Jon Belcher, co-chairman of the River Road Community Organization, stands on Hatton Avenue near single-family homes and the ECCO Apartments that rise from the more traditional residences. Belcher says that neighborhoods see value in adding missing middle housing within limits. But he says there's been discussions of encouraging missing middle housing as a transition zone between the dense development planned along the thoroughfare and existing single-family neighborhoods. [Andy Nelson/The Register-Guard] - registerguard.com ▲ A duplex at Cleveland Street and 18th Avenue was allowed under previous law because it was on a corner, but state lawmakers passed a bill this session that will enable developers to build more duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes in neighborhoods traditionally zoned for single-family homes. [Andy Nelson/The Register-Guard] - registerguard.com ▲

Eugene will kick and scream, but denser neighborhoods likely will become a reality for Oregon's second-largest city in the coming years.

Three weeks ago, Oregon lawmakers gave final approval to legislation that effectively bans single-family zoning in larger cities by requiring those neighborhoods to accommodate duplexes, triplexes and town homes.

The legislation, if signed into law by Gov. Kate Brown, which is expected, would represent a sea change for Eugene. The city has a influential bloc of neighborhood associations largely wedded to preserving single-family neighborhoods and a pained recent history with efforts to increase density in them.

"This is landmark legislation, no question about it," city of Eugene Planning Director Robin Hostick said. "Oregon already has a strong, unique land-use program, and the new legislation makes some big changes that will take time to understand."

Eugene's predominant land-use zone, R-1, is designed for single-family neighborhoods. The zone allows duplexes and other high-density dwellings, but city policy and regulation hasn't particularly rolled out the welcome mat for them.

For example, the city requires that duplexes only be built on a corner lot in R-1, and new duplexes are banned in three neighborhoods adjacent and near the University of Oregon. Triplexes are allowed in R-1, but the city requires an extensive approval process known as planned unit development. The city fees for that approval process alone can exceed $21,000, Principal Planner Alissa Hansen told city councilors earlier this year.

By contrast, the legislation, House Bill 2001, requires cities to allow duplexes on every lot on land zoned for single-family housing. In addition, it requires cities to allow "all middle housing types" — so named because they fall between homes and apartment complexes — in these neighborhoods.

The legislation comes as city leaders are grappling with how to make housing more affordable as rising prices driven by high demand and a lack of supply have put home ownership out of reach for low-income and even middle-income residents.

The city's regulations have stymied construction of new duplexes. In the past 10 years, the city has issued building permits to construct 2,192 single-family homes but only 78 duplexes, according to the city's online database.

House Speaker Tina Kotek, D-Portland, who championed the legislation, has said the legislation is another tool to provide prospective homebuyers with more housing choices that they can afford.

Housing advocates echo this, but detractors argue there's no evidence to support this claim and that the only success House Bill 2001 will have is destroying neighborhood livability through the loss of trees and privacy and increases in traffic and noise.

"It's like Trump's wall," said Paul Conte, former board chairman of Jefferson Westside Neighbors and a neighborhood advocate. "It's not going to the solve the problem."

The Eugene City Council's response to the legislation was a resounding no. In March, it directed its lobbyist to work to kill the bill, with the majority agreeing there were no amendments that would make the legislation palatable to them.

The council was furious at state lawmakers for what its majority termed a one-size-fits-all approach to local zoning.

"There's nothing in this bill that I can approve of — and the fact that it goes against home rule, I don't really care what it says after that," Councilor Emily Semple said.

The council's hard-line stance drew a rare rebuke from Mayor Lucy Vinis.

"I'm a little worried you're cutting off your nose to spite your face, that you're making a stand on principle and it's going to come back and hurt you" politically, she said.

The city's official land-use stance is not to expand its urban grown boundary — the invisible border around the city aimed at preventing sprawl — for housing.

The city has forecast Eugene's population will increase by more than 33,700 people between 2012 and 2032; its population has grown slightly more than 10,000 from 2013 to 2018, state population estimates show.

City planners have concluded Eugene can house the new residents within the existing boundary through construction on vacant and redevelopable land and adding new dwellings in downtown and areas zoned for denser residential uses outside of R-1.

Two of the city's core planning tenets are to protect compact urban development and protect neighborhood livability. But those tenets have turned at odds with each other.

About three years ago, blowback from neighbors in south Eugene prompted city officials to abandon a trial effort to increase density along south Willamette Street, a major transportation route.

The city then shifted its planning effort to the River Road-Santa Clara corridor, which is underway.

Jon Belcher, co-chairman of the River Road Community Organization, said the neighborhoods see value in adding missing middle housing within limits.

He said there's been discussions of encouraging that housing as a transition zone between the dense development planned along the thoroughfare and existing single-family neighborhoods.

"That's where we've been discussing using it," he said.

Impact on neighborhoods



Eugene also has struggled to come into compliance with a state law requiring cities to allow accessory dwelling units, commonly known as in-law suites, in single-family neighborhoods, a land-use debate that has pitted housing advocates against neighborhood leaders.

Similar to the accessory dwelling units law, House Bill 2001 gives cities the authority to regulate the location and look of missing middle housing so long as the rules don't discourage it through unreasonable costs or delays.

Bill Kloos, a local land-use attorney who has faced off with the city in numerous cases, said city leaders often drag their feet because "the neighborhood preservationists have too strong a hold on the City Council."

He added: "There's a lot more at stake here. Ultimately the city is going to have to come into compliance. It's just a question of time and effort and ... angst."

City Councilor Greg Evans, who serves as board president of the League of Oregon Cities, disputed that the elected body is under the thrall of neighborhood leaders.

"I quite frankly resent that notion," he said. "We listen to everybody."

He added: "Without discriminating against anybody, they (residents) should have the right to shape the character of their neighborhoods."

Eugene's deadline to adopt its regulations is June 30, 2022. If it misses the deadline, the city must follow the rules that the state develops until it can adopt its own local regulations.

"Nothing is changing overnight," said Hostick, the planning director, noting he heard about one local resident inquiring about building a duplex in his neighborhood upon learning about the legislation's approval.

Hostick said his staff has begun discussing how to meet the deadline and said they wanted residents engaged in the coming discussions.

"We're going to hear many different opinions and assumptions about what the bill means, and I'm really counseling patience," he said.

Conte criticized the legislation as driven by "YIMBY (Yes In My Backyard) zealots" that will strain aging and inadequate utility lines and other infrastructure in older neighborhoods. He said fed-up residents with the financial means to relocate will leave while those without will remain, leading to neighborhood degradation.

The legislation will undo the decades of time, money and effort he and other longtime homeowners put into turning around their once-troubled neighborhood.

"You don't win by destroying neighborhoods to get a few missing middle housing units," he said.

Promoting diversity, homeownership

Eliza Kashinsky, a member of the Walkable Eugene Citizens Advisory Network, which supports the legislation, said her hope is that it can spur a dialogue to unify the community and bring more diversity into neighborhoods as Eugene's land-use regulations have separated residents along ethnic and economic lines.

"I think our neighborhoods are enriched when they're more diverse," she said.

There are arguments that the legislation will help undo the racial inequity within the history of single-family zoning.

In an effort to stabilize the housing market after the Great Depression, the federal government created a new agency, Home Owners' Loan Corporation, that graded neighborhoods in determining lending risk. As a result, neighborhoods with people of color had less access to credit than white neighborhoods.

"The origins and the purposes of exclusionary single-family zoning have often been not only classist but very explicitly racist," Lisa Bates, an associate professor of urban studies and planning at Portland State University, told Oregon Public Broadcasting's Think Out Loud radio program in May.

Councilor Evans, who is black, said that legacy isn't as prominent in Eugene because its population of people of color is relatively small. Just 2% of the city's population is black and less than 10% is Latino.

"In a place like Eugene, people of color live everywhere," he said. "They're not concentrated in one spot. ... There is no ghetto here."

State Sen. James Manning, D-Eugene, who's also black, said he's looking toward the future than back to the past.

"I'm trying to help people who haven't had an opportunity to build personal wealth through home ownership," said Manning, who co-chaired a task force that examined racial disparities in home ownership in Oregon.

Manning flipped from "no" to a "yes" vote when House Bill 2001 came up for a second time during the final day of the legislative session after it had been narrowly defeated.

Manning said after further discussions, he felt the legislation granted enough authority to cities to regulate missing middle housing in single-family neighborhoods.

But he said he does question how the missing middle housing the legislation promotes would turn out to be affordable.

"We're not builders in the Legislature," he said. "It's going to come down to the public and private developers in order to make this dream a reality for moderate and low-income buyers."

Follow Christian Hill on Twitter @RGchill. Email christian.hill@registerguard.com.