<body><div><figure><img src="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?type=thumbnail_580x000&amp;url=1sg9sP_1F93g7TR00" alt="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=1sg9sP_1F93g7TR00" width="1080" height="720" ><figcaption>State Rep. Pam Marsh, D-Ashland, said the Legislature has heard complaints for years about the lack of housing in Oregon and the cumbersome bureaucratic hurdles facing developers. (123rf.com/Stock)</figcaption></figure>Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...Legislative bills aimed at stimulating housing production upend landmark 1973 bill; Medford might fold Site Plan and Architectural CommissionMedford and other local cities are confronting an abrupt break with the state’s landmark 1973 Senate Bill 100 that prioritized citizen involvement in housing developments.A number of recent legislative bills to stimulate housing production have in many cases eliminated public hearings and neighbor appeals, as well as curtailed notifications to neighboring properties.In a recent written commentary to Medford City Council, Interim City Manager John Vial said, “Many of these changes will have a profound impact on how existing neighboring property owners are allowed to participate in the housing and land development process. The reduced notice areas, the removal of a public hearing, and the prohibition of most appeals will leave impacted neighboring properties feeling excluded and ignored and they are likely to express those feelings to staff and elected officials.”Councilor Kevin Stine, during an Aug. 26 study session, expressed concern about the new notification process and lack of recourse for neighbors.“If parties with standing cannot appeal, what’s the point of the 100 foot or 500 foot notice,” he said.The change in public input prompted Michelle King, Medford planning director, to propose ending the Medford’s Site Plan and Architectural Commission, which reviews many housing projects.She said the commission’s responsibilities could be folded into the Planning Commission, a proposal that the City Council said would take further review. The Planning Commission might also have less opportunities to review projects going forward.The Medford Planning Department has already started following state regulations for new housing applications while the City Council considers new regulations that comply with state laws that would result in less public involvement.“It won’t be as interactive as it is now,” King said.The city is considering placing more responsibility and scrutiny on projects with the planning director and staff to comply with the new state regulations.Neighboring property owners who might object to a project would only have the option to express their feelings to planning staff or elected officials.<h2>Ashland and housing</h2>Ashland is also moving to change its local regulations to encourage more housing, including a proposal to allow two accessory dwelling units instead of one on a city lot.Brandon Goldman, Ashland Community Development director, said that when he started as a planner, Senate Bill 100 was just getting established and its direction was clear in planning circles.“Goal 1 of SB 100 requires citizen involvement,” Goldman said. “It is acknowledged in our comprehensive plan.”SB 100 has been the guiding star for planners for 50 years, and now the challenge is to rewrite local regulations to bring them in line with the legislative intent of the new bills, Goldman said.He said legislators placed a 2033 sunset on many of the provisions of the new laws that would require review to see if they are working.Among the new bills is House Bill 4037, a 2026 state law that scales back the notification of a new development of 19 units or less to properties within 100 feet from the current 200 feet. For 20 or more units, the notification distance is 500 feet.The land-use actions for housing developments won’t require a public hearing process and the appeals process is more limited. Only the developer is allowed to appeal.Senate Bill 974 is a 2025 state law that also limits notification to 100 feet from the property site for zone changes, land-use developments and variance to residential development.Under 974, no public hearing is required, and residential design standards would not be required for the development of some housing projects of 10 units or more compared to the current standard of five units.<h2>Rep. Marsh on the public process </h2>Rep. Pam Marsh, D-Ashland, is the chair of the House Committee on Housing and Homelessness, which helped advance policies aimed at state’s housing shortage.Marsh said the Legislature has heard complaints for years about the lack of housing in Oregon and the cumbersome bureaucratic hurdles facing developers.“We are constantly hearing we need to streamline the development process,” she said. “This is an attempt to do exactly that.”She said this will place more responsibility on cities to develop clear and objective standards for projects that provide clarity for developers as they begin the planning process.Marsh disagreed that the public is being taken out of the process.“There is nothing in the statutes that prohibits planners from meeting with people,” she said.Marsh said that when she was on the Ashland Planning Commission, there was a tendency to overplan developments.“We aspired to outcomes that were probably not achievable, honestly,” she said. “We’ve often been found guilty of micromanaging development.”Going forward, she said, “Maybe we can be a little less controlling.”Cities need to clearly establish zoning and other requirements for developments long before a building permit is submitted, she said.“When people (developers) want to make significant changes or have exceptions, that’s the time for public process,” Marsh said.She said the new legislation is a departure from the way the state used to do deal with building projects.“It might be disorienting for us to back away from the highest, highest standards,” she said.At this time, though, the housing crisis is the big issue for Marsh.“We have not yet succeeded in getting the number of houses that we want on the ground,” she said.Reach freelance writer Damian Mann at dmannnews@gmail.comType or paste story here</div></body>

Block Source: youroregonnews.com

Misinformation

Clickbait

Old or repetitive news

Explicit content

Location not relevant

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready... Legislative bills aimed at stimulating housing production upend landmark 1973 bill; Medford might fold Site Plan and Architectural Commission. Medford and other local cities are confronting an abrupt break with the state’s landmark 1973 Senate Bill 100 that prioritized citizen involvement in housing developments....

Public could feel ‘excluded, ignored’ on Oregon housing projects

NewsBreak

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready... Legislative bills aimed at stimulating housing production upend landmark 1973 bill; Medford might fold Site Plan

Public could feel ‘excluded, ignored’ on Oregon housing projects

Comments