitating existing buildings,thereby facilitating the continued
as a part of House Bill 2001 compliance. availability and habitability of older rental housing and owner-occupied homes.This is especially helpful to facilitate conversation into multiplex housing.
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.
We have removed occupancy requirements for ADUs and 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
A05 Code Provisions for ADUs Yes No No expanded maximum ADU size to 1,000 sq.ft.for internal development and enable more widespread production.For example,easing occupancy requirements,allowing more ADUs on a lot,and expanding maximum size requirements.
remodels of primary dwellings. 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.
We do not specify ownership of cottages so that both 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
renters/owners can live on the same cluster.Our minimum further defining cottage cluster design and development standards,housing code can effectively address a predictable process for developers,and potentially encourage greater
site size,setbacks and building coverage requirements do not 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
A08 Promote Cottage Cluster Housing Yes No No prohibit cottage cluster development on smaller lots,and we 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
have design standards for cottage clusters that implement HB 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
2001.We allow shared underground infrastructure for neighborhood contexts.Other ideas include:uniformed codes,form-based codes,and allowing shared underground infrastructure when practical(e.g.sewer lines from each cottage
cottages on one single lot. can connect to one main that runs out to street,rather than 8 parallel lines out to street).
We have short-term rental regulations that require the rental 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
A09 Short-Term Rentals Regulations Yes Yes Yes is a home occupation where a resident lives on the lot.STRs 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
are not permitted in ADUs where the ADU received an SDC fee 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
waiver. registration requirements for all short term rentals.
We require affordable housing(affordable to those earning 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
or development bonuses to offset the cost of affordable housing units.Careful consideration should be employed when enacting inclusionary zoning.Note:A number of
80%or less of AMI)on a portion of the Marylhurst Special
A10 Inclusionary Zoning Yes Yes Yes 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
District and a portion of the West Lake Grove Design District 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
(W LG-OC zone)where multifamily use is allowed.
result.
We dothis for affordable housing developments that are 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
Add Restrictive Covenants to Ensure withinin the Marylhurst Special District or the West Lake Grove
All Affordability yes Yes Yes Design District,and for any affordable housing development 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
that receives SDC fee waivers. unable to accommodate changed circumstances.
AB FAR&Density Transfer Provisions Yes Yes Yes We allow development rights to be transferred from areas 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
protected as sensitive lands. attained and covenants ensure long term benefit.This strategy assumes that there are adequate,realistic,and relatively easy receiving areas for TRDs.
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
Re-examine Requirements for Ground- We have a very limited area within our downtown where a
A34 yes No No 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
floor Retail/Commercial ground-floor commercial requirement applies. should be driven by market demand;with residential use more beneficial to meet needed housing in some cases(eg.affordable housing).
The mixed-use zoning that is in place near transit-Metro
'town centers',which also serve as CFAs,allows residential use Adopt increased density codes by right near transit stations,with higher levels of density near high capacity/high frequency stations,then stepping hack into residential areas.
A38 Increase Density near Transit Stations yes No No and does not limit density.These areas have Automaticallybased on transportation corridor classifications;meaning der ROWS t more flexibility land use byht.This will add some flexibility for new transit
and Regional Multi-use Trails upzone po gwi get yinrig y
developed/redeveloped with s of high-density(50-100 units 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.
per acre)development in recent years.
We don't have policies to encourage them,but we do allow 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
ADS Legalize and Encourage Tiny Homes yes No No tiny houses to be constructed as primary or accessory 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
and Villages dwellings,and as cotttages within cottage cluster 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
developments. 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.
The City has removed minimum parking requirements within
Remove or Reduce Minimum Parking 1/2-mile of priority transit,which includes the entire 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
001 yes No No Downtown Town Center,and will remove minimum parking 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
Requirements requirements in the City's other climate-friendly area(Lake without having the burden of parking minimums.Consider removing parking requirements near transit or for affordable housing.
Grove Village Center)to comply with CFEC rules.
Expedited permitting will help to reduce costs of development of Needed Housing as identified by the City.Consider projects with director indirect funding from local government as
003 Expedite Permitting for Needed yes No No The City has a practice of expediting the permitting process 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
Housing Types for deed-restricted affordable units. 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.
Cv 3 :OOS1 APAE85 411 711% -TO'f FOF7fo3
EXHIBIT D-1
The City allows up to two flag lots,in addition to a"non-flag"
Boy Reduce Regulatory Barriers to Lot yes No No lot that meets minimum frontage requirements.This can limit 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
Division the total number of lots created,notwithstanding the max number of units allowed.
minimum lot size(maximum density)allowed by the zone.
The City allows minor variances and residential infill design
Flexible Regulatory Concessions for variances for all buildings,including affordable housing Often,nonprofit housing developers and housing agencies face regulatory impediments to building affordable housing,which can often derail projects.This strategy providesa
BoB yes Yes Yes developments;the City also offers a height or density bonus 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
Affordable Housing for affordable housingdevelopments in certain zones(portion delivered.This strategy not intended to allow for a lower qualityfor affordable housingbuildings.pmen gy is
of WLG-OC,and the Marylhurst District's CI zone).
The City Council has prioritized affordable housing for several
years now with specific initiatives relating to City land
banking,fee waivers,rezonings,code and permit streamlining,Change the culture of Planning/Development Services departments to have a pro Affordable Housing agenda for both rental and homeownership.Supplement with fair housing
B12 Pro Affordable Housing Agenda Yes Yes Yes partnerships with Metro and the Housing Authority of 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
Clackamas County,and incentives and assistance to nonprofit 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
affordable housing developers including Mercy Housing NW, wealthier communities.As part of this,encourage departments to look closely at how existing approaches may inadvertently favor one type of tenure over another.
Habitat for Humanity.This has resulted in more than 180
units of affordable housing in the development pipeline.
Align Bike Parking Requirements with The City has bike parking requirements that comply with
313 Actual Use No Yes No Metro's requirements,and relatively few spaces are required. Require bicycle parking requirements more in line with actual use.Example:No more than 1-1.5 bike parking stalls per unit.
Reduce the Power of NlMBYism to The City has adopted numerous clear and objective standards 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
B15 stop,slow,change,or reduce Yes Yes Yes and development review processes that provide predictability moving in.Dedicate funds to educate citizens on poverty,exclusion,and racial dynamics.Remove policies that allow neighborhood opposition to evidence based zoning proposals
affordable housing in the permit process with appropriate opportunities for 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
public input. for those with the most money and/or privilege.
Our Comprehensive Plan historically has proritized infill and
redevelopment over UGB expansion to manage growth,
reduce infrastructure costs,and maintain a high quality of life.
Holistic Planning to Distribute New The City has focused higher density development into its two 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
B16 yes
No No town centers and the mixed-use employment districts.The 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
Density More Equitably City opted to take an equity approach in complying with distribute transit equitably to ensure that exclusionary neighborhoods don't remain that way because they don't offer transit for higher density housing.
middle housing requirements under HB 2001,wherein middle
housing is generally permitted in all of the City's residential
districts(we did not use the performance metric approach).
The City regularly seeks input from developers and builders
when drafting land use and local building code amendments
to understand how these policies may affect their projects.
We also seek input from affordable housing developers 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.
1339 Survey Applicants on Development yes No No specifically when developing policy and when the City is a 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
Program Decision-Making partner or contributor to their project(e.g.,financial 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
incentives).The Community Development Director also 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
coordinates with the Home Builders Association on legislative information is not part of the permit decision.
proposals,and over the years has convened a Builders
Advisory Committee to vet policy issues and provide customer
feedback.
The City has adopted regulations to waive systems
Reduce or Exempt SDCs for Needed development charges(SDCs)and development review fee
C01 Housing Yes Yes No waivers for income restricted affordable housing(80%or less Reducing,deferring,and/or financing System Development Charges(SDCs)at a low interest rate for needed housing types.This strategy reduces development costs.
of AMI)and for accessory dwelling units
The City has adopted regulations to waive systems
CO3 Reduce or Exempt SDCs for ADUs Yes Yes No development charges(SDCs)and development review fees for 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
accessory dwelling units based on size,resource efficiency,and access to alternative transportation.
Publicly Funded Infrastructure The City funds some off-site improvements for affordable
CO6 Improvements Yes Yes No housing developments on a case-by-case basis. Fund off-site improvements for workforce or affordable housing;e.g.street intersection improvements triggered by development.
provemen g pmen y
D0D Low Income Housing Tax Credit(LIHTC)Yes Yes Yes LIHTC are used by affordable housing developers,not the City.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
we do not have our own housing authority. in exchange for investment in qualifying new construction and rehabilitation projects.LIHTCs may also be paired with Tax Exempt Revenue Bonds.
The Lake Oswego Redevlopment Agency underwrote some of 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
Tax Increment Financing(TIF)Set- the costs in the North Anchor development to ensure the
D30 yes Yes Yes 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
Aside provision of deed-restricted affordable housing units using purposes(rental housing for households under 60%of Area Median Income(AMI)and homeownership for households under 80%of AMI.
the from the City's urban renewal program.
The City does this with vacant or underutilized sites,most Public purchasingof 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.
recently the 1.4 acre construction staging property for the g pmen ppo
FOS Land Banking Yes Yes Yes Boones Ferry Road Improvement Project.Metro is acquiring (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,
the site using regional affordable housing bond funds to 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
create 50 deed-restricted affordable housing units. state.
Cv 3 :OOO1 APAE85 41+ 17PA3E-10Z FOF7f03
EXHIBIT D-1
The City has partnered with organizations such as Habitat for 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
F04 Public/Private Partnerships(P3) Yes Yes Yes Humanity and Mercy Housing Northwest to produce institution were able to helpties de housing on its own.This can come in the form of coalitions,affordable housing task forces,and collaboratives.
affordable housing units. communities provide g g
Providing Information and Education The City's Planning Department frequently dedicates time to Providing information to small,local developers that will help them understand land use permitting processes and give them a sense of clarity and certainty about requirements so
F07 ye No No working withsmall,local developers to helpthem underttand
to Small Developers the City's housing regulations. they can better provide smaller scale housing at an affordable level.
The City acquired the North Anchor site-which was an
Conversion of underperforming commercial asset in the City's Downtown Acquisition of underperforming or distressed commercial assets(commercial,retail,industrial,or hotel)or partnerships with owners of the assets for conversion into needed
F08 Underperforming or Distressed Yes No No Redevelopment District,and is working to convert the housing.
Commercial Assets property into a mixed-use development that includes both
market-rate and deed-restricted affordable housing units.
The City does this with City-owned land,including the
F10 Prioritize Housing on City/County yes No No disposition of the staging site for the City's recent street Surplus property suitable for housing is offered up for affordable development.
Owned Land improvement project on Boones Ferry Road,which is now
slated to become deed-restricted affordable housing.
The City does this with vacant or underutilized sites,most
Gently the 1.4 acre construction staging property for the Sell land at the State or City's cost below market to developersof affordable housing.Lon
F12 Surplus Land for Affordable Housing Yes No No Boones Ferry Road Improvement Project.Metro is acquiring ( ) ous g Long-term lease at very minimal cost to developers for land the City is not yet ready to
the site using regional affordable housing bond funds to surplus.County surplus of foreclosed land to affordable housing developers and/or housing authority.
create 50 deed-restricted affordable housing units.
F14 Right of First Refusal for Land Purchase Yes No No The City employed this strategy in the Boones Ferry staging 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
site affordable housing development. manufactured home program where residents can buy out the manufactured home park when the owner is ready to sell.
F16 Regulatory Agreement Yes Yes Yes The City does this for a 50-year term,for all SDC waivers for 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
affordable housing. straightforward without going through a difficult or costly process.
The City employed this strategy through its work with the Over thepast few decades,faith institutions across the countryhave been declining.This has prompted conversations within different faith communities about how to refocus their
Sisters of Holy Names of Jesus and Mary(Sisters)when they
Utilize Surplus Land Owned by Faith- 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
were considering resuse of the former Marylhurst University
F18 Based Organizations for Affordable Yes No No 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)
Campus.Ultimately,the Sisters entered into an agreement
Housing Provide design and finance consultation for three organizations to prepare them for future affordable housing development projects,and 3)Determine barriers to development and
with Mercy Housing NW for construction of 100 units of how those can be addressed and/or streamlined.
affordable family housing.
EL 3g:0801 APAE85 41+ 17P P.Po3 FOF7fo3
•
.... AP E IBIT D-1
OM 1111
NM 1111
N - • 1111
■ ■■■ III 1111
1 1
•.
i .
• • 0' O
A.
'1
# Ak 0
•
xi fir _ ricl
ili
IP
A. :1 ,,,,, •
xxxx
• • • M*
11111111111111111111.1111111111111101! ,..0■1111,
4 40
)Util) ;
Ai dt
' ' ' em ( riV
•
Common
Ground
Inclusive FAIR
GUIDE -For Communities HOUSING
ED OFFICIAL Toolkit = COUNCIL
OF OREGON
July 2014
LU 25-0001 HIBIT D-1/PAGE 109 0
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 1 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
FAIR
HOUSING
COUNCIL
OF OREGON
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Fair Housing Council of Oregon would like to express our gratitude for the generous assistance
provided by these additional contributors. This work would not have been possible without their
expertise,counsel,and wisdom.
• Lisa Bates, Professor, Portland State University Urban Studies Department
• Bill Carpenter, Chief Information Officer,Oregon Housing and Community Services
• Karen Clearwater, Regional Advisor to the Dept.,Oregon Housing and Community Services
• Alyssa Cudmore, Former FHCO Equity Specialist
• Tom Cusack,Oregon Housing Blog publisher
• Gordon Howard, Urban Planning Specialist,Oregon Dept.of Land Conservation and
Development
• Ellen Johnson,Attorney,Oregon Law Center and Housing Land Advocates member
• Beth Kaye, FHCO board member and land use policy expert
• Leon Laptook,Affordable housing advocate
• Sue Lind, Housing developer
• Jenny Logan,Community Alliance of Tenants and Housing Land Advocates member
• Deb Meihoff,AICP, Communitas LLC
• Nancy Murray, FHCO board member and community development lawyer
• Bob Rindy, Senior Policy Analyst,Oregon Dept.of Land Conservation and Development
• Yesenia Sanchez, Housing Developer,Community Action Team (serving Columbia,Tillamook,
and Clatsop Counties)
• Ed Sullivan, Land use attorney,Garvey Schubert Barer,and Housing Land Advocates member
This Guide was prepared for the Fair Housing Council of Oregon by Andree Tremoulet, Ph.D.,of
Commonworks Consulting. For further information,see www.commonworksconsulting.com or
contact andree@commonworksconsulting.com.
Design work for this guide was developed by Dana Visse, Design and Consulting.
The work that provided the basis for this Guide was supported by funding under a grant with the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The substance and findings of the work are
dedicated to the public. The authors and publisher are solely responsible for the accuracy of the
statements and interpretations contained in this Guide. Such interpretations do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Federal Government.
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 110 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 2 OF 36
• r
•
- ' 0 COMMON
GROUND
GUIDE for
ELECTED OFFICIALS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
July2014
IN, THE BASICS
SECTION 1. An introduction to fair housing and inclusive
`-00 communities
FAIR HOUSING, AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND
HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
An introduction to the two types of housing
SECTION 4 developments where concerns around fair housing are
especially likely to surface
INFORMATION FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS
3. How to engage constructivelyand stayon the right
SECTION � J
side of the law
[41k-% RESOURCES
SECTION 4. O: Information about other guides and key resources
for those who wish to go deeper
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 111 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 3 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
INTRODUCTION ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
This GUIDE IS FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS, When changes are planned for a
including elected officials, planning neighborhood, whether it is a single house, a
commission members, planners and other new apartment complex or a new institution
staff for cities and counties in Oregon such as an assisted care facility, sometimes
who seek to understand their role in
neighbors object. They may not oppose the
addressing neighborhood conflicts over
residential uses related to fair housing. proposed project per se, but they may object
When such conflicts arise, public officials to its location in their neighborhood. They
often find themselves in the middle, may believe it belongs somewhere, as long as
acting informally as arbiters or more it is somewhere else.
formally as decision-makers. This guide
is intended to help you understand your Sometimes opoosition is based on non-
role and stay on the right side of the discriminatory factors—fact-based concerns
law. While there is no "app" for creating about traffic, for example—that do place an
inclusive, welcoming neighborhoods that undue burden on a neighborhood. However,
are safe places to live and raise families, opposition can also represent a desire to
new knowledge and understanding avoid having to deal with people who are
can help build a strong foundation for
productive engagement. This guide aims viewed as being "different." Sometimes
to provide that information. external impacts like traffic and parking
problems masquerade as rationales for
From our ancient roots as hunters and opposition when the real motivation is a
gatherers, we human beings are hard-wired desire for social exclusivity.
to be wary of situations that are unfamiliar
and people who seem different from us. We While supporting the development of an
also have a sense of territory. Instinctually, we inclusive community is an art, not a science,
feel an impulse to exert control over areas we there are some clear rules, based in federal
consider belong to us. and state law, which govern what is lawful
and what is not. This guide provides guidance
Fortunately, we're also hard-wired to want on those fair housing rules.
to live in a community. The communitarian
impulse supports our efforts to figure out This GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS is
how to get along and to seek benefit from one of a series of three guides that provide
associating with those who have abilities and practical, experience-based information to
insights different from ours. It takes hard stakeholders who may become involved
work to navigate our differences and reach with local opposition to new housing or new
solutions that provide an acceptable level of neighbors. The other two guides are:
personal security for everyone. The first step • GUIDE FOR NEIGHBORS
starts with communication. • GUIDE FOR HOUSING PROVIDERS
LU 25` W'Housing Council of Oregg HIBIT D-1/PAGE 112 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 4 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
THI GUIDE HAS
FO R SECTIONS
/ L r/` _ /`L / k
1 . 2. A 3. 4. 'a:
THE BASICS FAIR HOUSING, INFORMATION FOR RESOi,rc�.ea
ELECTED OFFICIALS
An introduction to fair AFFORDABLE Information about
housing as it relates to HOUSING AND How to engage other guides and key
inclusive communities HOUSING FOR constructively and resources for those
PEOPLE WITH stay on the right side who wish to go deeper
DISABILITIES of the law
An introduction to the
two types of housing
developments where
concerns around fair
housing are especially
likely to surface
r
Interspersed throughout
SOURCING are MYTHS AND FACTS
This guide draws extensively from guides produced + STORIES FROM THE
for other states and audiences. For ease of reading, FIELD that use examples
we have elected to not cite specific sources in the
body of this guide, but included them in the list of of things that actually
resources that forms the final chapter. We wish to occurred in Oregon to
thank and recognize the many sources whose work illustrate the main ideas.
provided the foundation for this guide.
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 113 OF 174
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/5
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 5 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
1 . THE BASICS ,,,,,,,,V.III
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
0
This section of the guide provides an FAIR HOUSING AND
introduction to fair housing concepts PROTECTED CLASSES
and touches on some of the most The purpose of fair housing laws is to
common rules that come into play provide access to housing choice by
when a new housing development everyone, free from discrimination. The
or a change in use of an existing federal Fair Housing Act makes it unlawful
residential use sparks concerns in a to discriminate against people seeking to
community about the kinds of new obtain housing. A wide range of housing-
neighbors who may move into the related activities are covered by fair housing
area. law, including renting, selling, lending,
zoning and providing insurance. Under
INTRODUCTION national fair housing laws, it is illegal to
Neighborhoods are changing all the time. deny access to housing to people because
Neighbors move in and out and businesses of their race, color, national origin, religion,
come and go as well. For some, change can gender, familial status (the presence of
be challenging and can make people feel children in a household) or disability.
uneasy or conjure up fears of the unknown. These seven characteristics are called the
But change can also be an opportunity. This federal protected classes. In Oregon, it
guide focuses on the opportunity to channel is also illegal to discriminate in housing
change in a way that fosters inclusive transactions based on a person's marital
communities. status, source of income (including, as of
July 1, 2014, Housing Choice/Section 8
Fair housing laws ensure access to housing Vouchers), sexual orientation (including
opportunities for all, regardless of their gender identity) or status as a domestic
backgrounds, beliefs or abilities. In effect, violence victim—Oregon's protected classes.
fair housing laws help identify which issues Some cities and counties have identified
can be legally addressed when community additional local protected classes that apply
concerns arise, and which infringe upon within their boundaries.
the rights of others not yet living in the
neighborhood. Neighborhood activists, Being a member of a protected class does
public officials, city staff and developers not give someone the right to engage in
all need to understand the law. The law unlawful activities. For example, if someone
helps to achieve a balance between existing who is disabled or a person of color
neighbors' concerns and the right of all commits a robbery, he/she is subject to
people to access a range of housing options arrest and prosecution just like anyone else.
and neighborhoods. The Fair Housing Act affords no protections
LU vpsl rarr- sousing Council of OreggXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 114 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 6 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
IPPM.Pw
DEFINITION
in•clu•sive
adjective \in-'klu-siv, -ziv\
: open to everyone : not limited to certain people
com•mu•ni•ty
noun \ka-'myu-ne-te\
: an interacting population of various kinds of
individuals in a common location
Source:
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary
to individuals who present a direct threat PROTECTED CLASSES
• others. Determining whether someone
poses such a direct threat must be made
on an individualized basis, however, and FEDERAL
•annot be based on general assumptions or • race
-peculation about a group of people or how • color
individuals who are part of that group (such • national origin
.4s people with mental health disabilities) • religion
ight act. • gender
• familial status
Nor do fair housing laws (with one e presence o c I .ren in a ousehold)
exception, special accommodations for • disability
people with disabilities, discussed in a
later section) convey special privileges STATE
or rights to an individual based on his or • marital status
her membership in a protected class. The • source of income
intention of federal, state, and local fair • sexual orientation
housing laws is to require that all individuals • status as a domestic violence survivor
be given the same treatment, the same
services, and offered an equal opportunity to
live in a home of their choice.
LU 25-0001 1-E)cHIBIT D-1/PAGE 115 OF 174
thd(iv4 COMMON GROUND:GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/ 7
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 7 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
THE BASICS ,, ,, �
FAIR HOUSING AND TYPES OF �L
DISCRIMINATION
Fair housing law protects against three kinds
of discrimination:
Direct Evidence: Actively and openly THE FAIR HOUSING ACT
limiting access to housing on the basis
of protected class. An example of direct Title VIII of the Civil Rights
evidence would be the refusal to rent to Act of 1968 (Fair Housing
someone solely because he was born in Act, codified at 42 U.S.C.
Saudi Arabia and is Muslim. That would 3601-3619), as amended,
represent discrimination on the basis of prohibits discrimination in the
national origin and religion. sale, rental, and financing of
dwellings, and in other housing-
Unequal Treatment: Treating people related transactions, based
differently based on protected class on race, color, national origin,
status; for example, requiring a renter religion, sex, familial status
with two children to pay twice the (including children under the
security deposit of a renter without age of 18 living with parents
children is discrimination on the basis of or legal custodians, pregnant
familial status. women, and people securing
Disparate Impact: Having a custody of children under the
discriminatory effect on a protected class age of 18) and disability. At the
while appearing to treat everyone the urging of President Lyndon B.
same. For example, giving preference to Johnson, Congress approved
renting to households with people who the Civil Rights Act of 1968, and
don't work in the local fish cannery would it was signed into law one week
have a disparate impact on the Latino after the assassination of Dr.
population if the vast majority of cannery Martin Luther King, Jr.
workers are of Hispanic national origin.
•
•
- I.
LU g .P9f}'y.iousing Council of Oregg HIBIT D-1/PAGE 116 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 8 OF 36
DID YOU KNOW? •
Deed restrictions were used to prohibit the •••
sale of homes in certain areas to people •••
of color and, in some cases, people from A
specific national origins. Such restrictions
are now null and void by virtue of the Fair
Housing Act of 1968.
DISPARATE IMPACT AND national origins. Upheld as legal by a
LAND USE LAWS Supreme Court decision in 1917 (Buchanan v.
It is important to note that a practice does Warley, 245 U.S. 60 (1917)), such restrictions
not need to be intentionally discriminatory are now null and void by virtue of the Fair
for it to be in violation of fair housing laws. Housing Act of 1968. A more contemporary
One of the complicated realities of American example of a policy that would have a
culture is that discriminatory practices— disparate impact is requiring an applicant
practices that have disproportionately seeking to build a single-unit house for
negative effects based on protected class— five unrelated people who have disabilities
have occurred for decades before fair (a protected class) to undergo additional
housing laws were adopted. Discriminatory hearings, reviews or community meetings
practices are so deeply imbedded in our that are not required for a single-unit
institutions, traditions and ways of doing house for any other group of five unrelated
business that it can be hard to identify and individuals.
isolate them. We continue those institutions
and practices, unwittingly perpetuating their A recent example of disparate impact and
negative effects. jurisdictional involvement is the Mount Holly
v. Mount Holly Gardens Citizens in Action,
One of the main ways that the concept of Inc., in which the Township of Mount Holly
disparate impact affects neighborhood planned to tear down existing housing to
quality is through zoning ordinances and build higher-end housing. The citizens
practices. Fair housing laws prohibit land who lived in the existing housing protested,
use regulations, restrictive covenants and saying that they would not be able to afford
conditional or special use permits from to live in the new housing and this would
imposing special conditions that have the have a disparate impact on the township's
effect of limiting housing choice based on minority population. The citizen group sued
protected class status. In the past, deed the jurisdiction under the Fair Housing
restrictions were used to prohibit the sale Act, citing disparate impact. The case was
of homes in certain areas to people of color settled in favor of the citizen group before it
and, in some cases, people from specific reached the Supreme Court.
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 117 OF 174
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/ 9
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 9 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
THE BASICS ,,,,,,,, 0
r
REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION WHAT DOES
FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
As mentioned above, people with disabilities DISABILITY MEAN?
do have an extra privilege under fair housing
to ensure that they can access equal housing There are many different
opportunity. The Fair Housing Act requires definitions of disability. The one
housing providers respond to requests for relevant to fair housing is the
reasonable accommodations. These are one included in the Fair Housing
exceptions to rules, policies, practices or Act, which states that someone
services to enable people with disabilities to is disabled if he or she has a
live in the residence. This includes physical physical or mental impairment
modifications to make the residence which substantially limits one
accessible. Local officials are also required or more major life activities,
to consider reasonable accommodations to including having a record of or
zoning, building codes and ordinances. being regarded as having such
impairment (42 U.S.C. 3602 (h)).
Local jurisdictions are required to make
case-by-case determinations about what
is reasonable based on the facts of the
particular case under consideration. For FREE SPEECH AND
example, the accommodations required to PUBLIC DECISIONS
assist people with mobility impairments may
be different from those needed to assist Fair housing laws require that public
people with loss of hearing. In neither case decisions about housing developments
could basic health and safety precautions be not be based on the race, color, religion,
set aside, nor could the general nature of the sex, national origin, familial status or
zoning of the neighborhood be changed.
disability of the residents. It also prohibits
public decisions and policies that have a
disproportionate impact on members of one
or more protected classes.
Community members have the right, under
First Amendment free speech protections, to
express their opposition to projects on any
LU 24, Housing Council of ore IBIT D-1/PAGE 118 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 10 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
•
basis as long as it does not constitute illegal
inti dation). However, land use and other ###
publ c decisions may not be made on the
bass of concerns based upon discriminatory CONFRONTING EMBEDDED
ass mptions. Local officials, including DISCRIMINATION?
sta , may only make their decisions based
on act-based, non-discriminatory factors.
Fu thermore, the law prohibits the public
Stella Adams, a fair housing
fr.m asking for information about the extent consultant from Durham, North
Carolina, compares deeply
or type of disability an individual or group of imbedded discriminatory practices
in.ividuals may have. from the past that continue into
ONCLUSION the present to sour dough starter
he creation of safe, inclusive communities—
that incorporates some toxic yeast.
places where people from a variety of When new loaves are made from
the starter, the bad yeast is baked in
backgrounds and abilities can thrive—is more to the new loaves, even though the
of an art than a science. It involves achieving baker had no idea that toxic yeast
a delicate balance among many different was present. Furthermore, the bad
pairs of opposing forces, such as: yeast is incorporated into the dough
• The desire of longstanding residents to left over to make new starter for
control their community's future vs. the the next batch of loaves. Getting
desire of newcomers to have housing rid of the bad leavening requires
choices a conscious choice and hard work
to create a fresh, clean batch of
• The need to apply laws equally to all vs. "mother" sourdough starter.
the requirement to be exi le around the
margins if so requested by someone with
a disability (reasonable accommodation).
111
F
LU 25-0001 E HIBIT D-1/PAGE 119 OF 174
1 undiN COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/11
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 11 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
r6i2 . FAIR HOUSING
Fair housing issues may arise with THE OVERLAP BETWEEN
respect to any kind of housing FAIR HOUSING AND
development and in any kind SUBSIDIZED HOUSING
of neighborhood. For example, In most communities, the majority of people
opposing a mosque's efforts to who need subsidized housing are also
partner with a developer to create people whose access to housing choice
a new apartment complex in the is protected under fair housing law. For
neighborhood would likely be a fair example, in many communities, a greater
housing violation if the objection share of people of color (race, national
based on not wanting people who origin and color) may need subsidized
practice Islam to move into the housing than the majority population;
neighborhood. A city that refuses to thus, in this community, the rejection
permit the development of a high- of subsidized housing would have a
end assisted living facility for adults disparate impact on people of color. The
with Alzheimer's disease based on reasons for this are complex and have
the complaints of neighbors who deep historical roots related to decades
don't want to live next door to "crazy of discriminatory practices that impacted
people who wander" would also the life opportunities of people of color
likely be a violation of fair housing and other groups, as well as contemporary
laws based on disability.
patterns and institutional practices that
While fair housing issues may have a disparate impact. The diagram below
arise in many different kinds of illustrates the overlap, or nexus, between fair
situations, there are two kinds
housing and subsidized housing.
of housing developments where
both neighborhood resistance and
fair housing issues may surface:
subsidized/low cost/low income/
affordable housing (it goes by AFFORDABLE FAIR+ FAIR
HOUSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING
many names) and projects serving HOUSING
people with disabilities (also called
special needs housing). This chapter
considers both in some detail.
LU V0 r1 Housing Council of ore HIBIT D-1/PAGE 120 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 12 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
4
Rejecting a housing project on the grounds
that it will serve low income people is, in
most instances, a violation of fair housing MORTGAGE DENIAL RATES
because that decision would have the effect
of discriminating against people on the DIFFER IN O R E G O N BY RACE
basis of their membership in a protected AND ETHNICITY
class, regardless of whether or not the
discrimination was intentional. In other In Oregon's rural communities,
words, that decision would have a disparate blacks and Hispanics with incomes
impact on minority populations protected above $75,000 per year had
under fair housing laws. much higher denial rates for home
purchase mortgage applications
While the nexus between fair housing and than their white counterparts.
affordable housing is a key principle, it is In 2004 - 2008, the denial rate
also important to remember that people for home purchase mortgage
who are not low-income can also experience applications for whites was 17.0%;
housing discrimination. For example, during during the same period, the denial
the housing crisis of the last decade, people rate for blacks was 30.1% and for
of color in some cities tended to be offered Hispanics was 25.6%.
riskier home mortgages (with higher interest Source: 2011-2015 Oregon Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing
rates and, in most cases, a greater likelihood Choice(Non Entitlement Areas),p.42,Table III-6.
www.oregon.gov/LCD/flocs/publications/introductory_guide_to_land_
of default) than the majority population with use_planning_in_oregon.pdf
similar incomes. While these homebuyers
of color were not low income, they likely
experienced discriminatory practices in the •_
mortgage lending market.
■
•
• dk
111 In
It*
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 121 OF 174
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/13
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 13 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
FAIR HOUSING PROTECTIONS the population. People cannot use fair
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF housing as an excuse for breaking the law.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING Furthermore, fair housing does not protect
Fair housing laws affecting the development people who pose a direct threat to people
of affordable housing revolve around a few or property. The law requires that such
essential principles: determinations be based on objective proof
of a threat by specific individuals and not
• Housing that serves people who are
generalizations about a population.
members of protected classes (minority
populations) cannot be put through HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WITH
extra steps or be required to pay DISABILITIES
extra fees or meet criteria that are not Another category of housing that often
required of housing that serves the triggers initial opposition is housing that
majority population (everyone else). The serves people with disabilities or special
"minority population" can be defined in needs housing. The reaction is often based
terms of one or more of the seven federal on fear of people who seem "different." The
protected classes or Oregon's protected first step is to recognize the potential for
classes. Thus, it would be illegal for a having a fear-based reaction and make the
jurisdiction to require developers of conscious choice to move beyond it to facts,
multifamily affordable housing to meet understanding, and community.
with neighbors if it did not require
the same of all multifamily housing Since the 1960s, there has been a cultural
developers. (Unequal Treatment) change in the US involving the movement
• It is illegal to have laws that seem away from placing people with disabilities,
neutral on the surface but result a or those recovering from alcohol and drug
disproportionate cost or delay for addictions, into large institutions. As a
housing that serves minority populations. result, an increasing proportion of people
(Disparate Impact) with a wide range of disabilities—physical,
mental health, developmental—live in
• Outright discrimination is also illegal, communities, either in traditional housing or
such as prohibiting the development of in staffed homes with services, depending
affordable housing in the jurisdiction. on the individual.
It is important to remember that people There are many different types and names
in protected classes must follow rules for specialized housing with services for
and regulations that govern the rest of people with disabilities, including supportive
LU 25. Housing Council of Ore IBIT D-1/PAGE 122 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 14 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
■ ■ ...
■ ■ ■■■
■■■ =II
■ ■ ■■■ .II
MYTH
■ ■ ■ ■■
Affordable housing always lowers property values in the ■ ■ N'
surrounding neighborhood.
FACT
How affordable housing affects nearby properties is complicated.
In 2005, the Journal of Planning Literature published an
authoritative review of seventeen academic studies that occurred
over 40 years regarding the impact of subsidized housing on
neighborhood property values. The author concluded:
• Housing that was acquired and rehabilitated as affordable
housing had a positive effect on nearby property values.
• Subsidized housing had no effect on nearby property values
when it was sited in healthy and vibrant neighborhoods, when
it was dispersed, and when it had responsive, responsible
management. Conversely, negative effects on property
values were more likely to occur when affordable housing was
clustered and located in declining neighborhoods.
• When negative effects do occur, they were relatively small,
especially compared to other factors that affected property
values.
Source:Nguyen,M.T.(2005).Does affordable housing detrimentally affect property values? A review of the literature.
10.1177 0885412205277069
1111
11111
•
• •
)Ltol glr-# .I' 151/PAGE 123 OF 174
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/15
LU 25-0001 OF
EXHIBIT D-1
FAIR HOUSING
housing, group homes and community FAIR HOUSING PROTECTIONS FOR
residential facilities. Examples include: THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING
• Group homes for persons recovering from FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
alcohol or drug addiction In addition to the protections for affordable
housing described above, there are several
• Residential treatment facilities for persons additional principles that underlie fair
with a mental illness housing as it applies to the development of
• Adult foster homes for older adults housing for people with disabilities, including:
needing assistance with activities of daily . REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION:
living As discussed in Chapter 1, the Fair
• Group homes for adults or children with Housing Act requires local governments
developmental disabilities to make minor modifications to local
regulations (including zoning and land
In addition to these clear-cut examples, there use regulations) if so requested, if doing
are a variety of other living arrangements so affords equal housing opportunity to
which may not, on the surface, appear to people with disabilities. For example, a
house people with disabilities, but which developer might request an exception to
do so in fact. One example is transitional a required setback that would enable a
housing for formerly homeless individuals. wheelchair ramp with the proper slope to
While homelessness is not in and of be installed.
itself considered to be a disability, many • NO QUOTAS: The Department of Justice
individuals who are homeless may have one
has advised local jurisdictions that setting
or more disabilities. Others may be members quotas on the number or share of housing
of a protected class in Oregon by virtue of units that serve people with disabilities
being a survivor of domestic violence. A within a geographic area is a fair housing
disproportionate share of homeless youth are violation. The only time that jurisdictions
gay, bisexual, lesbian, transsexual or queer,
may consider issues related to the
and sexual orientation and gender identity concentration of people with disabilities
are protected classes in Oregon. Thus, on a within an area is when such concentration
case-by-case basis, fair housing protections may work to the disadvantage of people
may extend to a wide variety of congregate
with disabilities.
living situations.
■■�■
■■■■
■■■■
■■■■
■■■■
LU 8540O61Housing Council of OrealbHIBIT D-1/PAGE 124 0017
'-
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 16 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
MYTH
Affordable housing is ugly and will quickly become an eyesore.
FACT
Perceptions about the design and construction of affordable
housing project are often based on memories of old public
housing projects, some of which were, indeed, built cheaply
(by Congressional mandate) and were unattractive. Much
has changed since then; in Oregon, the emphasis has been
on building sturdy, attractive and highly functional housing
for many years now. Nonprofits and public agencies that
build affordable housing are in it for the long haul; it makes
sense for them to use durable materials and maintain the
properties, as they are long-term owners and not in this ■■■
business to make money and sell the property to a new owner. ■■ MOM
Affordable housing developments that are well built, blend ■■ MOO
into the neighborhood and well maintained can be among a ■■ MOO
No
neighborhood's assets.
11
■U . ■ ■ ■ ■ PI
■ 1*
• CONFIDENTIALITY: Just like everyone provide specific protections but are not as
else, people with disabilities have a right broad as federal fair housing law. Thus, it is
to privacy with respect to their medical necessary, but not sufficient, that local codes
information. Housing providers cannot comply with Oregon law.
disclose the nature of the disability that
individuals have. Specifically, Oregon law requires that
jurisdictions make licensed residential
OREGON STATE LAW homes a permitted use in all residential
AND RESIDENTIAL HOMES zones and also in any commercial zone
AND FACILITIES that allows single-family dwellings (ORS
While each jurisdiction has its own zoning 197.660). A permitted use is a one that is
code and other rules that govern the allowed outright in a particular zone and
location and development of housing for does not require additional review to see if it
people with disabilities, Oregon also has meets extra criteria. A classic example of a
adopted laws on this subject with which permitted use is a single-family home in an
jurisdictions must comply. These state laws area zoned for single-family residences.
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 125 OF 174
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/17
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 17 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
,,,,,,,, di ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
\_
I
A licensed residential home is defined as a review, hearings or meetings or impose
home that is licensed by the state and serves additional standards on the group home.
no more than five individuals with mental
health disabilities or addictions (residential Oregon state law also requires jurisdictions
treatment homes) or developmental to make licensed residential facilities—
disabilities (residential training homes). It facilities licensed to serve six or more
also includes adult foster homes that serve individuals with physical, mental health or
five or fewer adults needing residential care developmental disabilities (defined in ORS
in a homelike environment (ORS 443.400). 443.400)—a permitted use in any zone
The licensing agencies are the Oregon where multifamily housing is a permitted
Health Authority, the Oregon Department of use. They must also be either a permitted or
Human Services and the Oregon Department conditional use in zones where multifamily
of Human Services or Health Authority for housing is a conditional use (ORS 197.667).
treatment homes, training homes and foster KEY CONCEPTS
homes, respectively.
In general, people who need subsidized
Fair housing laws provide even greater housing are also people whose access
protections than the state protections for to housing choice is protected under fair
residential homes. Many different types of housing law.
homes with disabled persons are not and do • There are many myths surrounding
not need to be licensed. Many people that affordable or subsidized housing and the
fall under the Fair Housing Act's definition people who reside there.
of "disabled" have a high degree of self-
care, and, while they may not need the level Affordable housing does not
of service provided in a licensed home or automatically lower property values
facility, they may find group living situations on the properties in the surrounding
beneficial. Permitting and zoning restrictions neighborhoods; property values
that directly target these unlicensed group depend on the current health of the
homes or group living situations are a neighborhood and a host of other
violation of the Fair Housing Act. factors.
• Affordable housing is more often than
Thus in residential zones, a group home that not attractive and well maintained.
serves five or fewer disabled individuals
must be treated in the same way that a • An increase in the number of low income
single-family home that serves five or fewer people into a neighborhood does not
unrelated individuals would be treated. necessarily translate into an increase in
Jurisdictions may not require additional crime.
LU ?\Or Housing Council of OreIBIT E 126 OF 174
TACH /PA
EXHIBIT D-1
r
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, hi_ ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
MYTH CRIMINAL HISTORY
An increase in the number of people One attribute that is frequently of
who have lower incomes means concern is NOT a protected class:
more crime. involvement with the criminal justice
system. The federal Department of
FACT Justice advises:
That's not what the research says. In The disability discrimination provisions
Memphis Murder Mystery Revisited: of the Fair Housing Act do not extend to
Do Housing Voucher Households persons who claim to be disabled solely
on the basis of having been adjudicated a
Cause Crime? researchers at New juvenile delinquent, having a criminal record,
York University's Furman Center or being a sex offender. Furthermore, the
tracked voucher holders and their Fair Housing Act does not protect persons
impact on neighborhood crime. who currently use illegal drugs,persons who
Using neighborhood-level data have been convicted of the manufacture
or sale of illegal drugs, or persons with or
for 10 cities across the nation, the without disabilities who present a direct
authors, "refute the notion that threat to the persons or property of others.
rising numbers of voucher holders (Joint Statement of the Department Of
contribute to increasing rates of Justice and the Department Of Housing
neighborhood crime... They also And Urban Development regarding Group
found no association between Homes, Local Land Use,And the Fair
the arrival of voucher holders in a Housing Act).
neighborhood and the incidence of It is important to note that some re-
crime one year later." entry housing developments serve
Source:National Low Income Housing Coalition,http://nlihc.org/article/ people with addictions or other
studies-examine-effects-affordable-housing-crime-patterns disabilities by design, and thus fair
housing protections (such as the
requirement to make reasonable
In Oregon, in residential zones, group homes accommodations if requested)
that serve five or fewer disabled individuals would apply. However, this does not
must be treated in the same way that a mean that the residents may lawfully
single-family dwelling is treated. continue to use illegal substances or
commit any other kind of offense that
In Oregon, jurisdictions are required to make would otherwise be considered a crime.
licensed residential facilities serving six or Source:Joint Statement of the Department Of Justice and the Department Of
more individuals with disabilities a permitted Housing And Urban Development regarding Group Homes,Local Land Use,And
used in any zone where multifamily the Fair Housing Act,www.justice.gov/crt/about/hce/final8_1.php
dwellings are a permitted use.
L BIT D-1/PAGE 127 OF 174
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/19
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 19 OF 36
3 . INFO FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS /`kn
When conflicts arise about land of personal characteristics related to
use issues in neighborhoods, public protected classes.
officials—elected officials, planning
commission members, planners, While these basic ideas may seem
public administrators and other straightforward, the difficulty arises in
staff—often find themselves in the applying them to real situations in the
middle, acting informally as arbiters community. So many decisions involve
or more formally as decision-makers. judgment calls about what constitutes a
On one hand, they are called to reasonable request and what constitutes an
understand the neighbors' wishes effort to make it difficult, if not impossible, to
to manage their surroundings; on develop a new project serving people whom
the other hand, they are called to neighbors view as being somehow different
respect and uphold the rights of from themselves. When in doubt, ask for
those seeking to provide housing for help. The Fair Housing Council of Oregon
some of the community's hardest to welcomes your inquiries. We would much
house residents. In this endeavor, rather help you avoid missteps than seek
public officials must be guided not remedial action in response to a complaint
only by their own judgment, but also from an aggrieved party.
by laws and professional standards
of conduct associated with their FAIR HOUSING COUNCIL OF OREGON
professions. One area of law with CI 1 (800) 424-3247
which public officials need to be www.fhco.org
familiar is fair housing. This chapter
addresses how fair housing laws This chapter is especially indebted to the information provided by Tracey
come into play in neighborhood McCartney,Tennessee Fair Housing Council,in her guide Navigating NIMBY:
A Public Officials Guide to Neighborhood Living for People with Disabilities,
disputes? Summer 2003.www.tennfairhousing.org/resources
z The most recent change to Oregon's protected classes has the effect of
As the introductory chapter indicates, it is making it illegal to discriminate against someone because the source
illegal to deny access to housing to people of their rent is derived from a Housing Choice(Section 8)Voucher,
because of their protected class status, effective July 1,2014.
regardless of whether that status arises
from federal, state2 or local law. More u i u u
proactively, fair housing is about ensuring
that people have access to the full array of
housing's benefits (including resource- and • 1111
opportunity-rich neighborhoods) regardless :::
•••
•••
LU z�-Qtr. Housing Council of Oree�i IBIT D_1/P 8 OF 174 4� ,
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 20 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
TIP
If your jurisdiction uses a land use review committee,
look closely at who serves on the committee.
Less informed citizen members, although well
intentioned, can run afoul of fair housing provisions
and create a potential liability for the jurisdiction.
THE ROLES OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS
As a public official, you play an important their choice on the other. Here are some
leadership role in the community. If you suggestions on how to find that balance:
are an elected or appointed public official,
you make important decisions that affect 1. Listen to what neighbors have to say.
the welfare of both individuals in your Community members have the right,
community and your community as a whole. under First Amendment free speech
You also have access to "the bully pulpit" as protections, to express their opposition to
a means of affecting community sentiment projects on any basis (as long as it does
and expressing new ideas. If you are an not constitute illegal intimidation).
elected leader, constituents may come to
you for help or leverage in addressing their 2. Never make land use or other decisions
concerns. based upon discriminatory statements
made by community members. The
If you are staff, you play an important role courts have repeatedly found such
in upholding, interpreting and explaining decisions to be in violation of fair housing
laws and rules that have been adopted for laws. Taking such action may result in
the benefit of the community overall. You costly legal fees, fines and damages
are on the front line—you are the ones most charged to your jurisdiction.
likely to first encounter the angry response
of neighbors who discover a new project 3. Be aware of, and nip in the bud, efforts
proposed for their neighborhood or who are to delay a project through requests
upset with the behavior of other neighbors. from neighbors for repeated meetings
to rehash topics already discussed and
Your job is to walk the line between addressed. At public meetings, balance
responding to legitimate community the need to permit free speech with
concerns about safety and neighborhood the right to be free from intimidation.
conditions on one hand and protecting the Mentally place yourself in the audience,
rights of all residents to have fair access to as a potential resident of the proposed
housing opportunities in communities of housing development, as a way to monitor
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 129 OF 174
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/21
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 21 OF 36
INFO FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS
if and when the testimony strays into those criteria cannot be considered by the
intimidation. Efforts to delay a project can decision-makers.
lead to extra costs for the developer and
threaten its viability. Stalling tactics based 6. Take appropriate action to address
on an illegal objective, lacking a reasonable legitimate complaints that the residents
basis in law or fact or having an improper of any home or apartment building,
motive are violations of the Fair Housing including subsidized or special-needs
Act (U.S. v. Wagner, 940F, Supp 972 (N.D. housing, are engaging in conduct
Texas 1996)). that is dangerous or a nuisance. Fair
housing does not give anyone free rein
4. Be aware of efforts to delay or overburden to disregard the law. Disturbances of
a project through raising facially "neutral" the peace, violent behavior, trespassing
issues (such as parking concerns) which and other offenses should be addressed.
have little basis in fact. Over the years, The complaints must be addressed on
it has become less socially acceptable the basis of the behavior of specific
to raise concerns about a project based individuals, and not on stereotypes about
on the race, ethnicity, national origin or how "those people" behave.
disability status of the likely residents.
Thus, neighbors are likely to find other 7. If your jurisdiction receives federal
ways to raise concerns about a project. housing funds, be aware of your
When you hear concerns about things responsibility to affirmatively further
like parking, sight lines and setbacks, ask fair housing. If you are not familiar with
yourself whether such objections would be it already, find out about your Analysis
raised if the project were to be occupied of Impediments to Housing Choice and
by a different population. Sometimes such the actions that your community has
objections are raised to stall the project proposed to promote access to housing
and drive up the cost of development. opportunities for everyone.
5. If a public hearing is part of a quasi- CO
judicial proceeding, remind speakers . . •
that a decision can be made solely on
the basis of whether a particular project Irl
conforms to pre-established criteria. If •
speakers stray into other areas, you can
remind them that testimony not related toIk
LU zz�r9ir Housing Council of Ore IBIT D-1/PAGE 130 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 22 OF 36 T
EXHIBIT D-1
,r , , „
Co MON FAIR HOUSING MISTAKES AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING
AN '' HOW TO AVOID THEM FAIR HOUSING
In a effort to be responsive to constituents
or to reduce community conflict, it is all
too -asy to stray into practices which All jurisdictions that receive
ma , in fact, have a discriminatory effect federal funds of any kind (not
on •rotected classes or otherwise violate just housing) are required to take
fai housing laws. This section describes steps to affirmatively further fair
co mon mistakes and the steps that public housing. At its most fundamental,
of icials can take to avoid or rectify them. the term affirmatively furthering fair
housing means going beyond not
R-quiring that affordable/subsidized discriminating to actively promoting
ousing projects undergo additional access to homes in resource and
:pproval steps, hearings, meetings with opportunity-rich communities
neighbors or other processes not required by those who historically have
for similar multi-unit housing developments. had the fewest housing choices,
Public officials and staff may not impose and to invest in bringing higher
extra steps or meetings, and you may not quality services and resources to
condition your approval upon the developer neighborhoods that have such
taking any extra steps. For example, you populations and individuals. If
may not require an affordable housing your jurisdiction receives federal
developer to meet with the neighborhood housing funds directly from the
association if you do not require the same of US Department of Housing and
developers of for-profit housing projects. Urban Development, then, in most
cases, you have also adopted an
Requiring affordable/subsidized housing Analysis of Impediments to Housing
projects to have extra screening, setbacks Choice and a corresponding plan
or other design modifications you do not describing actions to address the
require of for-profit housing projects. identified impediments. In this case,
For example, if a neighbor were to complain affirmatively furthering fair housing
about having "those people" move in, you
mean something specific; it means
may not require the affordable housing
implementing those actions and
project to build a fence, plant screening
documenting them and other steps
shrubbery or provide a bigger setback if that your jurisdiction has undertaken
to address the impediments.
those same requirements would not impose
upon a project with a similar form in the
same zone.
LU 25-0001 HIBIT D-1/PAGE 131 OF 174
TI Ivy COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/23
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 23 OF 36
INFO FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS M=EZE /`kri
Placing burdensome public safety or special needs housing are required
requirements on affordable housing or to submit documentation that their
housing for people with disabilities. plans conform to local zoning codes.
To quote the law, fair housing does not Withholding or delaying certifications or
provide protection to "an individual whose other documentation that the developer
tenancy would constitute a direct threat to needs could be considered discrimination,
the health or safety of other individuals or especially if the underlying reason for doing
whose tenancy would result in substantial so is itself discriminatory (for example,
physical damage to the property of because of objections to the project by
others" (42 U.S. Code § 3604(f)(9)). Thus, neighbors).
a jurisdiction may impose reasonable
protections to ensure the safety of the Again, a court case provides a relevant
community as a whole. However, the example. In Fu v City of Clyde Hill,
concerns upon which the protections are an operator of a home for adults with
based must be fact-based. The concerns disabilities requested documentation from
may not be based on assumptions, the city certifying that that her home would
generalizations or stereotypes about a not be in violation of the local zoning
population as a whole, and the protections ordinance. Her bank loan was denied
must be reasonable. because the city would not provide that
documentation. The court held that the
The courts have provided guidance on town's failure to provide the letter was a
reasonableness. For example, a court in violation of fair housing laws (FH-FL Rptr.
Utah found that requiring a group home 16.195( W.D.Wash. March 7, 1997)).
for developmentally disabled adults to
have 24-7 supervision and a community Treating group homes in a neighborhood
advisory panel to address complaints to zoned for single dwelling units differently
be intentional discrimination. The court from any other housing for unrelated
found that the city did not place similar people living together in a single unit.
requirements on other communal living The remedy here is straightforward: do not
arrangements and that the requirements impose any use restrictions, notice criteria,
were not justified by actual public safety design requirements or siting criteria on
concerns (46 F .3d 1491 (10th Cir. 1995)). group homes that you do not apply to
other group living situations, such as a
Interfering with funding for an affordable or group of unrelated people renting a house
fair housing project. together or a homeowner who provides
Often applicants for funding for affordable or rents space to housemates. If there are
LU 2 � 9 Housing Council of OrAPIBIT D-1/PAGE 132 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 24 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
TIP
Neighbors need a place to air their grievances; however,
monthly meetings on the same subject with the same
opposition only creates hardship for the affordable
housing provider. Be clear on what is not negotiable.
conflicts between neighbors, and one of the been found to be in violation of the Fair
neighbors happens to be a group home, you Housing Act because they limit housing
may refer them to a Community Dispute choice for people with disabilities. (See, for
Resolution Center, just as you might offer example, Larkin v. State of Michigan, 89 F.3d
this referral to other neighbors who have 285 (6th Cir. 1996)).
conflicts. You may not, however, make an
approval contingent upon a successful A fundamental principle of the Fair
resolution of a conflict involving a group Housing Act's protections is that people
home if you do not also follow this approach with disabilities should be able to live in
with other neighbors. an integrated residential setting of their
choice. The only way that dispersion
Imposing dispersion or spacing requirements have been found to be
requirements for housing for people with acceptable by the courts is if they result in
disabilities. an environment beneficial for the disabled
In an effort to prevent the concentration residents by avoiding segregation and
of special needs housing for people with clustering (Familystyle of St. Paul v. City of
disabilities in a particular neighborhood, St. Paul, Minnesota, 923 F.2nd 91 (8th Cir.
some cities may consider imposing 1991)). However, in most cases, dispersion
dispersion requirements that require a requirements have been found to be in
designated amount of space between such violation of the Fair Housing Act and have
housing. Such spacing requirements have been struck down by the courts.
ow` • . •
I Ng
_ -
� U
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 133 OF 174
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFIGIA,
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 25 OF 36
1
INFO FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS ==== /`kn
r
. .Q
PROVIDING REASONABLE ELJ
■
ACCOMMODATIONS FOR PEOPLE
WITH DISABILITIES FAIR HOUSING LAND USE
To ensure that people with disabilities
have access to a full range of housing AND ZONING CHECKLIST
opportunities, fair housing law enables FOR ORE G O N
them or their representatives to ask for a
reasonable accommodation—a departure The Fair Housing Council of Oregon
from a general rule or practice—to adapt or has developed a checklist for local
develop housing that is accessible. jurisdictions to use in reviewing their
land use and subdivision ordinances
According to the federal Department of and related practices. Called
Justice, whether or not a request for an Examining Local Land Use with a Fair
accommodation based on disability is Housing Lens, the checklist helps
reasonable depends on the answers to two jurisdictions both identify problem
questions: areas and add new best practices. It
• Does the request impose an undue is a "living tool" in that it is updated
burden or expense on the local as the Fair Housing Council assists
government? local jurisdictions with code-related
issues and discovers additional
• Does the proposed use create a issues and best practices. The most
fundamental alteration in the zoning recent version of the checklist can be
scheme [or other regulation]? For found on the Fair Housing Council of
example, does it allow a fundamentally Oregon's website:
different kind of use, such as a large www.fhco.org/pdfs/AFFHfhco1.pdf
skilled nursing facility in a single family
neighborhood?
If the answer to either question is "yes,"
then the requested accommodation may
be considered unreasonable. This is a very
complex and nuanced topic (for example,
how does one determine whether a burden V
or expense is "undue?") with a substantial +++++t+ 1. '
amount of case law informing it.
II
LU H pPill Housing Council of Ore IBIT D-1/PAGE 134 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 26 OF 36
ills/666 _ _ EXHIBIT D-1
frp
4
DID YOU KNOW? •
Failure to provide reasonable
accommodations is a violation of
the Fair Housing Act. If this occurs, •
contact the Fair Housing Council of
Oregon for assistance.
Local jurisdictions are encouraged by the
De•artment of Justice to specify, provide
an• publicize the availability of mechanisms
fo requesting a reasonable accommodation. COMMUNITY- BASED DISPUTE
T ese processes may not impose significant RESOLUTION CENTERS
casts or delays. If your jurisdiction does not
•pecify a mechanism, applicants for people IN O R E G O N
with disabilities can still request a reasonable
accommodation. Inordinate delay or failure
In Oregon, 22 of the states 36 counties
to respond to such a request is a fair housing are served by one or more community-
violation. based dispute resolution centers that
provide a neutral forum for resolving
COMMUNITY DISPUTE conflict. A current list of centers can
RESOLUTION PROGRAMS be found through Oregon Office for
Some communities may find it helpful to Community Dispute Resolution at the
engage the services of a Community Dispute University Of Oregon School Of Law:
Resolution Program to help work through
concerns with respect to a new or existing www.osbar.org/_flocs/public/cable/commdispute.pdf
organizations, some of which are affiliated
with city government, have trained staff and
volunteers who provide a neutral forum and Mill
a facilitated process for addressing conflict. MMMM
Community dispute resolution is a way to MI111111111
raise difficult issues in a non-confrontational Ell
way and work toward finding a solution that MMM.
'��illllllll
all parties can accept. MMMM
•tt
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 135 OF 174
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/27
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 27 OF 36
INFO FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS ==== /`kn
One of the potential outcomes of a KEY CONCEPTS
community dispute resolution process is a • Public officials, including elected officials
voluntary Good Neighbor Agreement, which and Planning Commission members as
lays out the rules each party agrees to follow well as staff, often finds themselves in the
to avoid conflict and be good neighbors, as middle of conflict over the development of
well as steps to take if problems do arise. affordable/subsidized housing or special
needs housing.
•
• Be aware of common fair housing
mistakes, especially those that place
burdensome requirements on housing for
people with special needs.
RESOURCES ABOUT REASONABLE • Engage the services of a Community
ACCOMMODATIONS Dispute resolution program if it exists in
your community.
Joint Statement of the Departments • It is important to maintain a balance by
of Justice and of Housing and Urban doing the following:
Development on Group Homes, Land • Listen to what the neighbors have to
Use, and the Fair Housing Act say;
Joint Statement of the Department of • Never make land use decisions on
Housing and Urban Development and discriminatory statements made by
the Department of Justice—Reasonable community members;
Accommodations under the Fair
Housing Act, May 17, 2004. • Be aware of and stop any efforts to
delay a project through neighborhood
www.justice.gov/crt/about/hce/about_guidance.php requests for repeated meetings to
discuss the same topics over and over
again; =���•
LU HAW Housing Council of Ore IBIT D-1/PA 136 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/ 28 6
EXHIBIT D-1
• Be aware of effort to delay a project Housing is a platform—a location in a
through raising facially neutral issues particular place and a safe haven—for
such as parking or traffic; pursuing life's opportunities. Housing
If a public hearing is part of a quasi- situates people in a particular place, with a
• particular set of nearby assets like schools,
judicial proceeding, remind speakers
that a decision can be made solely on in a particular environment (healthy and
the basis that the project conforms to safe, unhealthy and unsafe or somewhere in
established criteria; between), and among a particular group of
people. Denying people the opportunity to
• Take appropriate action to address live where they can thrive based on their race,
legitimate complaints of neighbors; color, religion, national origin, sex, disability,
and, or family status perpetuates cycles of poverty
• Be aware of your responsibility to and despair and represents both a huge loss
affirmatively further fair housing if of human potential and a crime.
your jurisdiction receives federal
At first, integration may not be easy or
funding.
comfortable for those on the front lines—
CONCLUSION: FROM NIMBY TO not for the neighbors who may be reluctant
ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY to experience change, nor for the new
In the decades since the passage of the people moving in. As public officials, you
Fair Housing Act, the emphasis has begun have the opportunity to promote patience,
to change from a focus on the prevention dialogue and understanding. You also have
and elimination of discriminatory practices the responsibility of upholding the law. We
(eliminating a negative) to proactively encourage you to use the resources at your
supporting access to opportunity through disposal, including our office, to help promote
enabling a wider variety of housing and fair access to opportunity through housing in
neighborhood choices for those who your community.
historically and economically have had the • •
fewest choices (pursuing a positive). • . •
•
• . . .
■ ■
49 40 ‘; ■
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 137 OF 1
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/29
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 29 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
i�
4 . RESOURCES ,,,,,,,, �, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
O.
The information available online
on fair housing and inclusive ESSENTIAL RESOURCES FROM
communities continues to expand. THE DEPARTMENTS OF HOUSING
Entering the search terms "Fair AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND
Housing" and "NIMBY" (which JUSTICE
stands for Not in My Back Yard, a
term commonly used to describe Fair Housing Act, As Amended:
neighborhood opposition to a www.justice.gov/crt/about/hce/title8.php
project being located in that
neighborhood) into a web browser List of Fair Housing Laws from HUD's Office
will yield resources which can be of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity:
scanned to determine which ones http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/
are from reliable sources, such as fair_housing_equal_opp/FHLaws
state fair housing agencies, national
nonprofits and academic sources. Department of Justice Fair Housing Policy
Statements and Guidance:
In this dynamic information www.justice.gov/crt/about/hce/about_guidance.php
environment, a comprehensive list of
resources would soon be out of date. Department of Justice Overview of Fair
Thus, the information in this chapter Housing Act and Enforcement Measures:
represents an annotated selection of www.justice.gov/crt/about/hce/housing_coverage.php
key resources, including ones used in
the development of this guide. While
all links are current as of publication
of this guide in July 2014, they, too,
may change over time.
LU G-Q� . Housing Council of Ore �i IBIT D-1/PAGE 138 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 30 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
,
OREGON-SPECIFIC MATERIALS GENERAL GUIDES
City of Portland, Office of Neighborhood Pratt, Sara and Allen, Michael. (2004).
Involvement (2072). Addressing Community Opposition to
Community Residential Siting Resources. Affordable Housing Development: A
www.portlandoregon.gov/oni/32417 Fair Housing Toolkit. Housing Alliance of
Before it was discontinued in 2012, the Pennsylvania.
Community Residential Siting Program www.housingalliancepa.org/resources/111
provided guidance to neighbors and At 80 pages, a very thorough guide
housing providers on siting affordable to understanding and responding to
housing and housing for difficult-to-house neighborhood concerns about affordable
populations in Portland and Multnomah housing. This guide addresses the
County. Four practical resources are following topics: zoning and land use, free
still available on the website above: speech, community information campaigns
information for neighbors, recommended and government opposition. The sidebars
public involvement guidelines, community contain relevant examples, information
involvement strategies, and site selection about best practices, practice-related hints,
guidelines for post-incarceration facilities. and detailed information about topics
Some of the information references mentioned in the text. The list of resources
Portland zoning code and may not be (10 pages) includes websites, articles and
applicable elsewhere, but much of the books, and cases. This is a good resource
information is relevant throughout the to have bookmarked on your computer.
state.
Fair Housing Council of Oregon (2074).
Examining Local Land Use With a Fair
Housing Lens: An Evaluation Tool for
Planners, Policy Makers and Other
Practitioners.
www.fhco.org/pdfs/AFFHfhcol.pdf
A checklist for reviewing zoning codes and
current planning practices based on both
fair housing laws and Oregon state land use
laws and administrative rules.
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 139 OF 174
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/31
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 31 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
RESOURCES ,,,,,,, 471, ,,
RESOURCES FOR NEIGHBORS RESOURCES FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS
Tennessee Fair Housing Council. (2003). McCartney, Tracey. (2003). Navigating
Good Neighbors, Healthy Communities. NIMBY: A Public Official's Guide to
www.tennfairhousing.org/resources Neighborhood Living for People with
A guide about housing for people with
Disabilities. Tennessee Fair Housing Council.
disabilities written for neighborhood www.tennfairhousing.org/resources
residents. Using research findings, it One of the few guides available specifically
addresses common misconceptions about for elected officials. It includes a clear,
the impact of group homes and other logical presentation of the laws and
housing for people with disabilities on significant cases, myths and truths about
neighbors and neighborhoods. It also people with disabilities and a thoughtful
includes chapters on relevant laws, the chapter on the role of public officials.
rights of neighbors who live near housing
for people with disabilities and frequently Voelker, Robert. (n.d.). Utilizing the Fair
asked questions. Housing Act to Counteract NIMBY.
Shelterforce Online. National Housing
Institute.
www.nhi.org/online/issues/fairhousingmonth.html#Resources
A brief but very useful article that
describes the kinds of actions by local
governments and local officials that courts
have found to be in violation of the Fair
Housing Act. Includes a list of resources.
LU zz rain Housing Council of ore�j IBIT D-1/PAGE 140 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 32 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
,
RESOURCES FOR HOUSING
PROVIDERS
Connelly, Joy. (2005). Yes, in My Back Yard: Housing Assistance Council. (2005). Telling
A Guide for Ontario's Supportive Housing Our Story: Marketing Affordable Housing.
Providers. HomeComing Community Choice Rural Voices (10) 1.
Coalition. www.ruralhome.org/storage/documents/voicesspring2005.pdf
www.homecomingcoalition.com The Spring 2005 edition of Rural Voices,
While the laws governing housing choice the publication of the Housing Assistance
re different in the US and Canada, the Council, includes ten articles about how
underlying human dynamics are similar. This to advocate for affordable housing within
guide provides step-by-step suggestions for communities, with funders and with local
housing developers. Of particular interest residents in rural areas.
are the fifteen predictable objections and
how to deal with them. John Jay College of Criminal Justice. (2009).
In Our Backyard: Overcoming Community
Corporation for Supportive Housing. (2006). Resistance to Reentry Housing.
Thinking Beyond NIMBY: Building Community www.jjay.cuny.edu/TOOL_KIT_1-NIMBY_FINAL.pdf
Support for Supportive Housing. This guide introduces the magnitude of
www.csh.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/BeyondNlMBYpdf.pdf the challenge of finding housing for people
A guide for providers of supportive released from jails and prisons. The principal
housing—affordable housing with services focus is a detailed case study of The Castle,
for people who face complex challenges a reentry project undertaken by the Fortune
with daily living. Includes a variety of Society in New York City, and the more
strategies for overcoming community fears, broadly applicable best practices learned
including ideas for ways to link to outside from it. The publication also includes a list of
resources. Concludes with a case study and resources related to on reentry housing and
a list of additional publications. related topics.
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 141 OF 174
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/33
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 33 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
4 . RESOURCES
RESOURCES FOR HOUSING
PROVIDERS CONTINUED
OneCPD Resource Exchange (n.d.). N I M BY
Risk Assessment and Decision Tree Tool
(online resource).
https://onecpd.info/resources/nimbyassessment
An online resource for developers of
housing, with or without supportive
services, targeted to homeless individuals.
The user completes an online questionnaire
about current concerns, and the tool leads
to targeted case studies that address the
identified issues.
Tennessee Fair Housing Council. (2003). A
Place to Call Home: Addressing Opposition
to Homes for People with Disabilities in
Tennessee Neighborhoods.
www.tennfairhousing.org/resources
A guide for providers of housing for
people with disabilities. One of the best
features of this guide is a thorough
discussion of the comparative advantages
and disadvantages of high profile and
low profile approaches to siting. Other
chapters present an overview of relevant
laws, myths and truths (backed by research
findings) and other issues related to siting,
including a discussion of "fair share."
LU 25-000i
rem Housing Council of OrAPIBIT D-1/PAGE 142 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 34 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
NO, ES
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
MN
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ NO
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ r no
■ ■ a U .
. , rr
mm ri •
II% r A
LU 25-0001 _ EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 143 OF 174
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/35
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 35 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
. .
•
IFAIR
HOUSING
COUNCIL
OF OREGON
www.fhco.org
(503)223-8197
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-1/PAGE 144 OF 174
LU 25-0001 ATTACHMENT 2/PAGE 36 OF 36
EXHIBIT D-1
Fillikall.1611111111Z
Ii uildin1 uilding Inclusive Communities
A Guide for Public Officials
VP.A.'.11116‘
Agerit -
f
!it
fl'ir
Io 0
. o c
(=)
Mt. r. y
• • -: s
i i • H ENT E Tv� 30
_i � �
EXHIBIT D-1
91
Fsivilti ❑
�_ 0 Scan QR code to download the online
" girtd
Ff—� �� version of this guide, complete with
•z J r 0 ' reference links and the latest updates.
0 •
I—
FAIR
/rill
HOUSING
COUNCIL
OF OREGON
Fair Housing Council of Oregon,Winter 2024
Have a fair housing question or complaint in Oregon?Contact our housing discrimination hotline anytime via email at enforcement@
fhco.org or through our website.Please be sure to include your name,contact information,raceðnicity,city&zip code,and as
much detail as possible including dates and nature of incident(s).Providing this information will help us to assist you better.
Developed and written by Commonworks Consulting with JET Planning
Design and layout by Jean Dahlquist
The author gratefully acknowledges the assistance and contributions of the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and
Development in preparing this guide.
The work that provided the basis for this publication was supported by funding under a grant with the U.S.Department of Housing
and Urban Development(HUD).The substance and findings of this work are dedicated to the public.The author and publisher are
solely responsible for the accuracy of the statements and interpretations contained in this publication. Such interpretations do not
necessarily reflect the views of the federal government.
Page x
Eli 25:8881 MAilpE /eA Ad Z
EXHIBIT D-1
Table of Contents
1. Introduction oo,Fa:e 1
- Why You Should Use This Guide - Pg z
- Key Housing Terms - Pg 3
- A Note About Affordable Housing and Fair Housing - Pg 4
2. Federal Fair FIousin :asks ...Pa tie 5
- What is Meant By Discrimination? - Pg 6
- Brief History of Segregation & Land Use in Oregon - Pg 7
- Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing in Federal Law - Pg 8
3. Fair Housin k_ Ore on Goal 10 Plannin oo,Pa e 9
- Towards a Marriage of Systems - Pg io
- Plan for Fair and Inclusive Communities - Pg II
- Integrating Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Into - Pg Iz
Your City's Housing Production Strategy
- Increasing Housing Choice Through Supporting the - Pg 13
Development of Diverse Housing Types
- Incorporate Fair and Inclusive Community Engagement - Pg 15
- Establish and Follow Fair and Inclusive Local - Pg 17
Regulations
4, Ore:on Land Use Laws and Fair FIousin ...Fa:ce 22
111
_ ,
JVII II
FXH �p Page xi 4
�� ir�5-8881 ATT� HIVIEWI hV M Y)
EXHIBIT D-1
1 . Introduction
Is this Guide for You?
If you are a planning commissioner, elected official, or a Chapter 2 introduces fair housing and how it is intertwined
city or county staff member who is unclear about what with land use planning historically and today. Chapter
fair housing has to do with land use planning,then this 3 is about how land use planning can foster inclusive
guide is for you. If you are a local staff or official looking to communities, places where everyone is welcome. It
support fair housing,this guide is for you. Staff from other addresses ways to integrate fair housing principles into
departments and agencies that intersect with housing the Oregon Goal 10 housing planning process. Planning
or land use, such as building officials or social services staff seeking formal guidance on Goal 10 should consult
providers, as well as housing developers and community the authoritative materials provided by the Department of
advocates, may also find this guide useful. Land Conservation and Development (DLCD)1.
This guide is about land use planning and management
through a fair housing lens, with an emphasis on
housing that meets the needs of those most challenged
to find a suitable place to live.The goal is to create
inclusive communities by expanding housing choice
and affirmatively furthering fair and equitable housing.
Expanding housing choice means both reducing the 1 Should there be a conflict,guidance provided by DLCD super-
barriers that people experience in finding and securing sedes information in this guide. DLCD guidance is authoritative and is
likely to be more detailed and timelier.
housing that meets their needs and budget and increasing
the range of good housing options available to them.
0
0
I 0 0
o 0 0
o ' 0 0
0 o Page
38-8881 o , ',d, Hga/AV-AVZd
O
EXHIBIT D-1
Why You Should Use This Guide
regon faces a critical shortage of all housing, but
most especially housing affordable to households
and individuals with modest incomes. In 2021,the state
needed an estimated 140,000 more housing units just
to meet current demand at all income levels. Nearly
30%of the projected 580,000 housing units required to
meet housing need through 2042 (twenty years) must
be affordable to Oregon's lowest-income residents and
require public funding.2
Many have called for cutting regulations and streamlining
processes to address this crisis. But slashing regulations
does not ensure that Oregonians will get more of the
housing needed most, nor does it address existing housing
issues like segregated neighborhoods, racial and ethnic
disparities in homeownership, new development that
maximizes profit over housing diversity and opportunity,
homes full of barriers for people with mobility challenges,
and living environments where older adults cannot age
in place. So, it is important to also do things differently.
That's where this guide to Building Inclusive Communities
comes in.
Changes in laws and practices take time to bear fruit. As
you go down this path, remember you are trying to change
the course of an ocean liner, not a kayak. But if that ocean
liner doesn't start to change course now, it won't ever get � "pp
.
to its destination. Invest now in doing things differently . .
so that the next generation can live in more inclusive • • N
communities, places where everyone can find a suitable
home.
2 Source:20220201 RHNA Interim Framework Report.
pdf(oregon.gov).These figures are based on pilot effort to estimate
statewide housing need.Since this time,the methodology has been
revised to better account for second homes and vacation homes.
II : II II : II `t Ill II Ill 11!LAO.
I I 0i i � ❑❑ ❑❑
L 25 1 FXH p Page 2 �g E 4
E 25-8881 ME-ri VIE1 3 B0�i0
EXHIBIT D-1
Key Housing Terms Naturally occurring affordable housing means low-cost
housing that was not built with direct government subsidy.
It may include older apartments, manufactured dwelling
In this guide,the term housing types is used to refer to parks, and, in some cities, older single-family dwellings for
the way structures are built. It includes single-family rent.
detached houses, townhouses, plexes (duplexes, triplexes,
and quadplexes), multifamily, accessory dwelling units, Housing Affordability by Income Level
single room occupancies, and so forth. It also includes
various construction methods, including manufactured, The Oregon Housing Needs Analysis analyzes housing need
prefabricated, and site-built housing. for five income levels:
• Housing affordable to households making less than
Housing affordability refers to the ability of households 30 percent of median family income;
to afford housing if they are to pay no more than 30% • Housing affordable to households making 30
of their gross income for housing costs. While housing percent or more and less than 60 percent of
affordability is a consideration for households at all median family income;
income levels, the term affordable housing typically means • Housing affordable to households making 60
housing affordable to households with lower incomes. percent or more and less than 80 percent of
How low? That depends on the context. For example, median family income;
ORS 197A.470 pertaining to time limits for processing • Housing affordable to households making 80
development applications defines affordable housing as percent or more and less than 120 percent of
being affordable to households earning 60% Median Family median family income; and
Income (MFI), whereas ORS 197A.445 requiring cities to • Housing affordable to households making 120
permit affordable housing developments outright across percent or more of median family income.
most zones defines it as being affordable to households
earning 80% MFI for a minimum of 30 years. Sometimes Source: ORS 194.453(4)
the law also specifies ownership (e.g., nonprofit-owned
housing). Because the term affordable housing is used
fluidly, check individual laws to identify what is meant.
Housing tenure refers to ownership structure. Rental
housing is owned by a non-resident property owner or
landlord. Owner-occupied housing, as the name implies, is
owned by one or more residents. Mixed tenure, also called
divided asset ownership, sometimes occurs, as in the
case of investor-owned manufactured dwelling parks with provided by the federal government. In 2015,it cost$90 billion,while
owner-occupied manufactured homes. While jurisdictions the combined price tag for federal housing assistance to low-income
households such as housing vouchers and public housing was$51
are required to provide for both rental and owner- billion. Source: https://talkpoverty.org/2016/06/30/biggest-beneficia-
occupied housing,they are prohibited from requiring ries-housing-subsidies-wealthy/index.html.
specific projects to be for sale or rent per ORS 197A.465.
Government supported housing refers to housing financed
in whole or part by government subsidy from the federal,
state, or local government or a housing authority, per
ORS 456.005. It includes site-specific subsidies, such as
low-income housing tax credits, or household-specific
subsidies, such as Section 8 or Housing Choice vouchers.
It excludes indirect or market-wide subsidies that affect
housing units produced by the private market, such as the
Mortgage Interest Deduction3 or highway investment.
3 While not often considered a housing subsidy,the federal
Mortgage Interest Tax Deduction is the largest single housing subsidy
L 25 1 Wig!! p PPaagge 3 p E 4
I_d 25-8881 RAW-A �0�it
EXHIBIT D-1
c
•
1.
•-I
•":a- '1' . 1. ,!. �~ E. N :7) ;A ♦ 1-••r.`i ..•; ",f•.." .• -
..-
'KstbI• \ , �,. ' r^LA • + ' ._ • fir. i
It at
ilivIer
•• •,� ��'`, �, - �w !.• • R. fir 1"
r.
•
• • '
••_ gip; '! --� ; •
• j•
• 11.1 1.-• ''P'IL- '641.e./bSa. 6. "1• ,... d a • ......„...
• , I v
a` 10. ` .
A Note About Affordable Housing
and Fair Housing
-;�
. .,
.....• 11, ' .
... Nu Ili,h
s. I' L
ill
-� IF 1 .r. J r I \
„LAIR
il
. _ _.
. , ..,._____,__ ,._ _
. . .
. ,.... ,
..a_ss` _ iv.:
Fair housing and affordable housing are related but distinct concepts. Housing affordability deals
with whether a household's housing costs are within its means to pay. Fair housing, on the other
hand, refers to barriers that a household experiences based on protected class characteristics.
Because a disproportionate share of some protected class groups, such as Latinx households or
people with disabilities, have low incomes, these groups have a disproportionate need for govern-
ment-supported and naturally occurring affordable housing. Thus, a nexus between fair and afford-
able housing exists.
A Supporting the creation and preservation of affordable housing is essential to affir-
matively furthering fair housing, but it is only part of the solution.
- -
Lu 25 1 FXH p /PPaoge 4 E Z4
E 25-8881 F E-ri DE1/eA LV �vd 30
EXHIBIT D-1
2. Federal Fair Housing 'Basics
• • • • • •
DISABILITY RACE SEX COLOR NATIONAL RELIGION FAMILY
ORIGIN STATUS
The federal Fair Housing Act (FHA)was adopted as part
of the sweeping Civil Rights Act of 1968 in the wake of selling, lending, and providing insurance.
the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King. It makes equal
access to housing regardless of one's race, color, national Federal Protected Classes
origin, religion, sex(including sexual orientation and Race
gender identity), familial status (the presence or absence Color
of children under the age of 18 in the household), or National Origin
disability the law of the land. Religion
Sex(including sexual orientation and gender identity)
"Protected class" refers to a social characteristic, such Familial Status
as sex. Within each protected class, some population Disability
groups are more likely to experience discrimination than
others. For example,testing by the Fair Housing Council of Additional Oregon Protected Classes
Oregon consistently finds that Black and Latinx households Marital Status
experience discrimination in seeking rental housing4. Source of Income
Currently,there are seven federal "protected classes." Locally-Designated Protected Classes
Oregon has designated several additional protected classes OregonProtectedClasses_FHCO_2021.pdf
statewide. Some cities and counties have adopted local
ones as well.This guide focuses on land use and zoning-
related fair housing issues, but the FHA also applies to
a range of housing-related activities, including renting,
4 Differences in how prospective rental applicants were treated
based on their race were found in 26.4%of matched pair tests con-
ducted by the Fair Housing Council of Oregon between 2014 and 2022.
People of color were shown fewer options,told that there were no
vacancies,or experienced other unfavorable conditions when compared
to white applicants with similar or not quite as good rental qualifica-
tions.
111
111
\ A
4411‘1
25pp �XHI Paeg
Z5-00S� ATTAHIVIENT3 i •
EXHIBIT D-1
What is Meant By Discrimination?
When the term discrimination is used, overtly racist,
sexist, homophobic, or able-ist actions may come to
mind. But discrimination today is likely to be more subtle.
Housing discrimination takes many forms, and all are
prohibited by the FHA. Here are some examples:
• Direct Evidence:Actively and openly limiting
access to housing options based on an individual's
protected class status, such as the presence of a i
disability or national origin. •
• Unequal Treatment:Treating people differently 011c:
161
based on their protected class status, like charging
a household with children a higher security deposit J
than an adult-only household.
• Disparate Impact: Taking actions or adopting
policies that have a disproportionate and negative `►
•
effect on a protected class group while appearing
to treat everyone the same. Because this type
41111 _\•)
of discrimination is particularly relevant to land '
use and housing policy, it is discussed further in
Section 3 of this guide.
• Institutionalized or Systemic: Discrimination that
is widespread and deeply embedded in values, •
policies, and practices. Systemic discrimination •'" / 1
can be hard to recognize because it feels "normal," •
1
simply the way things are. For example, policies
that support the perpetuation of segregated
neighborhoods are embedded in land use codes 0:5' •
throughout the US. It takes a conscious effort
to see how those laws foster racial, ethnic, and
economic segregation and to change them.
tit 411
1 FXH Page 6
2
EU 8=888 FXHI�IHrkisi AVAO
EXHIBIT D-1
A Brief History of Segregation and Land Use in
Oregon
Oregon, like other states, has a long history of discriminatory housing practices which contribute
to persistent economic and social patterns of residential segregation and intergenerational wealth
gaps. For millennia,the area that became the Oregon Territory and later the State of Oregon was
home to indigenous people. These tribal nations were forced off their traditional homelands
and onto reservations as white settlers began coming into Oregon in the mid-19t" century.The
Donation Land Act of 1850 encouraged white families to move to Oregon, build farms, and spread
out across the state.The land claims were distributed without waiting for tribes to officially cede
the land through negotiated settlements. Within five years, the Oregon settler population boomed
from 13,000 to 52,000, and millions of acres of native land had been stolen and occupied by white
settlers.
The land grant program for white settlers is just one of several laws that made Oregon a
predominantly white state. During the mid-19t"century, as Oregon was preparing to become the
33rd state, a series of laws excluded Black people from coming to or residing in the Oregon Territory.
Article 35 of the Oregon State Constitution stated: "No free Negro or Mulatto, not residing in this
State at the time of the adoption of the constitution shall come, reside or be within this State,
or hold any real estate."This law was not repealed until 1926, and the actual language was not
removed until 2001.
Chinese immigrants, once the second largest racial group in Oregon after whites,faced their own
exclusionary barriers in the 1859 constitution. "No Chinaman, not a resident of the state at the
adoption of this constitution shall ever hold any real estate or work in any mining claim therein."
While there was an unwillingness to ban Chinese labor,the government made it clear that they
were not to be regarded as permanent residents. This provision was not repealed until 1946.
In the early part of the 20' century, early zoning codes across the US were used to explicitly
exclude certain residents by race. Oregon was no exception. When this practice was made illegal
by the Supreme Court in Buchanan v. Warley(1917), single-family residential zones and racially
restrictive deed covenants were used instead to achieve similar aims.
During WWII,the United States forcibly relocated and incarcerated thousands of people of
Japanese descent, most of whom were from Pacific Coast states. They lost their homes,their
businesses,their neighbors, and their communities. More than 4,000 Oregon residents of Japanese
descent were forcibly relocated, only to return to discrimination and reduced opportunities.
Mortgage lending "redlining" further solidified patterns of residential racial segregation. Later in
the century, urban renewal projects and highway building disproportionately displaced people of
color and low-income households. Today, economic displacement and gentrification remain active
threats in some areas.
This history means that Oregonians have a lot of work to do to recognize, understand, and address
old patterns of racial and economic exclusion that persist. Subtle vestiges of discriminatory laws still
haunt our land use and planning practices today.
LL 2255 11 FXH g�T �/pPagge 7E 9 p 1 4
C� Z5:OOS1 AVM81 4 3_/9AGE410 FO o
EXHIBIT D-1
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
in Federal Law
Affirmatively furthering fair housing means going
beyond not discriminating. It means taking meaningful Oregon's Fifteen Fair Housing Plans
actions to address disproportionate housing needs, HUDG►antee HUD Grantee Type _ Pan Dote
overcome patterns of segregation, and racially/ethnically _ _ Statewide
concentrated areas of poverty. It means fostering inclusive Oregon Balance of State 2021
communities free from barriers that restrict access to Cede
opportunity based on protected characteristics. Albany City Entitlement 20181
Ashland City Entitlement 2020
The Fair Housing Act (FHA) requires jurisdictions that Bend City Entitlement 20191
receive federal funding for housing to affirmatively further Corvallis City Entitlement 20181
fair housing. If a jurisdiction routinely receives an annual Eugene City Entitlement 2020
appropriation from any of five funding sources managed Grants Pass City Entitlement 2016
by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development Medford City Entitlement 2015
(HUD),5 they must prepare and implement a fair housing Redmond City Entitlement 20151
plan on specified cycle, typically every five years. Currently, Isalem City Entitlement 2019
fourteen local jurisdictions and the state of Oregon have Springfield City Entitlement 2020
fair housing plans. Most are cities with populations of Countywide
50,000 or greater, but the list includes some counties as
well.The State of Oregon plan covers the balance of state, Multnomah County Portland Consortium 20111
that is, the areas without their own local fair housing Washington County Washington County Consortium 2020
plans.As jurisdictions meet eligibility thresholds,the list Clackamas County Urban Entitlement County 2022
changes slightly over time. Marion County Urban Entitlement County 2021
These federally mandated fair housing plans contain Sourcet tripesunm.n ofI4ouwr and urt�n l netop ,.nt,cityI county
extensive data and analysis about local housing needs websltet,electronic commurr.catlanc
and disparities. They also describe what a jurisdiction
has committed to do to affirmatively further fair housing. Notes
They are an important local resource, and planners should to 2020•Kelm joined Marion County,forming a new(Alan County
consult these plans and meet with local housing staff Enbdemcnt Program liar CMG 8 HOME
as part of their local Oregon Goal 10 housing planning Eugene and S rtneeldare inaconsortwm(no other prsd(lions involvedl,
but they trepan:wparate etls and subena therm prntly.
process.
'R Resources
Defining Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Federal State
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing I HUD. ORS 197A.100(9)
goy/U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development(HUD)
5 The five HUD programs are Community Development Block
Grants(CDBG),HOME Investment Partnerships(HOME),Emergency
Solutions Grants(ESG),Housing Trust Fund(HTF),and Housing for Peo-
ple with AIDS(HOPWA).
EHL 2255 FXH g�T �/pPagge 8E 9 p 1 4
Z5-8881 A7TAlCFf1NT 3_fAGE51'f FoF730
EXHIBIT D-1
Ilk t
4 0. • ) _
...4 Is orrir 4. illif
•
i 14ke.c.„,
' I
f
4 - tj . i--
. Will
,s ,
e V N' Ak `v .
, 1 l<7.4 \ I\
/ \' Ak\..w -----‘ --tk
' N r \
• . f ,
APP
ht
.0,
I Fair Housing and
Oregon Goal 10 Plannin
4_
a
Goal 10 Housing: Buildable lands for residential use shall be inventoried
and plans shall encourage the availability of adequate numbers of needed
housing units at price ranges and rent levels which are commensurate with
the financial capabilities of Oregon households and allow for flexibility of
housing location, type, and density...
'ill
Excerpt from Oregon Housing Goal 10,goa110.PDF (oregon.gov)
Lu 25 1 FXH g�T /pPagge 9 Q 1 g
Cv 25:5881 A7TA�CFff NT 3ffiR8n FOF730
EXHIBIT D-1
Towards a Marriage of Systems
Goal 10 Housing was among the first 14 Statewide housing choices for people who have the fewest. Who has
Planning Goals that LCDC adopted in 1974 to form the fewest housing choices? Members of protected class
the backbone of Oregon's land use planning system. Goal groups, like people of color and people with disabilities.
10 Housing requires cities to plan for the availability of
needed housing. The federal and state laws also have different geographic
scopes. Federal law requires cities of approximately 50,000
Needed housing, and its related features of affordability, or greater to affirmatively fair housing through fair housing
type, density, and location, are concepts central to Oregon plans, while the state obligation extends to Oregon cities
housing planning. Oregon cities must demonstrate that of 10,000 or greater that produce Housing Production
they have sufficient land available to accommodate the Strategies.
projected 20-year need for these types and any locally
designated types of needed housing. Needed housing is This section addresses four aspects of promoting inclusive
what cities must"plan for." neighborhoods through land use planning in Oregon:
• Updating your comprehensive plan and the Goal
Oregon's Goal 10 Housing and the federal Fair Housing 10 Housing Planning Process
Act were inspired in part by a similar impulse—ensuring • Incorporating fair and inclusive community
housing choice for everyone—and were adopted within engagement and decision-making
a few years of each other.The connection was cemented • Establishing and following fair and inclusive
beginning in 2019,when state regulations and laws began regulations and procedures
to embed federal affirmatively furthering fair housing • Understanding shelters and emerging housing
principles in the Goal 10 housing planning process. types
However,the two laws take different approaches to The recommendations are in keeping with both federal
expanding housing choice. Federal law focuses on people- and state fair housing law.
-protected classes--to promote housing choice, whereas
Goal 10 initially focused on land use planning for physical
buildings--needed housing. However, the inclusion of
affirmatively furthering fair housing in the Goal 10 housing
process elevated the importance of expanding decent
Y 7
tee'
State Housing Council Chair Betty Niven
of Eugene (pictured) and Homebuilders
Association lobbyist Fred VanNatta advocated
• for the creation of a housing goal in 1974.
1'4
•
L 25 1 FXH g�T �/PPaggeioE 9 p 1 4
CU Z5:OOO1 A7TA�CFf NT 3_fAG 713 FO o
EXHIBIT D-1
Plan for Fair and Inclusive Communities
When the state legislature revamped the Goal 10 The cycle begins with the Oregon Housing Needs Analysis
Housing Planning Process in the early 2020s,they (OHNA), an annual 20-year estimate of housing needs
established two goals: statewide by the Oregon Department of Administrative
• the production of housing to meet the need of Services (DAS). DAS allocates that 20-year need to local
Oregonians at all levels of affordability; and governments and also provides a total Housing Production
• the production of housing in a way that creates Target and the number of units needed at specified
more housing choice by affirmatively furthering income levels for each city and urbanized area in the state
fair housing. annually.
The diagram below illustrates the process that cities Cities,through a Housing Capacity Analysis, determine
with populations of 10,000 or greater must follow to whether they have sufficient buildable land within their
periodically study and plan for the housing needs of both Urban Growth Boundary to meet those needs, and what
current and future residents. kinds of comprehensive plan and code changes may be
.,a •.g Capacity A
Drepen
Mousing Needs ♦ Local Mr • Housing Production
Analysts IOHNA) Needed h tq / Reporting Dashboard
Ass.ss Land Cape city r�
y$ Ar r -1lj1c Lw..li
_I. Dsvelopnwr Readwse i4ousicie 4 `1
IMtwing livedtrdisn lMsbgy
l N,'.•Jr• &
E vaWte Boners
"10 k d
to Production
The Goal 10 Proc•••
State Fey Not.
Source: Department of Land Conservation and Development
needed to meet those needs. Cities also develop and
adopt a Housing Production Strategy that describes actions Resources
that a jurisdiction will take to support the development
of needed housing and promote housing choice. Finally,
cities implement their Housing Production Strategy and
report annually on housing production to track progress.
The housing planning cycle is repeated every six(Portland -
Metro)to eight(balance of state)years to update city pun to accommodate me u
plans and evaluate their progress. hatngona regular k gutarochoou
DLCD Housing
4111 Capacity and
Production
(c)
Overview&
Goal 10
Houvt+q Noods'Capacay
Anrtr,tts INNA)
LL 2255 1 FXH g�T /pPagge rrE 9�g 1 4
C� Z5-8881 A7TA�CFf1NT 3 AGE-12FOF730
EXHIBIT D-1
Integrating Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
into Your City's Housing Production Strategy
Csties are required to achieve fair and equitable housing
outcomes through the implementation of their Housing ♦ I I
Production Strategy. The Strategy must affirmatively —•_
further fair housing as well as identify strategies to make r I 1 ♦
progress towards a city's Housing Production Target. .
Affirmatively furthering fair housing means taking • Ilk
proactive steps to address housing disparities, patterns of - ` .4.
segregation, and disparate access to community assets. i
` .
1 Before you can identify the right strategies, however, you " %
must identify the problems. Fair housing plans required A
by the federal government of jurisdictions that are annual Ci$*
t •
•
HUD Grantees contain data and research directly related 7"
to housing needs of protected classes.They also lay out /7 . ,
strategies and actions to affirmatively further fair housing.
If your city is covered by a fair housing plan, consult it,6 it .
or, if you don't, refer to county level data in the state's 4( '
fair housing plan. Research barriers experienced by _/ i,�� —/ / �(11147 -( . - . , 4 ,
members of protected classes in your area. Look for fair • Examine your city's geographic pattern of
housing problems embedded in planning and land-use
related policies and practices, such as those propping up integration and segregation and consider its
relationship to patterns of affluence and poverty,
segregation by income and race/ethnicity. locations of community assets like good schools,
Here are some recommendations for identifying fair and exposure to environmental harms.
housing issues: Consider what can be accomplished through your land use
• Identify the primary populations facing housing
challenges like cost burden. Consider race, planning system, such as changes to the comprehensive
ethnicity, housing status (whether housed or plan, capital improvement plan, zoning map and code,fee
unhoused), types of disability, age, and household schedules, development incentives, and programs. Also
types (such as single parent households). consider changes to processes and procedures within both
• Look at regional demographics, as well as those the planning commission and the planning department.
But don
of your city. Identify protected class groups in
t stop there.
the region but not in your city and consider what The obligation to affirmatively further fair housing applies
barriers might be preventing them from living in to the entire city, not just one department. So, be sure
your community. to include elected officials and city leadership, other
• Look for barriers that prevent local protected
class groups from accessing each of these city departments including public works, engineering,
specific housing options: 1) rental housing, 2) parks,finance, and administration, as well as potential
homeownership opportunities, and 3) housing partners like housing developers, culturally specific
with needed accessibility adaptations. Go deeper organizations, and social service providers in the Housing
than the shortage of low cost and government- Production Strategy planning process and work to secure
supported housing. While that is a pervasive and commitments from them.
important problem, it's not the only one to solve. After the HPS is adopted, decide how to integrate periodic
6 See page 8 of this guide for a list of jurisdictions that produce progress reports to your planning commission, city council
HUD-mandated fair housing plans. and key partners to keep them engaged in implementation.
7 Oregon's 2021-25 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing
Choice can be found here:Con Plan Dividers(oregon.gov)
LL 2255 1 FXH g�T /PPagge 12E 9�g p 1 4
C� Z5-8881 A7TA�CFf1NT 3_fAGE-15F0F730
EXHIBIT D-1
Increasing Housing Choice through Supporting
the Development of Diverse Housing Types
In 2023, the City of Gold Beach, which has
a population of less than 2,500, passed the
Housing Advancement Project, which combined
all existing residential zone types into a single
residential zone. The City also allowed middle
housing types by right. These changes had the
effect of simplifying the permitting process,
saving time and money. In the long term, it
may also lead to more inclusive development
„Jr r.,�{' „ , ,, • patterns, with housing of all types and
densities side-by-side one another in every
neighborhood.
O
regonians have diverse housing needs, and they Getting the right zoning in place is an important first step,
change over the course of a lifetime as households but it's just one piece of the larger puzzle of support-
grow and contract, and abilities change with age.Average ing housing choice. Simply allowing a housing type as a
household size has been shrinking over the decades, permitted use does not guarantee that it is practicable to
while average dwelling size has increased. Currently, most build. Many other aspects of development regulations,
Oregon households—approximately 60%--are comprised such as siting and design standards and public facilities
of one or two individuals, of which more than a quarter standards, affect whether a given housing type is econom-
are single individuals who live alone. Nearly one in five ically feasible to build. Financial policies, like system devel-
Oregonians are older adults over the age of 65. opment charges and permit fees, and public investments
further impact project feasibility. These are all aspects of
Simply planning and zoning land within a UGB for a bifur- housing development that local governments can address
cation of single-family detached homes and multifamily to support the creation of diverse, inclusive communities.
apartments does not provide for an abundance and diver-
sity of affordable options. Housing options like accessory Providing for variety within each residential neighborhood
dwelling units (ADUs), middle housing types (plexes,town- (not just within the city overall) supports greater economic
homes, and cottage clusters), manufactured and modular integration at a human scale. Economic integration opens
homes, single-room occupancy developments (SROs), and the door to greater racial, ethnic, and cultural integration.
other housing options play an important role in meeting Providing people of all income levels with meaningful
the evolving housing needs of Oregonians. Accessibility choices about the community they live in helps overturn
or adaptability features that go beyond the minimum longstanding patterns of racially segregated living.Allowing
required in state building code, like ensuring that all new for a broader mix of housing types in single-family neigh-
bathroom walls are reinforced to support future installa- borhoods as required by state law is a good start; what can
lion of grab bars, support aging in place. your city do to encourage their development?What other
housing options can be permitted in more places within
your community?
LL 2255 1 FXH g�T /pPa a 13E 9�p Q 1 4
C� Z5-888a AVM81 f4NT Page
FOF730
EXHIBIT D-1
R Resources
DLCD Guidance and Resources—
• Accessory Dwelling Units:
i Microsoft Word - SB1051 ADUguide
updatedSept2019.docx (oregon.gov)
• Middle Housing:
Department of Land Conservation and
Development : Housing Choice : Housing
Program : State of Oregon
• Housing in Climate Friendly Areas:
Department of Land Conservation
and Development: Increasing Housing
Production and Transportation Choice
Climateandhousing.pdf
•
im.
Ilk
1101 o L-7112(=, 0
o 1 o o . •
m p, ," _
„eft 44 . , 9,.." t t'. ;*vr:
• i'�' ( f - 70 X1•. J'-` n
r
u 25 1 FXH g�T /PPagge 14E Q 1 g
EU 25:8881 A7TANTarlT 3fR8E117 FoF730
EXHIBIT D-1
Incorporate Fair and Inclusive Community
Engagement
• Don't "tokenize" certain leaders within marginal-
/ Assess1]C]l< Your Community ized communities or assume that they speak for
the whole community. Seek out a variety of voices
within communities.
Ent ement Practices
• Take time to understand why someone might want
Incorporating fair housing into the way your city works to get involved. Two studies found that the prima-
means taking a fresh look at your community engage- ry motivations of participants from traditionally
ment processes, from who is on appointed commissions marginalized communities were the desire to give
and committees through how outreach is done around back to their community and to improve opportu-
specific projects. Think broadly about the kinds of commu-
nities for future generations'.
nities that exist in your area, including geographic commu . Depending on the community, consider focusing
nities (such as neighborhoods), communities of interest dialogue more on desired outcomes than on tech
(such as cyclists), and communities of identity(such as nical concerns. If you must get technical, present
people who have emigrated from Mexico). How do these options with clear examples to help illustrate the
intersect (or not)with protected class groups in your city? choices to be made.
• Create realistic expectations by incorporating
Many cities struggle with including communities of color, information on what is and is not within the city's
people born outside the US, and non-English speakers
ability to achieve.
in their outreach efforts. Start with investing in building • Be respectful of people's time. Only ask for
trust, which takes time and the willingness to engage in information that you will use or is relevant to the
two-way communication. Here are some ideas': choices that will be made. Don't ask if what stake-
• Take time to learn about the culture and communi holders say isn't likely to make a difference in the
cation pathways of the groups you want to reach. project. Be clear about how community input will
• Invest in forming relationships and building trust impact a project.
over time, so that you are not scrambling at the • If people provide you with information, be sure
last minute to conduct outreach to "check a box" to circle back to them to let them know how that
Focus on showing up, listening, being culturally
appropriate, honest, and consistent with actions. information was used and what the final product
includes. Getting back to participants is part of
• Look for opportunities to merge engagement of building trust.
forts for multiple projects. For example, Beaverton
identified several projects that would involve out-
reach to Latinx communities over a few years. This
enabled city staff to combine resources, recruit a
9 See:Zapata,Moses,Mercurio,Ghosul,&Townley.(2021).
single group of volunteers, and build relationships. Regional Supportive Housing Impact Fund Report: Equitable Evalua-
• Don't let the lack of local culturally specific organs- lion Framework and Governance Recommendations,"Health Share of
zations derail your efforts. Instead, consider where Oregon(2021).https://www.pdx.edu/homelessness/equitable-eval-
people naturally congregate, such as a church or a uation-framework-and-governance-report.Also: Snow,Tweedie,&
store or a Head Start Center. Reach out to cultur Pederson.(2018)."Heard and valued:the development of a model
to meaningfully engage marginalised populations in health services
ally specific organizations active throughout the planning,"in BMC Health Services Res rch 18,Article 81.https://doi.
state to see what ideas and potential contacts they or: 10.1186 s12913-018- 69-1
may be able to provide.
• Consider why some groups may not trust "the
government" and seek advice on navigating those
barriers. '
8 Some suggestions in this section come from this report:
Zapata, M.,&Mercurio,S.(2022).Planning Housing with Marginalized
v
Communities.Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Develop- '
ler
ment.
LL 2255 1 FXH g�T �/pPagge 15E 9 p 1 4
C� Z5-8881 A7TA�CFf NT 3_fAGE218 F0V 0
EXHIBIT D-1
Seek Decision Makers with Diverse
7/0
Csties should identify and promote individuals with a
variety of experiences to serve as decision makers on
appointed boards and commissions. Members of protected
classes may be significantly underrepresented at all levels
of political leadership. Consider how to include people
who may add a new perspective on planning issues. For ex-
ample, does your planning commission include renters'°? likil# °al*
Does it include someone with a mobility-related disability
whose lived experience may be relevant? What about
younger adults, who may be living in your community for
decades to come?To ensure that newer commissioners
feel welcome and able to participate, review the kinds of ( of
support your city can offer,from training on land use and Public Meet>1ffnts
)
informal mentoring to financial assistance and practical
support such as meals and childcare during meetings.
One of the impacts of the COVID pandemic was to
accelerate cities' adoption of virtual and hybrid public
meetings. Consider how these meeting types affect com-
10 See: Levine Einstein, Maxwell, Palmer.(2023).Who Rep- munity participation. Have they supported greater partici-
resents the Renters?Housing Policy Debate,33:6,1554-1568,DOI: patios by groups underrepresented at in-person meetings,
10.1080/10511482.2022.2109710https://maxwel Ipa I mer.com/research/
EinsteinOrnsteinPalmer Homeowners.pdf such as people with disabilities, people with transportation
challenges, and people with childcare responsibilities?
Have they decreased participation from less digitally con-
' ` nected or less tech savvy groups like older adults? Evaluate
and fine tune outreach and the conduct of meetings to
include previously or currently underrepresented people.
i
,r While it's difficult to contain hateful statements from the
-...,eilsliipublic because of Constitutional free speech protections
• and state law, public officials need to remember that public
decisions about housing cannot be based on race, color,
�r religion, sex, national origin, familial status, or disability
status. Here are some general guidelines:
• Listen to what people say, but never make deci-
sions based on discriminatory statements.
• Pay particular attention to not buying into un-
founded generalizations about groups of people.
• Don't fall for the ploy of facially neutral issues like
.` •
traffic generation which mask underlying resis-
tance�� to living near"those people."
• Stay focused on impacts related to a specific de-
velopment that are regulated by zoning like height
and density and be hyper-alert to comments about
"community character" or"decreased property
values"that may be coded discrimination against
protected classes.
• Be aware of, and nip in the bud, efforts to delay
1] ; 1] 11 ; 1] 1] I 1decisions and rehash topics as stalling tactics.
1 2 — i� I! , � ❑❑ ❑❑
Lu 2255 1 FXH g�T /pPa e r6E 9 Q 1 4
EU Z5-S881 A7TA�CFf4NT Page
FOF730
EXHIBIT D-1
Establish and Follow Fair and Inclusive
Local Regulations
CClear and Objective Standards for
All Housin<t
For all housing types inside an Urban Growth Boundary, for Portland's central city or Metro's eight designated
a city must offer a clear and objective review path regional centers. However,there's a small exception to the
with clear and objective standards for an application or exception: clear and objective standards must be applied
permit for residential development.The review path and to development of housing on property owned by a
standards cannot "have the effect, either in themselves nonprofit corporation organized as a religious corporation,
or cumulatively, of discouraging needed housing through such as St.Vincent DePaul of Eugene or Caritas Housing/
unreasonable cost or delay" (ORS 197A.400(1)(b)). The Catholic Charities (ORS 197A.470(5)).
intent in part is to make the approval process more
predictable, streamlined, and cost-efficient for developers A common practice from the past is to make the
than a path embedded with discretionary reviews. A city construction of single-family detached housing "clear and
may also offer an additional review path that includes objective," but to subject other housing types like duplexes
standards that do not meet the clear and objective criteria, to scrutiny by the planning commission and/or city council,
provided the pathway is 1) optional, 2) in compliance with typically through a conditional use permit process.This
statewide land use planning goals and laws and 3) enables can lead to discretionary standards being applied, which is
the same or more housing than what would be allowed via a violation of state law. Vestiges of this practice still exist
the clear and objective pathway. in some planning codes, and cities should address them
to comply with state law and avoid potential litigation by
There are two exceptions to the "clear and objective" applicants.
requirement of state law: applications for residential
development in designated historic districts and those
erz 1Resources
Clear and Objective Standards:
A local government may adopt and apply only clear and objective
standards, conditions and procedures regulating the development of
housing... The standards, conditions and procedures...may not have the
effect, either in themselves or cumulatively, of discouraging needed
housing through unreasonable cost or delay...
Excerpts from ORS 197A.400
Lu 25 1 FXH g�T /PPagge 17E 9 fi p 1 4
Cv Z5-S881 A7TA�CFf Ni 3 AGE420 FOF730
EXHIBIT D-1
achieved by another practice that has a less discriminatory
effect (Step 3).
�- One example of a policy that falls under the discriminatory
effects doctrine is so-called "snob zoning." Researcher
_
' Richard Kahlenberg claimed zoning laws barred multifamily
units on three-quarters of the land in most US cities'1
0requFor example, 81%of residential land in Connecticut
:
ired one-acre lots, driving up the cost of housing. In
communities where significantly more people of color
1 SI
and people with disabilities have lower incomes than
I + �.,� white people and people without disabilities, snob zoning
would both perpetuate racial segregation and have a
disproportionate impact on several protected classes.
tr
• Zones that allow for only single-family detached
` —Alb 46
housing may be vulnerable to a legal challenge under
` the discriminatory effects doctrine. Oregon state law
mandating that cities of 2,500 or more allow a mix of
housing types in zones permitting single-family detached
housing may reduce vulnerability to such a legal challenge.
Cities may, however, have other policies resulting in
Discriminatory Effects: Disparate potentially discriminatory effects. That's one reason why
Impact and Perpetuation of Se re Ott®� cities should analyze the potential positive and negative
impacts of housing policies on protected class groups
before they are adopted. Consider whether the policy
As a matter of good practice, cities should consider the increases or decreases housing opportunities for groups
potential positive and negative impacts of a land use with the fewest housing choices.
policy on protected classes before adopting it (such as a
burdens and benefits analysis). But there's also a legal 11 See: Kahlenberg,R.(2023).Excluded: How Snob Zoning, NIM-
reason: the federal Discriminatory Effects Doctrine. BYism,and Class Bias Build the Walls We Don't See.Excluded by Richard
D.Kahlenberg I Hachette Book Group
Under the federal Fair Housing Act, cities are prohibited
from adopting policies that perpetuate segregation or have
a disproportionate impact on members of one or more I Resources
protected classes.This is called the Discriminatory Effects
Doctrine. It provides a legal basis for challenging policies
such as zoning requirements that unnecessarily excludeler
protected classes from housing opportunities or cause
systemic inequality in housing, regardless of whether they
were adopted with discriminatory intent or not. HUD Guidance on Discriminatory Effects
Doctrine:
HUD has instituted a three-step process to determine • Fact sheet on 2023 Rule:
whether a policy runs afoul of the Discriminatory Effects DISCRIMINATORY EFFECTS FINAL RULE
Doctrine. In a discriminatory effects challenge of a planning
policy, the parties bringing the lawsuit must show evidence (hud.gov)
that the claim has sufficient merit to proceed to trial (Step • Revised Rule:DISCRIMINATORY EFFECTS
1).Then,the burden shifts to the jurisdiction to show that REVISED RULE
the challenged practice is necessary to achieve one or
more substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interests j
(Step 2). However,the parties bringing to lawsuit may still
prevail by proving that the legitimate interests could be
EHL 2255 1 FXH g�T �/PpagAe r8E 9 p 1 4
Z5:8881 A7TAN NT 3 AGE52'f FOF730
EXHIBIT D-1
TZ I Resource I'easonable Accommodations for
]�eo7plle with Disabilities
Cities
should work toward planning accessible
Reasonable accommodations communities that provide people with disabilities
eliminate barriers that prevent persons more choice in where they live and increase their ability
to engage in daily life.There are many proactive actions
with disabilities from fully participating that cities can take to promote housing choice for people
in housing opportunities, including both with disabilities, and some have been mentioned in prior
private housing and in federally assisted sections of this report. At a minimum, cities must follow
programs or activities. the "reasonable accommodation" policy in the federal Fair
Housing Act, which requires local jurisdictions to make
Source: Reasonable Accommodations and Modifica "reasonable" exceptions or changes to the general rules
lions HUD.gov/U.S. Department of Housing and or practices to accommodate the needs of people with
Urban Development(HUD) ] disabilities.
The federal law requires that jurisdictions decide what is
reasonable on a case-by-case basis based on the needs
Adir of the individuals involved.The city is not required to put
health and safety precautions aside or change the nature
of the zoning of the neighborhood.The jurisdiction should
keep a running list of accommodations made over time
to help guide future decisions about what is reasonable
ik and to ensure consistency.An example of a reasonable
accommodation might be to allow the slight encroachment
of a housing feature such as a wheelchair ramp into a
setback.
yt it S
Jurisdictions must also make reasonable accommodations
ilir_
for people with disabilities when they meet with staff,
- apply for a permit, or attend a public meeting. This may
mean changing the meeting location if it is not accessible
or providing sign language interpretation if the person is
hearing impaired.
A
ifInInformation
I
el
1, r,
What does disability mean?
There are many different definitions of disability. The one relevant to fair housing is
included in the Fair Housing Act and states that someone is disabled if he, she, or they has
_ a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more major life activities,
Lis regarded as having such an impairment, or has a record of such an impairment. Source:
DOC 7771.PDF (hud.gov) and 43 U.S.C. 3602(h).
LL 2255 FX1, B1T .� g 0 4 _
C� Z5-8881 f-i jik ATTACH I I mag62z FbV30
ems,,
EXHIBIT D-1
(Understand Shelters and Emer<tency ) _
r
Living<_Arran emennts
4.-weelry
11!:0 0 0 0 Olf -* ',Al ic4
Shelters `
Shelters address an important human need for people who •
lack a permanent place to live. They function as part of a V;
shelter to housing continuum12. -.4r,,—..
While shelters are important to community health, the / . a
federal Fair Housing Act and Oregon land use law treat
them differently. Because the FHA applies to "dwellings," - ol.
some shelters are likely covered, and thus shelter • - l f
tl �.
operators cannot discriminate based on the federal ��
protected class status of a resident or applicant.The courts
have found that a shelter qualifies as a dwelling when it is
intended for occupants who plan to remain at or return to While the state does not treat shelters like housing in
the facility over a period of time.13 land use law, it does regulate how cities manage the siting
of shelters. As long as the share of people experiencing
Shelters,transitional housing, motels used as transitional homeless in Oregon continues to reach or exceed 0.18%as
housing, and campsites do not fall under the definition of measured by the biennial statewide point-in-time count,
needed housing per ORS 197A.018. This means that cities local governments must approve emergency shelters on
are not required to plan for them in comprehensive plans any property within the UGB or on rural residential lands,
nor describe how they will support their development subject to certain conditions and ownership, per ORS
through their Housing Capacity Analyses and Housing 197.78314. Local governments must unconditionally allow
Production Strategies. Shelters do not count as housing the conversion of hotels or motels to emergency shelters
units for state housing production counts. or affordable housing meeting statutory parameters, per
ORS 197.748.
12 This continuum represents a range of living arrangements.
Note,however,that individuals do not have to experience each stage
before moving on to the next. For example,in the"Housing First"ap-
proach,people without housing move directly into subsidized housing. 14 The rate of homelessness in Oregon is.42%,per The 2022
13 An average stay of 14.8 days has met the court's standard. Annual Homelessness Assessment Report(AHAR to Congress)Part 1:
See Lakeside Resort Fnters.v. Bd.Of Supervisors of Palmyra Two. 2006 Point-In-Time Estimates of Homelessness,December 2022(huduser.
US App.LEXIS 18223(2006). gov)
An Example of a Shelter Housing Continuum
4( '" r° • 1
/Nm III n - • r' Arta
al .. �� 11.
Emergency Transitional Supportive Community/ Subsidized Private
Homelessness SheltPrc Housing Housing Social Housing Maritet Rent Market Rent HomeownerahSP
.EH 25-8881 ATTARFi NTGE723 FOF730
EXHIBIT D-1
Emerging Living Arrangements
New kinds of living arrangements emerge when traditional housing options become less affordable or less appealing to
more people. Some have been fashioned by people who would otherwise lack a place to live. Others have been created
by people who want a more minimalist or mobile lifestyle than that offered by standard housing.These options include
recreational vehicles and Tiny Homes on Wheels.
Recreational Vehicles (RVs) are motor vehicles or trailers that typically include sleeping
quarters, a kitchen, and bathroom. They are designed to readily travel from place to place
and are built to be temporary living quarters for recreational, camping, travel, or seasonal
use, not permanent dwellings. However, some households live in them for years and consider • • \
them to be their permanent home. Per state law, RVs are allowed in manufactured dwelling ,
parks. The state does not require local jurisdictions to make RVs outside manufactured
dwelling parks an allowed use.
Tiny Homes on Wheels (THOWs) are small living spaces on wheels that typically have
provisions for sleeping and eating as well as a bathroom. Oregon state law does not define
THOWs, and so there's no uniform construction code that they all must meet. Some are built
to RV dimensions and code standards and are regulated as such by some cities.Their quality
and safety vary, with some being very well-crafted. (More about Tiny Homes)
Locally and nationally,the high cost of construction has spurred interest in new building
technology and types. The use of robotics, new variations in factory-built housing, and 3-D
printed homes are some of the emerging options being considered to build permanent
housing meeting standard fire and life safety codes. /J
Cities should consider--and plan for and permit--a range of shelter and housing options to
meet the immediate and permanent housing needs of residents locally and in their region.
Cities should consider how to regulate emerging living arrangements without losing sight of
the need to create permanent housing options for all residents.
11
ekak 1 Reso urces
Tiny Homes on Wheels
Tiny House Movement
Housing Innovation Resources
Building Differently, an Under the Lens series — Shelterforce
Portland: Shelter to Housing Continuum Report and RVs
The City of Portland did an extensive study of their local shelter to housing continuum. Among the chang-
es implemented, the city elected to allow one RV or tiny house on wheels per residential lot with a house
if it connected to water, sewer, and utilities. Portland also allows up to four occupied recreational vehicles
in the parking lots of religious institutions.
Shelter to Housing Continuum (S2HC) Project I Portland.gov
Occupied Recreational Vehicles, including Tiny Houses on Wheels I Portland.gov
.rr
EHL 2255 1 FXH g�T /PPagge 21 9�g 1 4
Z5-8881 A7TAICFf NT 3_fAGE-22lbV 0
EXHIBIT D-1
4 Oreon Land Use Laws
OUP
and Fair Housin�4
MID
J y ~ • y �r' F ! '
•
V ,t�d..�L.
* - •�_T -
- � ��c_�
• Orr-
4,
did
Erom its origins in the 1970s through today, Oregon's and persist over time. Housing opportunities for older
land use system has attempted to promote housing adults and others who need mobility or sensory housing
choice, an important component of fair housing. The adaptations will remain limited without changes in building
table below presents a summary of some of the principal codes, some of which may add to the cost of new housing.
laws that help increase the housing options available to
Oregonians and promote more inclusive communities. The summary of key Oregon laws affecting planning and
Even if federal policy shifts with changes in federal zoning for housing below highlights both long-standing
administrations, Oregon's laws will continue to support principles and recent legislative refinements, focusing
access to housing opportunities for all Oregonians. on newly updated rules that jurisdictions may need to
take action to address. Keep in mind that state policy
Is it a perfect system? No. Public regulation can only go makers are likely to continue to approve new laws
so far. Cities are mostly in the business of setting rules and administrative rules aimed at promoting housing
for development, not developing or directly funding production and choice, and so some provisions below may
housing themselves. Housing affordability is also a change.
major issue. Without subsidy, most new housing is not
affordable to households with lower incomes,thus limiting
housing choice for many protected class groups most
likely to experience fair housing issues. Also, patterns of
segregation by income and race are deeply entrenched
L 25 1 FXH g�T /PPagge z2E 9�g Q 1 4
EU Z5-8881 AM181 46:3 AGE-25 FO O
EXHIBIT D-1
9171.1
State Policy
PLANNING
Comprehensive Land Use Planning Basics Limit Implicit& Explicit Bias and Support Housing Choice
Needed housing—Local governments must plan for and support the devel- ORS 197A.018 ('need-
opment of needed housing through their Goal 10 Housing Planning Process. ed housing' defined),
As part of the Buildable Land Inventory, cities must evaluate the availabil- ORS 197A.200 to ORS
ity of buildable land for development of each needed housing type over a 197A.320 (planning for
20-year timeframe. Housing Production Strategies must include actions and needed housing), ORS
policies to promote the development of needed housing. Needed hous- 197A.100 to 197A.130
ing types include detached single-family housing, single-room occupancy (Housing Production
developments, middle housing, multifamily housing, government assisted Strategies)
housing, manufactured dwelling parks, manufactured homes on individual
lots, housing for agricultural workers, housing for individuals with disabili-
ties, housing for older persons, housing for college or university students, if
relevant to the region. It includes housing affordable to households with in-
comes in these ranges: 0-30% MFI, 30-50% MFI, 50-80% MFI, 80-120%
MFI, 120% MFI and greater. It also includes multifamily housing for sale and
for rent.
Local approval of housing- Local governments must approve subdivisions, ORS 197.522
partitions, or construction of any land for needed housing consistent with
the comprehensive plan and applicable land use regulations
Oregon Housing Needs Analysis(OHNA) Distributes Housing Need Uniformly and Fairly
OHNA projections, allocations, and targets-On an annual basis, Oregon ORS 184.451 to 184.455
Department of Administrative Services (DAS) projects the statewide 20-year
housing need. DAS allocates proportional shares to individual cities and
counties and provides six-or eight-year housing production targets for each
city with populations over 10,000 and the unincorporated Portland Metro
urban areas.The 20-year projections, allocations, and six-or eight-year tar-
gets are segmented by income.This data forms the basis for cities' Housing
Capacity Analysis and Housing Production Strategy.Available starting Janu-
ary 1, 2025.
Housing Production Strategies Must Affirmatively Further Fair Housing
Housing Production Strategy—Cities with a population of 10,000 or greater ORS 197A.100 to
must develop and adopt a Housing Production Strategy every six years if 197A.130
located inside the Portland Metro Region and every eight years if located in
the balance of the state. In addition, Metro must develop and adopt a Hous-
ing Coordination Strategy every six years.
Affirmatively furthering fair housing—Housing production strategies must ORS 197A.100(3)(e) and
include a list of specific actions jurisdictions will take to promote affirmative- (9)
ly furthering fair housing.
Equity Indicators—Oregon Housing and Community Services publishes ORS 197A.130(2)(a)(C),
Equity Indicators for each city annually. The indicators may address subjects referencing equity indi-
such as cost burden, housing segregation by race and income, and housing cators in ORS 456.602
accessibility/visitability. DLCD may consider Equity Indicators in evaluating a
city's performance.Available starting January 1, 2025.
L 25 1 FXH g�T /PPagge 23E 9�p Q 1 4
EU Z5-8881 A7TA�C114 3_/9AGE-26FO O
EXHIBIT D-1
ZONING & LAND USE REVIEW
Clear and objective standards and review-With some exceptions, a city ORS 197A.400(1)
must offer a clear and objective review path with clear and objective stan-
dards for an application or permit for all housing types inside an Urban
Growth Boundary.The review path and standards cannot discourage housing
development by causing unreasonable cost or delay.
Optional discretionary pathways- "Optional discretionary" review pathways ORS 197A.400(3)
must meet the required statutory conditions:
1. The applicant retains the option for a clear&objective pathway;
2. The discretionary pathway complies with statewide land use plan-
ning goals and rules; and
3. The discretionary pathway authorizes a density"at or above"the
density authorized in the clear& objective pathway.
Dwelling Occupancy Limits—Jurisdictions may not impose occupancy limits ORS 90.112
for residential dwelling units, such as through code definitions of'family,'
based on the familial or nonfamilial relationship status of the dwelling's
occupants.
Small Housing Types Provide Housing Choice in Single-Family Neighborhoods
Single Room Occupancy(SRO) Developments-SRO developments are ORS 197A.430
structures with attached, independently rented, lockable units for sleeping
and living. Residents share common bathrooms or kitchens.Jurisdictions
must allow SRO developments of four to six units on parcels in single-family
residential zones.Jurisdictions must also allow SRO developments on parcels
in multifamily residential zones, subject to density standards consistent with
multifamily developments.
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) -Cities with a population greater than ORS 197A.425
2,500 and counties with a population greater than 15,000 must allow the
development of at least one ADU on any lot zoned for residential use that al-
lows single-family detached dwellings within the UGB. Cities cannot require
off-street parking or owner occupancy of ADUs.
Middle Housing Types Provide Housing Choice in Single-Family Neighborhoods
Duplexes-All Oregon cities with a population of 2,500 or more, and, with- ORS 197A.420(3)
in the Portland Metro Boundary, all cities with a population greater than
1,000 and all unincorporated areas with sufficient urban services must allow
duplexes in single-family residential zones. Deadline:June 30,2025,for cities
with populations of 2,500-10,000.
Triplexes, quadplexes, cottage clusters, and townhouses-Oregon cities with ORS 197A.420(2)
a population greater than 25,000, unincorporated areas within the Portland
Metro boundary that are served by sufficient urban services, all cities within
the Portland Metro boundary with a population greater than 1,000, and
all cities and communities within Tillamook County must also allow middle
housing types in areas zoned for residential use that allow for the devel-
opment of detached single-family dwellings. Deadline:June 30, 2025,for
Tillamook County jurisdictions
Middle housing land divisions- Middle housing land divisions that meet ORS 92.031
specific statutory requirements must be approved by cities and counties via
an expedited land division process.
L 25 1 FXH g�T /PPagge z4E 9 Z 1 4
CU Z5-8881 A7TA�CFf NT 3_fAGE129FOF730
EXHIBIT D-1
Expediting Permitting of Affordable and Government-Assisted Housing Supports Housing Choice
Affordable housing allowed-Affordable housing allowed- Local governments ORS 197A.445
must allow affordable housing that meets specific statutory requirements on
sites zoned for commercial use, religious assembly, or public lands, without
requiring a zone change or conditional use, and must provide density and
height bonuses.
Affordable housing allowed in commercial zones— Local governments must ORS 197A.460
allow residential and mixed-use affordable housing projects by right in all
commercial zones.
Expedited affordable housing review-Cities and counties above a population ORS 197A.470
threshold must take final action on qualifying affordable housing applications
within 100 days after an application is deemed complete
Equal treatment of affordable housing—Cities and counties may not outright ORS 197A.395(1)
prohibit government assisted housing and may not impose additional stan-
dards on government assisted housing that do not apply to similar unassist-
ed housing projects.
Manufactured Housing Expands Housing Choice
Manufactured homes - Cities must allow manufactured and prefabricated ORS 197.478
homes in single-family residential zones, subject to only the same standards
as other homes.
Manufactured home parks-Cities and counties must allow manufactured ORS 197.480 to 197.493
home parks sufficient to meet need as identified in an adopted Housing Ca-
pacity Analysis. They must allow the siting of manufactured homes, prefab-
ricated structures, and RVs meeting statutory requirements in manufactured
home parks
Manufactured home subdivisions - Cities and counties must approve subdivi- ORS 92.835 to 92.845
sions for manufactured home parks that meet applicable local standards and
parameters outlined in statute. The applicant must provide notice and 'right
of first refusal' to manufactured home park tenants.
Equal Treatment of Farmworker Housing Prevents Discrimination
Farmworker housing- Cities and counties must permit single-family and ORS 197A.395(2) and (3)
multifamily farmworker housing in any residential or commercial zone that
permits single-family or multifamily residential, respectively, and may not
impose standards that are more restrictive than those applied to other sin-
gle-family or multifamily uses in those zones.
Residential Homes and Facilities Expand Housing Choice
Residential homes &facilities- Local governments must permit "Residential ORS 197.660 to 197.670
homes" and "Residential facilities" (definition in ORS 443.400) in residential
zones and may not impose more restrictive zoning requirements.
Permitting Residential Uses in Commercial Zones Expands Housing Options
Residential conversion of commercial uses—Local governments must allow ORS 197A.445(3)
conversion of commercial uses to residential uses without requiring a zone
change or conditional use permit.
Page 25
EU 30-0881 A7TANTarlT 3fA8E28FOF73o
EXHIBIT D-1
Siting and Permitting of Emergency Shelter is Expedited
(Oregon land use laws do not consider shelters to be housing.)
Local Approval of Emergency Shelters—When the statewide point-in-time ORS 197.783
count indicates that 0.18% or more of the total state population consists of
people experiencing homelessness, local governments must approve emer-
gency shelters subject to certain conditions on any property within the UGB
or on rural residential lands if it is operated by a local government, non-prof-
it, religious corporation, or housing authority.
Hotel/Motel conversion - Local governments must unconditionally allow the ORS 197.748
conversion of hotels or motels to emergency shelters or affordable housing
meeting statutory parameters
Limits on Development Moratoria Remove Barriers to Housing Development
Public facilities- Local governments engaging in a "pattern or practice of ORS 197.524
delaying or stopping the issuance" of permits/approvals based on a shortage
of public facilities must adopt a public facilities strategy or a moratorium
Moratoria - Cities, counties, and special districts that adopt moratoria must ORS 197.505 to 197.520
comply with specific statutory provisions that ensure they are temporary,
narrow in scope, and underlying problems are addressed through local ac-
tion.
Zoning and Permitting Laws Limit Bias and Require Timely Action on Development Applications
Permitting and approval -Approval or denial of permits must be based on ORS 227.175 (city)
clear and objective standards outlined in the development ordinance and ORS 215.416 (county)
may not condition reductions in height for housing, except to resolve a
health, safety, or habitability issue or to comply with a statewide land use
planning goal.
120-day land use approval- Final action on a permit must be taken within ORS 227.178 (city)
120 days after an application is deemed complete ORS 215.427 (county)
Land use procedure—Cities and counties must apply procedural require- ORS 227.180 and
ments surrounding appeal of local actions, including timelines, ex parte 227.181 (city)
contact, bias, and remand. ORS 215.422 and
215.435 (county)
Page 26
EU 30-0881 A7TA'CFf A ffiR8i 29 FOF73o
EXHIBIT D-1
r ,,-,
El
. ` : � •. �. ., Scan QR code to download the online
I 1'L — r , version of this guide, complete with
de PF "..A1
fF _
. reference links and the latest updates.
LsLittiz
EU 3g:0881 A7TANTagT 3fA8E430FoF73o
EXHIBIT D-2
C61s4„, MEMORANDUM
C5REG )
cl
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Erik Olson, Long Range Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Housing Production Strategy Implementation (PP 22-0005) Work Session
DATE: May 16, 2025 MEETING DATE: May 28, 2025
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY&ACTION REQUESTED
This memo provides background for the Commission's May 28 work session, which will include
an overview of initial work plans for implementing the near-term strategies in Lake Oswego's
Housing Production Strategy (HPS).
The HPS was adopted by City Council on November 19, 2024, and approved by the Oregon
Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) on April 18, 2025, subject to five
conditions (Attachment 6). The HPS outlines thirteen different strategies that the City will take
to promote housing development that meets the needs of the community as identified in the
City's 2023 Housing Needs Analysis (HNA). This includes commitments for the City to take near-
term action, beginning in 2025, regarding several of the strategies identified in the HPS.
BACKGROUND
The HPS was prepared in compliance with House Bill 2003 (HB 2003) (2019) and HB 3155
(2021), now codified as ORS 197A.100 and 197A.335(1), which require the City to adopt an HPS
that includes a list of specific actions that the City will undertake to address the housing needs
identified in its HNA. The HPS was also developed to comply with Statewide Planning Goal 10:
Housing, which aims to provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state by encouraging
the availability of adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levels
which are commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households.
The City Council adopted the 2023 HNA on October 17, 2023. As required under ORS
197A.100(1), the City adopted the HPS on November 19, 2024. Soon after, the City submitted a
notice of adoption to DLCD, who is tasked by ORS 197A.103(6) to review and issue decisions on
Housing Production Strategies adopted by local jurisdictions. On April 18, 2025, City staff
received a letter from DLCD relaying that the City's HPS was approved, subject to five
conditions (Attachment 6). See HPS Conditions of Approval, below, for more detail.
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-2/PAGE 1 OF 9
503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
EXHIBIT D-2
Page 2 of 9
HPS Conditions of Approval
As stated in DLCD's decision letter, while the descriptions of the strategies in the HPS meet the
minimum requirements of OAR 660-008-0050(3)(a), "many of the action titles and descriptions
are vague, exploratory in tone, or lack reference to the specific outcome" (p. 6, Attachment 6).
To address this and other concerns outlined in the letter, DLCD applied five conditions of
approval to the City's HPS, each of which is related to how the City must document
implementation of the strategies in the three-year midpoint report required under OAR 660-
008-0060:
• Condition of Approval 1 requires the City to, "provide a description of the
implementation status for all actions included in the HPS, with specific and particular
attention to how the city has implemented the actions consistent with the
"Consideration", "Recommendations", and "Implementation Actions" sections of each
action" in the midpoint report (p. 8, Attachment 6).
• Condition of Approval 2 is related to the Rezone Land strategy, and requires the City to,
"demonstrate that the cumulative impact of zone changes implemented under this
action—including any associated regulatory changes such as increased allowable
densities, building height limits, or reduced minimum lot sizes—will yield additional
residential capacity in consideration of the identified shortfall of residential capacity in
the city's adopted Housing Capacity Analysis" (p. 8, Attachment 6). More specifically,
"The city must demonstrate progress on a methodology to quantify the added
capacity—accounting for both base zoning and realistic development potential" in the
midpoint report. See Rezone Land (Strategy 3), below.
• Condition of Approval 3 is related to the Public-Private Partnerships for Affordable
Housing strategy, which included a "Recommendations" section in the HPS outlining
four steps the city could take to advance public-private partnership in support of
affordable housing production. This condition requires the City to demonstrate it has,
"taken formal action to initiate or advance at least one of these four recommended
steps" in the midpoint report (p. 9, Attachment 6). See Public-Private Partnerships for
Affordable Housing (Strategy 10), below.
• Condition of Approval 4 is related to the Use of Tax Increment Financing (TIF) to Support
Affordable Housing Development strategy. This condition requires the City to clarify the
scope of the action and, "provide an update on progress towards implementation of the
action as part of the midpoint report (by December 2027)" (p. 10, Attachment 6). See
Use Tax Increment Financing (TIF)to Support Affordable Housing Development
(Strategy 11), below.
• Condition of Approval 5 requires the City to provide its annual monitoring summaries to
DLCD at the time of the three-year midpoint report (p. 15, Attachment 6).
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-2/PAGE 2 OF 9 — Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-2
Page 3 of 9
HOUSING PRODUCTION STRATEGY IMPLEMENTATION
The HPS includes a general implementation timeline with schedules for each strategy, as
excerpted below:
IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE
2024 2025 2026 1 2027 2028 2029 2030
1. Code audit and amendments
2. Remove or reduce min. Parking requirements
3. Rezone land* Non-Residential Low-Density Res.
4. Evaluate accessible design incentives or mandates
5. Evaluate Multiple Unit Property Tax Exemption
6. Pre-approved plan sets for ADUs
7. Modify SDC fee schedule* Cottage SDC Methodology
Cluster
8. Nonprofit Low-Income Housing Exemption
•
9. Low-Income Rental Housing Tax Exemption
10. Public-private partnerships for affordable housing Ongoing
11. Use TIF to support affordable housing
12. Affordable housing preservation inventory
13. Fair Housing policy and education* Policy Update Education
*Refer to the strategy description for details about phasing.
A more detailed discussion of recent progress on individual strategies is included, below.
Code Audit and Amendments (Strategy 1)
Strategy 1 in the HPS requires the City to both undertake a comprehensive audit of the
Community Development Code (CDC) to identify barriers to housing production, and to
implement code amendments to address those barriers. City Council also adopted a 2025
Initiative that would expand this work to address barriers to economic development, in
addition to barriers to housing. This work is now being tracked internally under the Planning
Project number PP 25-0002.
The implementation timeline outlined in the HPS commits the City to beginning work on this
strategy in the near-term, starting in 2025, and finalizing the strategy by the end of 2027. Staff
intends to apply for a Metro 2040 Planning and Development Grant in the 2025 third-quarter
grant cycle to secure funding for this project. Upon grant approval in Fall 2025, a consultant will
be selected through a competitive process, beginning with the release of a Request for
Proposals (RFP) and subsequent contract award. The project will commence with a
comprehensive audit of the CDC to identify barriers to housing development and business
growth. Based on the audit findings, draft amendments will be developed, refined through
stakeholder input, and finalized to effectively address the identified barriers.
Staff notes that the City's work on the Code Audit and Amendments strategy should be closely
coordinated with any code amendments necessary to comply with the City's request for an
exemption to the mandatory adjustment provisions of Section 38 of Senate Bill 1537 (SB 1537)
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-2/PAGE 3 OF 9
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-2
Page 4 of 9
(2024). As discussed at the Commission's work session on August 26, 2024, SB 1537 (2024)
requires local governments to grant up to 10 distinct adjustments to specific development and
design standards for the development of housing if the application meets certain conditions.
These criteria include a requirement that the proposed development provides a minimum of 17
dwelling units per acre (or a minimum of 2,562 sq. ft. of lot area per unit). See Attachment 3 for
more detailed discussion of SB 1537.
The state developed a process to allow cities to apply to the new Housing Accountability and
Production Office (HAPO) for an exemption to these mandatory adjustments if they can show
that (1) all applicable development and design standards are eligible for an adjustment under
the city's current process, and (2) within the previous 5 years the city has approved 90% of
received adjustment requests. As directed by City Council, staff formally applied to HAPO for an
exemption to the mandatory adjustment provisions of SB 1537 (2024) on April 17, 2025. HAPO
is now inviting public comment on the City's application, with the public comment period
closing on June 1, 2025, and a final decision is expected from the state on or before July 16,
2025. Though the City has yet to receive a final decision from HAPO, staff notes that code
amendments would likely be needed to fully comply with the mandatory adjustment
provisions, if directed by Council.
There may be amendments required to comply with SB 1537 that would also advance the goals
of the Code Audit and Amendments strategy, and it will be important to identify any
opportunities to meet shared project goals. Staff expects to conduct a study session with City
Council to receive further direction on SB 1537 compliance once a final decision has been
issued by HAPO.
Staff further notes that the Oregon Legislature is currently considering House Bill 2138 (HB
2138) (Governor's Middle Housing Bill) that would make changes to the state's definitions,
allowances, and procedures for middle housing (Attachment 5). As drafted, HB 2138 would also
void pre-existing CC&Rs or other governing documents that limit accessory dwelling units
(ADUs) or middle housing. If implemented, these changes could impact the production of
middle housing and ADUs, which may currently be limited by the presence of CC&Rs that
prohibit this type of housing in subdivisions and planned developments throughout the city.
Given that HB 2138 is likely to require the City to further amend the CDC to promote housing
development, it will also be necessary to closely coordinate the City's response to HB 2138 with
the Code Audit and Amendments strategy. This will help to avoid proactively considering any
potential code changes that could be duplicative of the eventual requirements of HB 2138, and
will help to establish a clear baseline with which to analyze additional amendments that would
reduce barriers to housing and economic development beyond the HB 2138 minimum
requirements.
Remove or Reduce Minimum Parking Requirements (Strategy 2)
City Council adopted amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and CDC to comply with the
CFEC rules for parking reform on December 17, 2024. These amendments included removing
minimum parking requirements citywide and adding language to comply with CFEC rules
regarding the maximum number of parking spaces allowed on a site, electric vehicle charging
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-2/PAGE 4 OF 9 _ Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-2
Page 5 of 9
infrastructure, and the design of surface parking lots over one-half acre in size. Given that all
implementation actions identified in the HPS for this strategy have now been completed, this
strategy is considered complete for the purposes of the HPS.
Rezone Land(Strategy 3)
Strategy 3 in the HPS commits the City to rezone commercial, mixed-use, or other non-
residentially zoned properties to better accommodate residential uses, especially multi-family
housing. The HPS also identified that later phases of this work could involve updating zoning
districts to allow housing where not currently allowed or rezoning lower-density areas to allow
higher-density housing. This work is now being tracked internally under PP 25-0001.
As discussed above, Condition of Approval 2 for the HPS relates to the Rezone Land strategy. In
their decision letter, DLCD stated the following regarding the Rezone Land strategy (p.9,
Attachment 6):
Notably, the implementation timeline for this action—beginning in the near term and
completing in the medium term—aligns with the Department's 2025-2027 biennial
grant cycle. The city is encouraged to apply for and participate in a housing planning
grant for this action as the funding is tailored to assisting cities in this manner.
Consistent with this guidance, staff intends to pursue a DLCD housing planning grant to secure
funding to complete this strategy. Though DLCD has yet to provide specific information
regarding the 2025-2027 grant cycle, DLCD staff indicated at a recent webinar that grant
applications will be due by August 1, 2025. Assuming the grant is approved, a consultant would
then be selected through a competitive process, beginning with the release of an RFP in late
2025 and subsequent contract award.
The project would then kick off in Spring 2026 with a detailed technical analysis of developable
commercial, mixed-use, or other non-residentially zoned land in the city. The findings of this
analysis will be used to inform the development of a number of alternate rezoning scenarios
throughout the city, which will then be evaluated through a robust public engagement process
to determine which areas would best meet the city's unique housing needs.
As outlined in the HPS, the "Non-Residential Zones (Part 1)" component of this strategy is
intended to be completed by December 31, 2026, and "Low-Density Residential Zones (Part 2)"
would be completed by December 31, 2028. In addition, HPS Condition of Approval 2 (p. 8,
Attachment 6) further requires the City to, "demonstrate progress on a methodology to
quantify the added capacity" at the three-year HPS midpoint report, which is due by the end of
2027. In order to ensure that there is sufficient time for community engagement to consider
and evaluate the rezoning alternatives, it will likely not be feasible to fully complete the
identified implementation actions to adopt Zoning Map, Comprehensive Plan Map,
Comprehensive Plan, and CDC amendments by December 31, 2026.
As such, staff proposes that alternate rezoning areas be recommended and outlined in a memo
that includes a methodology to quantify the associated added residential capacity by the end of
2026. This would then allow for the drafting and eventual adoption of the amendments
necessary to implement these recommendations by the end of 2027.
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-2/PAGE 5 OF 9 _ Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-2
Page 6 of 9
In addition to the work described above, forthcoming updates to the Foothills District Plan (PP
25-0005) are expected to result in the rezoning of non-residentially zoned properties to
accommodate residential uses. This work is intended to advance the Council initiative to, "Begin
the update of the Foothills District Plan," and will involve revisiting the vision previously-
outlined in the Foothills District Framework Plan (2012) to transform the existing 120-acre area
that lies between the Willamette River and downtown Lake Oswego—the Foothills District
(District) — into a vibrant mixed-use neighborhood.
The City was awarded a Metro 2040 Planning and Development Grant in February of this year,
and proposals have now been reviewed in response to an RFP issued by the City to find a
consultant team to conduct the work. The City intends to award this contract to First Forty Feet
at the City Council meeting on May 20, with contract negotiations expected to be finalized by
June 1, 2025.
Similar to the timeline proposed for the general rezoning strategy, above, the updated Foothills
District Plan is expected to be adopted prior to the end of 2026, with implementing
amendments adopted by the end of 2027. This timeline will allow staff to quantify any
residential capacity that would be added to the Foothills District in the discussion of the Rezone
Land strategy required to be included in the three-year mid-point report (due by December 31,
2027).
Modify SDC Fee Schedule (Strategy 7)
Strategy 7 in the HPS commits the City to updating the SDC fee schedule so it is tied more
directly to dwelling size. Though the timeline in the HPS identifies that work on the main
component of this strategy will not commence until 2027, the HPS also identifies that work to
update the SDC fee schedule to charge a lower rate per unit for cottage clusters than for single-
family homes would be both initiated and completed in 2025. Staff intends to accomplish this
as part of this year's update to the City's Master Fees and Charges, which would then be
reflected in the eventual 2026 Master Fees and Charges schedule.
Nonprofit Low-Income Housing Tax Exemption (Strategy 8)
Strategy 8 in the HPS commits the City to adopting the Nonprofit Low-Income Housing Tax
Exemption to benefit low-income residents by alleviating the property tax burden on nonprofit
organizations providing affordable housing at or below 60% of area median income (AMI). City
Council chose to fast-track adoption of this strategy to make it available to affordable housing
projects being developed in 2024 (including the Mercy Greenbrae development at Marylhurst
Commons). The tax exemption was approved by City Council as Ordinance 2945 in May 2024
(PP 24-0003). Given that all implementation actions identified in the HPS for this strategy have
now been completed, this strategy is considered complete for the purposes of the HPS.
Regardless, the City will continue to implement this tax exemption program over the course of
the foreseeable future, and will be expected to document its impact on housing production in
the midpoint HPS report.
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-2/PAGE 6 OF 9 — Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-2
Page 7 of 9
Low-Income Rental Housing Tax Exemption (Strategy 9)
Strategy 9 in the HPS commits the City to adopting the Low-Income Rental Housing Tax
Exemption to benefit low-income residents by alleviating the property tax burden for any
development that provides affordable housing at or below 60% of AMI, including those built by
for-profit developers. The timeline in the HPS shows the project being completed in 2025, with
implementation actions including working with other taxing jurisdictions to gain approval,
developing application standards and guidelines, and eventually adopting the tax exemption
policy at City Council by resolution or ordinance. Staff anticipates work on this strategy will
begin this fall and be completed by the end of 2025 or early 2026, if approved by City Council.
Public-Private Partnerships for Affordable Housing (Strategy 10)
Strategy 10 in the HPS commits the City to continuing its ongoing work to partner with private
entities to develop affordable housing. Given that this work is primarily opportunistic, and
requires action from the private sector in addition to action from the City, the HPS identified a
number of different ways for the City to explore partnering with organizations to support their
affordable housing efforts.
As mentioned above, Condition of Approval 3 for the HPS relates to the Public-Private
Partnerships for Affordable Housing strategy. In their decision letter (p. 9, Attachment 6), DLCD
requested that the City demonstrate in the midpoint report that it has taken formal action to
initiate or advance at least one of the four steps included in the "Recommendations" for this
strategy in the HPS (p. 29, Attachment 2):
• Consider donating surplus city-owned land for affordable housing as it becomes
available.
• Work with faith organizations to utilize excess or underutilized land for affordable
housing. Assist with favorable zoning, permitting, and financial incentives.
• Continue to leverage federal, state, and regional resources—such as the Metro
Affordable Housing Bond—to fund affordable housing in Lake Oswego.
• If a new TIF district is established(Strategy 11), use TIF funds to support affordable
housing partnerships. This could include addressing infrastructure deficiencies or
contributing funding to affordable housing more directly.
DLCD further clarified the following with respect to the Public-Private Partnerships strategy (p.
9, Attachment 6):
The Department does not require the city to fully adopt or complete any of the
recommendations by that time. Examples of acceptable demonstrations include but are
not limited to: a signed memorandum of understanding (MOU) with a development or
community based organization, a council resolution or direction to staff to initiate
surplus land transfer, site acquisition, or zoning changes, public notice of land disposition
or acquisition efforts, Council approval of an application for, or allocation of, external
funding to support affordable housing partnerships, or other equivalent evidence of
action provided by the city. This condition is intended to ensure the city moves beyond
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-2/PAGE 7 OF 9 — Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-2
Page 8of9
exploratory intent as outlined in the action description and commits to taking tangible
steps that expand existing public-private partnerships that support affordable housing
outcomes.
Consistent with this guidance, staff intends to continue to be opportunistic in identifying
opportunities to make progress on this strategy through the steps outlined in the HPS. Given
that it is difficult to pursue this strategy without first identifying a partner organization, staff
will further explore the viability of these different potential approaches before recommending a
more tangible plan of action.
Use Tax Increment Financing (TIF) to Support Affordable Housing Development(Strategy 11)
Strategy 11 in the HPS commits the City to using tax increment financing (TIF) to support
affordable housing development. More specifically, the "Recommendations" for this strategy in
the HPS task the City with incorporating affordable housing into the eventual Urban Renewal
Plan for the Foothills neighborhood by including it as an approved "project" that is eligible for
TIF funding (p. 31, Attachment 2).
As mentioned above, Condition of Approval 4 for the HPS relates to the TIF strategy. In their
decision letter (p. 10, Attachment 6), DLCD stated that they were, "unable to determine based
on the information that was presented whether the intention of the action is to incorporate
affordable housing into all future TIFs, or if the creation of the Foothills Urban Renewal Area,
with affordable housing funding included, is itself the action." Staff notes that, while the intent
for this action was to specifically incorporate affordable housing into the future Foothills Urban
Renewal Area, the wording for this strategy was left somewhat open-ended as there may be
opportunities to utilize TIF funding in other Urban Renewal Areas elsewhere in the city.
Also in their decision letter (p. 9-10, Attachment 6), DLCD asked the City to clarify the scope of
the action and provide an update on its implementation as a part of the midpoint report. While
staff intends to clarify that this action was intended to be limited to just the Foothills Urban
Renewal Area in the midpoint report, it may nonetheless be advisable to explore TIF funding in
other areas of the City to support affordable housing development through Public-Private
Partnerships (Strategy 10).
As mentioned above under Rezone Land(Strategy 3), the City expects to complete the Foothills
District Plan updates (PP 25-0005) prior to the end of 2026. The adopted Foothills District Plan
will then be used as the basis for the creation of an Urban Renewal Plan (URP) for the Foothills
Urban Renewal Area, guiding such elements as public investment priorities (including
affordable housing), types and locations of public improvements, land consolidations, and
public/private partnerships. Staff anticipates that the Foothills URP will be adopted by the end
of 2027, concurrently with other Zoning Map, Comprehensive Plan, Comprehensive Plan Map,
and CDC amendments necessary to implement the recommendations of the updated Foothills
District Plan.
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-2/PAGE 8 OF 9 — Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-2
Page 9 of 9
Fair Housing Policy and Education (Strategy 13)
Strategy 13 in the HPS requires the City to amend its Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing a housing policy. The strategy also includes a
consideration of other efforts the City could take as part of an educational campaign, including
creating an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing, conducting fair housing trainings,
providing access to fair housing information to individuals involved with real estate
transactions, and ensuring that City staff know how to identify potential fair housing violations
and make referrals accordingly. This work is now being tracked internally under LU 25-0001.
As noted in their decision letter (p. 11, Attachment 6), "Under the rules adopted by LCDC in
December 2024 as part of the Oregon Housing Needs Analysis rulemaking, cities will be
required to conduct an analysis of fair housing choice as part of the Contextualized Housing
Need." As such, DLCD advised that, "it may be more strategic for the city to earmark the
analysis of fair housing choice as part of its next HPS cycle plan." For the time being, DLCD
urged the City to pursue the implementation of fair housing education and referral actions, and
to analyze fair housing outcomes— particularly any potential disparate impacts on protected
classes—as we implement other strategies.
The timeline in the HPS shows the adoption of fair housing policy beginning in the near-term
and completing in 2026, with education and other actions scheduled to begin in the near-term
and be completed by the end of 2028. City Council has a study session on Fair Housing policy
tentatively scheduled for its meeting on July 1, and staff expects to bring forth Comprehensive
Plan amendments to make Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing a housing policy to a public
hearing in October 2025.
ATTACHMENTS
1. City of Lake Oswego 2023 Housing Needs Analysis, 9/21/2023
Due to file size, this attachment is available in the "Public Records Folder"using link provided below.
2. Lake Oswego Housing Production Strategy, 11/19/2024
Due to file size, this attachment is available in the "Public Records Folder"using link provided below.
3. Staff Memo on SB 1537 Implementation, dated 8/14/2024, for the PC Work Session on
8/26/2024
4. Foothills District Plan Update RFP, 3/7/2025
5. Oregon House Bill 2138, A-Engrossed, 4/16/2025
6. HPS Decision Letter from DLCD, 04/18/2025
Link to Public Records Folder for PP 22-0005:
https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/planning/pp-22-0005-housing-needs-and-production-strategies
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-2/PAGE 9 OF 9 Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-3
p4 E�s� MEMORANDUM
V
OREGO�
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Erik Olson, Long Range Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Fair Housing Policy and Education (LU 25-0001) Work Session#1
DATE: July 18, 2025 MEETING DATE: July 28, 2025
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY&ACTION REQUESTED
This memo provides background for the Commission's July 28 work session, which will include a
discussion on recent Council direction regarding how to amend the Comprehensive Plan to
explicitly make Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) a City housing policy. Fair Housing
Policy and Education was identified as a near-term strategy in the City's recently-adopted
Housing Production Strategy (HPS), and a public hearing to consider the adoption of
Comprehensive Plan amendments to explicitly make AFFH a housing policy is tentatively
scheduled for September 8.
BACKGROUND
On November 19, 2024, the City Council approved Resolution 24-36 to adopt the HPS as a
component of the Comprehensive Plan to meet the requirements of ORS 197.296 and OAR 660-
008-0050 [Oregon House Bill 2003 (2019)]. The HPS identified Fair Housing Policy and Education
as a strategy for near-term adoption, including both the adoption of legislative amendments to
the Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make AFFH a Housing Policy as well as education and
other actions to increase access to fair housing information.
Per the HPS, the Fair Housing and Education strategy (Strategy 13) is intended to benefit
priority populations—including low-income households, people of color, people with
disabilities, seniors, and other state or federal protected classes— by:
• Formalizing the City's commitment to fair housing goals;
• Facilitating a better understanding of fair housing issues in the community; and
• Educating City staff, housing stakeholders, and community members about fair housing
laws and residents' rights.
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-3/PAGE 1 OF 6
503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
EXHIBIT D-3
Page 2 of 4
Though the City is required to comply with state and federal fair housing laws regardless of
whether an AFFH policy is formally adopted, the strategy is nonetheless anticipated to provide
additional protections against housing discrimination and bolster the City's focus on prioritizing
housing equity and affordability in its housing programs and investments.
The Planning Commission held their first work session on this topic on January 27, 2025, which
included an overview of AFFH policy from Samuel Goldberg, Public Policy Manager at the Fair
Housing Council of Oregon (FHCO). The Commission received another brief update on the
project on May 28, 2025, as part of a work session on HPS implementation more broadly.
The City Council most recently held a study session on this topic on July 15, 2025, where they
received a general overview of AFFH from Shyle Ruder, Education and Outreach Director at the
Fair Housing Council of Oregon (FHCO). At this study session, the Council provided direction to
amend the Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make AFFH a City housing policy pursuant to the
approach recommended by staff(see Comprehensive Plan Amendments, below).
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
Through the HPS, the City has committed to amending its Comprehensive Plan to explicitly
make AFFH a housing policy by the end of 2025, with other implementation actions related to
outreach and education expected to be completed over the long-term.
City policies related to housing have evolved significantly since the last time the Complete
Neighborhoods and Housing chapter of the Comprehensive Plan was updated (in 2014). Staff
notes that this chapter should eventually be updated to reflect numerous updates in City
housing policy in recent years— including code amendments to allow middle housing (LU 22-
0007), the findings of the 2023 HNA, and the strategies the City committed to as part of the
HPS. While these Comprehensive Plan amendments would not effectively change the policies or
procedures the City is currently pursuing with respect to housing, they would nonetheless
ensure consistency between the Comprehensive Plan, Community Development Code (CDC),
and other supplemental City plans, allowing all recent housing policy changes to be listed in one
place for easy reference.
With this in mind, staff notes that it is likely that additional state mandates will continue to
impact City housing policies for the foreseeable future. Most notably, rules governing the new
statewide Oregon Housing Needs Analysis (OHNA) are still being developed by the state
Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), with adoption by the Land
Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) anticipated before the end of 2025. These
rules are expected to significantly modify the processes cities are required to use to develop an
HNA and determine their housing needs, including linking local HNAs to a statewide allocation
of needed housing, as well as changes to the methodologies to inventory buildable lands and
calculate housing capacity. As such, staff recommends taking a more surgical approach to adopt
a fair housing policy as a Comprehensive Plan amendment in the near-term and to conduct a
more thorough update to the Complete Neighborhoods and Housing chapter when more is
known about the revised OHNA methodology.
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-3/PAGE 2 OF 6 _ Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-3
Page 3 of 4
Staff has compiled Comprehensive Plan language from other cities in Metro Portland in order to
better understand the range of potential approaches for incorporating fair housing policy into a
Comprehensive Plan document (Attachment 1). While several cities took a relatively minimal
approach to adding fair housing language to the housing chapters of their Comprehensive
Plans, other cities took a more holistic approach that addressed the numerous different facets
of what cities do to affirmatively further fair housing.
Staff recommends that the City adopt a relatively simple version of AFFH policy— using a
"surgical" or more minimal approach — prior to the end of 2025, and to pursue more thorough
amendments after the OHNA rulemaking process concludes. This will allow the City to
demonstrate its commitment to affirmatively furthering fair housing in the short term, while
still providing space to conduct the public outreach and research necessary for a more
thorough amendment to the Complete Neighborhoods and Housing chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan at an appropriate time.
Proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment language reflecting this approach is provided,
below, shown in bold and underlined:
City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan
Complete Neighborhoods and Housing
///
8. Housing Choice and Affordability
8-1. Provide and maintain zoning and development regulations that allow the
opportunity to develop an adequate supply and variety of housing types, and that
accommodate the needs of existing and future Lake Oswego residents.
8-2. Provide and maintain land use regulations that allow secondary(accessory)
dwelling units, subject to standards that ensure compatibility with existing residences
and residences on adjoining lots.
8-3. Provide and maintain land use regulations and standards consistent with state law
that allow opportunities for siting of special needs housing in all zones where residential
uses are allowed.
8-4. Preserve and enhance the habitability of existing housing through code inspection
and enforcement, and with housing safety programs.
8-5. Employ strategies to affirmatively further fair housing by fostering inclusive
communities, overcoming disparities in access to community amenities, and enhancing
housing choice for people in protected classes.
///
Staff is seeking direction from the Commission regarding whether to bring forth this proposed
language to a public hearing at the Commission's meeting on September 8.
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-3/PAGE 3 OF 6 — Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-3
Page 4 of 4
PROJECT SCHEDULE
The proposed project schedule to adopt Comprehensive Plan amendments to explicitly make
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing a Housing Policy is included below:
Overview of Affirmatively Furthering Planning Commission Work Session#1 Jan 27, 2025
Fair Housing Policy
City Council Study Session #1 Jul 15
HPS Implementation Overview Planning Commission Work Session#2 May 28
City Council Study Session #2 Aug 5
Review of Draft Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Work Session#3 Jul 28
Amendments
Adoption of Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Public Hearing Sep 8
Amendments
Planning Commission Findings Sep 22
City Council Public Hearing Nov 4
City Council Findings Nov 18
Effective Date: Dec 18,2025
Per the Implementation Timeline in the HPS, the educational component of the Fair Housing
Policy and Education strategy is scheduled to begin and be completed in the medium-term
(approximately 2027-2028).
ATTACHMENTS
1. Comprehensive Plan Fair Housing Policy Research—Other Metro Cities, 06/23/2025
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-3/PAGE 4 OF 6 Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
EXHIBIT D-3
6/23/2025
Comprehensive Plan Fair Housing Policies—Other Metro Cities
Research for City of Lake Oswego Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing policy
Portland: Comprehensive Plan Chapter 5 - Housing
Policy 5.10 Coordinate with fair housing programs. Foster inclusive communities, overcome
disparities in access to community assets, and enhance housing choice for
people in protected classes throughout the city by coordinating plans and
investments to affirmatively further fair housing.
Beaverton: Comprehensive Plan Chapter 4—Housing—4.4 Fair and Affordable Housing
Policy c) Continue to work with the Washington County HOME Consortium to identify
impediments to fair housing and develop strategies to address them
Gresham: Comprehensive Plan Volume 2: Policies— 10.600 Housing
Housing Equity Policy: All housing related policies and actions will affirmatively further fair
housing for all state and federal protected classes and other underserved populations by:
addressing disproportionate access to housing,furthering patterns of integration and
lessening racial or ethnic segregation, deconcentrating areas of poverty and wealth, and
decreasing disparities in access to housing services and opportunity.
Housing Choice and Location Policy: Facilitate housing choice for all, particularly for state and
federally protected classes, communities of color, low-income communities, people with
disabilities, and other under-served populations. Foster access to existing or new quality
housing that is located in neighborhoods with high-quality community amenities,
schooling, employment and business opportunities, and a healthy and safe environment.
Tigard: Comprehensive Plan
Housing Policy 9: The City shall make affirmative efforts to further fair housing and equitable
access to community resources for all residents. In doing so, the City shall comply with
federal and state housing laws, including the Fair Housing Act, as well as applicable
implementing administrative rules and regulations.
Housing Policy 10: The City shall enact policies that provide for equitable housing opportunity
without discrimination or disparity based on tenure,familial status, or household
composition of the occupants of any type of housing.
Milwaukie: Comprehensive Plan
POLICY 7.1.3 Promote zoning and code requirements that remove or prevent potential
barriers to home ownership and rental opportunities for people of all ages and
abilities, including historically marginalized or vulnerable populations such as
people of color, aging populations, and people with low incomes.
CU 35-8881 EntRaI-P1ViWi5cV26
EXHIBIT D-3
6/23/2025
POLICY 7.1.7 Support the Fair Housing Act and other federal and state regulations that aim to
affirmatively further fair housing.
Hillsboro: Comprehensive Plan
POLICY H 2.7 Fair housing. Employ strategies that support the Fair Housing Act and
affirmatively further fair housing.
Happy Valley: Comprehensive Plan
Policy H-1.6 Employ strategies that support the Fair Housing Act and affirmatively further fair
housing goals.
City of West Linn: Comprehensive Plan—Goal 10: Housing
Policy 16 Employ strategies that support the Fair Housing Act and affirmatively further fair
housing.
No policy specific to"fair housing"/AFFH:
• Tualatin
• Cornelius
• Forest Grove
• Wilsonville
• Gladstone
• Oregon City
• King City
• Sherwood
• Troutdale
• Wood Village
CU 35-8881 EkEiRaI-i-1TPaGF26 26
EXHIBIT D-4
STAFF REPORT
CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO
PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
APPLICANT FILE NO.
City of Lake Oswego LU 25-0001, Ordinance 2967
LOCATION STAFF
Citywide Erik Olson, Long Range Planning Manager
DATE OF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING DATE
August 28, 2025 September 8, 2025
I. APPLICANT'S REQUEST
The City of Lake Oswego is proposing to amend its Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) a City housing policy.
II. APPLICABLE REGULATIONS
A. Oregon Statewide Planning Goals
Goal 2: Land Use
Goal 10: Housing
B. Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan [Metro Code 3.07]
Title 7: Housing Choice [Metro Code 3.07.710 - .740]
Title 8: Compliance Procedures [Metro Code 3.07.810 - .870]
E. City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan
Complete Neighborhoods & Housing
Policy B-1
First Addition — Forest Hills Neighborhood Plan
Housing, Land Use, and Neighborhood Character Policy 7
Lake Grove Village Center Plan
Land Use Policy 4.2
F. City of Lake Oswego Community Development Code
LOC 50.07.003.3.c Notice of Public Hearing
LOC 50.07.003.4 Hearings before a Hearings Body
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0290 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-4/PAGE 1 OF 7
EXHIBIT D-4
LOC 50.07.003.16.a Legislative Decision Defined (Quasi-judicial Comp. Plan Map,
Zone Map, and CDC Amendments to be processed via Major
Developments Procedures)
LOC 50.07.003.16.c Required Notice to DLCD
LOC 50.07.003.16.d Planning Commission Recommendation Required
LOC 50.07.003.16.e City Council Review and Decision
III. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act, also known as the federal Fair Housing Act (codified at 42 U.S.C.
3601-3619), was enacted by the United States Congress in April of 1968 and has been further
clarified by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in subsequent
rules. The Fair Housing Act makes it unlawful to discriminate against people seeking to obtain
housing, and covers a wide range of housing-related activities including renting, selling, lending,
zoning and providing insurance. The law includes provisions related to AFFH, requiring entities
who receive federal funds to use a fair housing lens in viewing all their activities — including
zoning, land use, code enforcement, and sustainability planning. The intent is to ensure that none
of these activities will have a negative impact on protected classes, diversity, and inclusion, while
also eliminating any remaining patterns of housing discrimination.
More specifically, AFFH includes taking steps to:
• Address significant disparities in access to community assets;
• Overcome segregated living patterns and support and promote integrated communities;
• End racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty; and
• Foster and maintain compliance with civil rights and fair housing law.
On November 19, 2024, the City Council approved Resolution 24-36 to adopt the Housing
Production Strategy (HPS) as a component of the Comprehensive Plan to meet the requirements of
ORS 197.296 and OAR 660-008-0050 [Oregon House Bill 2003 (2019)]. The HPS identifies Fair
Housing Policy and Education as a strategy for near-term adoption, including both the adoption of
legislative amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make AFFH a Housing Policy as well
as education and other actions to increase access to fair housing information.
Per the HPS, the Fair Housing and Education strategy (Strategy 13) is intended to benefit priority
populations— including low-income households, people of color, people with disabilities, seniors,
and other state or federal protected classes— by:
• Formalizing the City's commitment to fair housing goals;
• Facilitating a better understanding of fair housing issues in the community; and
• Educating City staff, housing stakeholders, and community members about fair housing
laws and residents' rights.
Though the City is required to comply with state and federal fair housing laws regardless of whether
an AFFH policy is formally adopted, the strategy is nonetheless anticipated to provide additional
protections against housing discrimination and bolster the City's focus on prioritizing housing equity
and affordability in its housing programs and investments.
Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 2 of 7 LU 25-0001
September 8, 2025
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-4/PAGE 2 OF 7
EXHIBIT D-4
The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment is included in Attachment 2 to Ordinance 2967,
Exhibit A-1. The proposed amendment would add a new policy— Policy B-5 —to the Housing
Choice and Affordability section of the Complete Neighborhoods and Housing chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make AFFH a City Housing Policy.
While the draft amendment is similar to the version discussed at the City Council's July 15 work
session, the revised version addresses direction from the Planning Commission at their study
session on July 28 to clarify that AFFH policies are not limited in applicability to protected
classes, and must be applied to other populations as well. More specifically, the resulting
change modifies the language at the end of the policy from, "for protected classes" to, "for
populations including, but not limited to, people in classes protected under state and federal
fair housing regulations."
Public Engagement
City staff offered numerous opportunities for public engagement and comment on the adoption of
the HPS in Fall 2023 through Fall 2024, drafts of which always included a strategy to adopt
legislative amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make AFFH a City Housing Policy.
These opportunities occurred through several avenues and public events , including an Online
Open House survey, a "Community Forum" event, five Planning Commission meetings, two City
Council study sessions, one joint meeting with both the Planning Commission and Council, and five
meetings of the City-appointed Ad-Hoc Housing Production Strategy Task Force ("Task Force") per
Resolution 22-30, charged with providing high-level policy guidance to the Planning Commission
and City Council on their efforts to comply with HB 2003.
The following opportunities were provided for public comment specifically related to the
currently-proposed adoption of Comprehensive Plan amendments to make AFFH a City Housing
Policy:
• On January 27, a work session was held at the Planning Commission that included an
overview of AFFH policy from Samuel Goldberg, Public Policy Manager at the Fair Housing
Council of Oregon (FHCO);
• On May 28, 2025, a second work session was held at the Planning Commission with
another brief update on the project as part of a work session on HPS implementation more
broadly;
• On July 15, 2025, a study session was held at City Council where they received a general
overview of AFFH from Shyle Ruder, Education and Outreach Director at FHCO, and
provided direction regarding draft Comprehensive Plan amendments;
• On July 28, 2025, a third work session was held at the Planning Commission to provide
more detailed direction to staff regarding proposed Comprehensive Plan language.
Additionally, the City maintains a project website that describes the project, includes project
updates, and allows the public to access draft documents as they become available.
Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 3 of 7 LU 25-0001
September 8, 2025
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-4/PAGE 3 OF 7
EXHIBIT D-4
IV. NOTICE OF APPLICATION
A. Newspaper Notice: On August 27, 2025, public notice of the proposed Comprehensive
Plan amendment and Planning Commission public hearing will be published in the Lake
Oswego Review.
B. DLCD and Metro Notices: Pursuant to ORS 197.610 and LOC 50.003.07.16.c, staff has
provided notice of the proposed amendments to DLCD. Staff notified Metro as required
by Metro Code 3.07.820(a).
V. COMPLIANCE WITH APPROVAL CRITERIA
A. OREGON STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS
Amendments to the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan must comply with Oregon's
Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines (OAR Chapter 660 Division 15) when amending the
Comprehensive Plan policies, and must also comply with the existing Comprehensive Plan
policies.
Goal 2: Land Use—The City of Lake Oswego has a state-acknowledged Comprehensive
Plan. Section B of this report describes findings and conclusions that the
proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment is consistent with applicable
procedures and applicable goals and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Goal 10: Housing—The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment was developed in
compliance with statewide planning policies that govern planning for housing
and residential development, including Goal 10 (Housing), OAR 660 Division 7
(Metropolitan Housing), and OAR 660 Division 8 (Interpretation of Goal 10
Housing). The Comprehensive Plan amendment is being proposed to reflect the
findings of the City's 2023 HNA and community values and priorities that were
heard during the HPS project outreach. Additional findings regarding Housing
can be found in Section B of this report.
Conclusion: The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment is consistent with all applicable
Oregon Statewide Planning Goals. For the reasons stated above, the proposed
Comprehensive Plan amendment is established on a factual basis, is consistent with existing
City policies, and has been sufficiently coordinated with needed housing in the Metro
region, in accordance with OAR 660-008-030(1).
B. METRO CODE
Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, Title 7: Housing Choice[Metro Code
3.07.710- .740]
Title 7 of Metro's Urban Growth Management Functional Plan is designed to ensure the
production of affordable housing in the Metro UGB. Each city and county within the Metro
region is encouraged to voluntarily adopt an affordable housing production goal and is
Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 4 of 7 LU 25-0001
September 8, 2025
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-4/PAGE 4 OF 7
EXHIBIT D-4
required to ensure that their comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances include
strategies to:
• Ensure the production of a diverse range of housing types;
• Maintain the existing supply of affordable housing, increase opportunities for new
affordable housing dispersed throughout their boundaries; and
• Increase opportunities for households of all income levels to live in affordable
housing (3.07.730).
Findings: These requirements are intended to ensure that Lake Oswego's implementing
ordinances include strategies to ensure the production of a diverse range of housing types
and increase opportunities for new affordable housing dispersed throughout the City. The
proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment furthers the City's compliance with Title 7 by
implementing one of the strategies identified in the HPS to promote the development of
needed housing. This Comprehensive Plan amendment will lay the foundation for future
actions and implementation measures aimed at increasing opportunities for households of
all income levels to live within Lake Oswego in affordable housing.
Metro Urban Growth Management Functional Plan, Title 8: Compliance Procedures[Metro
Code 3.07.810- .870]
Section 3.07.820 of this title requires that at least 35 days prior to the first evidentiary
hearing on an amendment to a comprehensive plan, or land use regulation, that the City
submit the proposed amendments to Metro. Metro may review the amendments and can
request that the City provide an analysis of compliance with the Functional Plan.
Findings: The City submitted the proposed amendments to Metro on August 4, 2025, 35
days prior to the first evidentiary hearing scheduled for September 8, 2025.
Conclusion: The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment will increase the likelihood that
development of needed housing will occur that meets the housing needs identified in the
2023 HNA, and will directly implement one the strategies outlined in the City's HPS. The
proposal is consistent with Title 7 Housing Choice and Title 8 Compliance Procedures as
described in the findings herein.
C. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Staff has identified the following Comprehensive Plan Policies applicable to this proposal. Following
each policy or group of policies is a response:
Complete Neighborhoods and Housing- Housing Choice and Affordability:
Policy B-1: Provide and maintain zoning and development regulations that allow the
opportunity to develop an adequate supply and variety of housing types, and that
accommodate the needs of existing and future Lake Oswego residents.
Findings: The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment was specifically developed as
part of the action plan outlined in the City's HPS to increase housing supply over a 20-
year time period though the development of the types of housing that meet the city's
Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 5 of 7 LU 25-0001
September 8, 2025
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-4/PAGE 5 OF 7
EXHIBIT D-4
current and future housing needs. The adoption of the proposed Comprehensive Plan
amendment and the subsequent implementation of this policy will encourage more
opportunities for increased housing supply and the development of a variety of housing
types. This policy is met.
Neighborhood Plans
First Addition Neighbors and Forest Hills Neighborhood Plan
Housing, Land Use, and Neighborhood Character Policy 7: Encourage a variety of housing
types within First Addition/Forest Hills that is compatible with neighborhood character and
design.
Finding: This policy is intended, in part, to encourage a variety of housing types within
the First Addition / Forest Hills neighborhood, along with other neighborhoods
throughout the City. The proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment would establish a
new City Housing Policy that would, among other things, serve to ensure that future City
land use actions enhance housing choice for populations including, but not limited to,
people in classes protected under state and federal fair housing regulations. This policy
is met.
Lake Grove Village Center Plan
Policy 4.2: Preserve and increase the number of high density housing units and provide a
range of housing opportunities.
Finding: This policy is intended, in part, to encourage a variety of housing types within
the Lake Grove neighborhood, along with other neighborhoods throughout the City. As
stated above, the proposed amendment would establish a new City Housing Policy that
would, among other things, serve to ensure that future City land use actions enhance
housing choice for populations including, but not limited to, people in classes protected
under state and federal fair housing regulations. This policy is met.
D. CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CODE
Notices will be published in the Lake Oswego Review in advance of both the Planning
Commission and City Council hearings. Public comment may be submitted before or during the
forthcoming Planning Commission and City Council hearings. All those who submit comment on
the proposed amendments receive a notice of decision. Notice of the Planning Commission
public hearing has been given to DLCD in the manner provided by LOC 50.07.003.16.c.
Classification of Amendments as a Legislative Decision
The "legislative decision" process per LOC 50.07.003.16.a for adoption of Ordinance 2967 will
be followed for the adoption of amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and Community
Development Code to comply with the CFEC rules:
A legislative decision is generally a policy decision which is up to the discretion of the City
Council, but shall:
i. Comply with any applicable state law;
Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 6 of 7 LU 25-0001
September 8, 2025
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-4/PAGE 6 OF 7
EXHIBIT D-4
ii. Comply with any applicable statewide planning goal or administrative rule
adopted pursuant to ORS Chapter 197. and
iii. In the case of a legislative amendment to this Community Development Code,
comply with any applicable provision of the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan.
The criteria are listed in Applicable Regulations, above, and are addressed in Sections A-C,
above.
VI. RECOMMENDATION
Based on the information presented in this report, staff recommends approval of the
proposed amendments to the Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan.
EXHIBITS
A. Draft Ordinance
A-1 Ordinance 2967, draft 08/26/2025
Attachment 1: Reserved for City Council Findings (not included)
Attachment 2: Comprehensive Plan Amendments, draft 08/04/2025
B. Findings, Conclusions and Order [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
C. Minutes [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
D. Staff Reports
D-1 Staff Memo, dated January 16, 2025, for the Planning Commission Work Session
on January 27, 2025 (due to size, use link below to view this exhibit)
https://a pps.lakeoswego.city/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=2895368&repo=CityofLakeoswego&cr=1
D-2 Staff Memo, dated May 16, 2025, for the Planning Commission Work Session on
May 28, 2025 (regarding PP 22-0005)
D-3 Staff Memo, dated July 18, 2025, for the Planning Commission Work Session on
July 28, 2025
E. Graphics/Plans [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
F. Written Materials [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
G. Letters [No current exhibits; reserved for hearing use]
Staff reports and public meeting materials that were prepared for this Comprehensive Plan
amendment can be found by visiting the project webpage for LU 25-0001. Use the link below to
visit the City's "Project" page.
https://www.ci.oswego.or.us/all-projects
(Under "Search" enter LU 25-0001, then press "Enter")
Planning Commission Public Hearing Page 7 of 7 LU 25-0001
September 8, 2025
LU 25-0001 EXHIBIT D-4/PAGE 7 OF 7