The Commission on Housing Affordability (CHA) met last Tuesday to receive some briefings on housing-related topics and issues, and to hear reports from their various subgroups that are working on issues that may be recommended ultimately for action in the upcoming legislative session.  The CHA has been doing this for a few years, and is now a working committee under the Unified Economic Opportunity Commission, a body chaired by Gov. Cox and which includes the Speaker of the House and the President of the Senate, among many other notables.

Chris Gamvroulas, President of Ivory Development and a member of the CHA, is chairing one of the subgroups that is primarily looking at local land use regulation, and his list of topics the group is addressing this year is most interesting.  Some of the more notable:

• Parking definitions, minimums, garages
• Blanket increase of 1 or 2 units permitted in all residential zones
• The parameters for public hearings/public comments for land use applications (full disclosure: this is a topic that has been near and dear to my heart for a few years now as well!)
• Streamlined process for issuing permits for identical sets of plans
• Standardizing zoning among communities (not sure what he means by this – I know Chris has for a couple of years now been pushing for mandatory conformity of zoning with general plans, don’t know if this is that or something different)
• Allowing by right for external ADUs
• Enhancing allowance for small lots (Rep. Ray Ward had a bill in the last legislative session that would have done something like this, to some degree)

Most informative to me, however, were some of the comments from CHA members about what may be something of a turn in approach to these land use issues.  As we’ve noted for some time now, Utah has not been typical in pursuing the kinds of legislative mandates for zoning reform (in all its multiple meanings) that we’ve been seeing in other states around the country (see several past blog posts).  Instead, state and local officials have been displaying much more of a cooperative and incentives-based direction.  While there has been plenty done, there really hasn’t been time yet to see if these approaches will ultimately bear fruit.

We may be getting to the end of such a way, if the comments made by some of the CHA members at Tuesday’s meeting are foretelling.  Let me give you a taste (the quotes are paraphrases of the comments made).

Chris Gamvroulas: Statewide education (on the need for smaller lots, smaller houses, different housing) is fine, until (local officials think) it affects me, and then I’m going to vote a certain way if it’s in my backyard.  The only way to create the kinds of outcomes we need is to have some requirements for the zoning that ultimately gives some cover to the city council members and the planning commissioners.  Unless there is some requirement that holds the local policymakers’ feet to the fire, I don’t know that we’re really going to have the outcomes called for in the Moderate Income Housing Plans.

Wayne Niederhauser (state homelessness czar, former Utah Senate President): There isn’t a silver bullet to lower the cost of housing.  Maybe there needs to be some kind of market rate factor that goes into a formula that cities and land use authorities have to abide by.

David Damschen (President, Utah Housing Corporation): Something I’ve heard from colleagues in other states on carrots vs. sticks, I’ve seen our governor and legislature working hard to develop compromise and produce some carrots.  I have great respect for the League and our local governments, but I’ve heard it said that in other states that have gone down this road, that it got to the point where the carrots had to become sticks at some point.  The League and cities and the property rights coalition have worked hard to come up with things that can be agreed upon, but it appears we’re running out of things that can be agreed upon.

There you have it, folks and fellow planners.  It looks like we may be joining the ranks of our fellow states that have trod the more typical, top-down zoning reform mandates, if the comments of the CHA members are any signpost to what’ll be recommendations for legislative action next session.

If you’d like to listen to Tuesday’s CHA meeting, here’s the link.  It is an interesting meeting.