<body><div><figure><img src="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?type=thumbnail_580x000&amp;url=0ddTxy_1FAGuFrA00" alt="https://img.particlenews.com/image.php?url=0ddTxy_1FAGuFrA00" width="1080" height="720" ><figcaption>Oregon lawmakers are considering changing land use rules next year to allow for more housing construction on farmland and in unincorporated rural communities. (Oregon Department of Transportation/Contributed)</figcaption></figure>Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...SALEM — Oregon lawmakers and regulators are considering changing land use rules next year to allow for more housing construction on farmland and in unincorporated rural communities.Along one track, a legislative work group is considering a bill to be introduced in 2027 that would make it easier for farmers and others to build second homes on their properties in agricultural zones.Currently, land use rules permit second homes to be built on farmland but the process is often “convoluted” and depends on a farmer’s relationship with the potential inhabitant, said Rep. Pam Marsh, D-Ashland.“The theory is we should look at environmental impacts, and not to try to micromanage how people live their lives,” Marsh said during a recent legislative hearing.The bill would provide a more clearcut process for such secondary homes, with likely “sideboards” that limit the dwelling’s size and require the use of existing septic systems, she said.Existing rules often require the occupant of a second home to be a relative of the farm’s operator who helps with running the farm.Marsh said these pathways tend to “invite misuse” and are “easily undermined,” so the legislation would adopt more uniform standards regardless of potential inhabitants.“We’re exploring making the process more straightforward and transparent,” she said.Lawmakers recently passed a bill that eases the construction of “accessory dwelling units” within rural residential zones, which may serve as a “guiding light” for the bill on secondary homes on farmland, Marsh said.“We’re looking at what people in towns can do and whether there could be an application to people who live on farms,” she said.<h2>Unincorporated areas</h2>Separately, the state’s Land Conservation and Development Commission is weighing a regulatory update to rules for unincorporated communities outside of cities.The original rules for these unincorporated communities were enacted about 30 years ago, so the goal is to see whether counties believe changes are necessary, said Alexis Hammer, legislative and policy manager for the Department of Land Conservation and Development, which is overseen by the commission.“We’re trying to understand what is working and what is not for county governments,” he said.The goal would be to allow for “modest growth” within such communities, focusing on residential development but also including retail and commercial uses, Hammer said.The updated rules, which LCDC aims to approve by February 2027, would help counties plan for such growth without overburdening local infrastructure, said Jon Jinings, DLCD’s community service specialist.“There will be nothing forced upon counties. They will do it at their own discretion,” he said.The retail and commercial components are intended to create “complete communities” with opportunities for employment and shopping, to reduce the need for travel to other areas, Jinings said.In response to questions from lawmakers, DLCD’s representatives said the rule revisions are not meant to apply to the construction of data centers, which have lately become a political lightning rod.“We don’t expect any changes to the rules that speak to industrial development that would open things up,” Jinings said.Despite these assurances, some lawmakers on the Senate Natural Resources and Wildfire Committee said they were concerned about the rule-making’s direction.For example, the regulatory update is expected to encompass “light industrial” development, which would include data centers unless they are specifically excluded, said Sen. Floyd Prozanski, D-Eugene.Prozanski said he was also troubled by the timeline of the rule-making and whether it conforms with the intentions of Senate Bill 100, the state’s landmark land use planning law.“Why are we on such a fast track? Right now, what I am hearing would basically be decimating SB 100,” he said.Sen. Jeff Golden, D-Medford, said he’s also heard concerns the rule-making amounts to “blowing the doors open on Senate Bill 100,” which has increasingly been treated as a “relic of history” in recent years as Oregon has sough to improve housing availability.There’s an assumption that expanding the amount of land available for development will alleviate the state’s housing shortage, but in many cases, the actual “bottleneck’ is insufficient infrastructure, Golden said.Any revisions to land use regulations should be based on actual data, such as an inventory of land that is currently buildable, he said.“We’re seeing powerful swings of the pendulum that maybe aren’t as data-based as they need to be,” Golden said.</div></body>

Block Source: youroregonnews.com

Misinformation

Clickbait

Old or repetitive news

Explicit content

Location not relevant

SALEM — Oregon lawmakers and regulators are considering changing land use rules next year to allow for more housing construction on farmland and in unincorporated rural communities. Along one track, a legislative work group is considering a bill to be introduced in 2027 that would make it easier for...

Oregon lawmakers may ease second homes on farmland

NewsBreak

SALEM — Oregon lawmakers and regulators are considering changing land use rules next year to allow for more housing construction on farmland and in unincor

Oregon lawmakers may ease second homes on farmland

Comments