Probably the biggest thing to be aware of at this point is that it appears that the Land Use Task Force bill, HB477, has been modified somewhat and rolled into SB284.  Here is the comparison of the newly released substitute SB284 with the original, showing what new language has been added.  I’ve been told that this was done because SB284 has already had one committee hearing and is on the Senate floor awaiting a vote, and is thus ahead of HB477 in the process, which hasn’t even had a committee hearing yet.  With less than two weeks left in the session, this may be critical to make sure it gets through by the end of the session.

Now, I want to put in a plug for the Utah Land Use Institute’s upcoming Spring Conference in St. George on March 20.  Here is the preliminary program for the conference.

We will be doing a legislative update session on land use and housing measures passed, with Steve Waldrip, Shawn Guzman, Karson Eilers and yours truly on the panel.  The afternoon of the conference will be dedicated to the topic titled “The Need for Speed.”  The two sessions will be focused on the issue of how long, drawn-out land use and building permit application and review processes can stymie new development and add to costs in a significant way.  In fact, at the national level, permitting processes has been identified as one of the main points in need of reform to help bring down costs for new housing.

To help make the point, earlier this month, a study by Goldman Sachs on the stagnation of productivity in the construction industry was released.  The study talks about how, if the construction industry had made gains in productivity comparable to the rest of the economy, construction costs would be considerably lower.  Why the industry has not realized those productivity gains is due to a variety of reasons, but regulation is cited as one of the major issues.  From the study:

Increased regulation of housing has also been a major drag on construction productivity growth.

Our cross-country analysis further confirms that stricter land use regulations have weighed on construction productivity growth meaningfully.

Using US state-level data, our analysis further shows that approval delays tend to impose the largest drag on construction productivity growth (emphasis mine). Rules that restrict the size and height of new buildings also weigh on construction productivity growth, likely because they lead to inefficient investment decisions across different locations. State political involvement, local approval requirements, and impact fees can also lower construction productivity growth, by raising barriers for new developers to enter, thereby reducing local competition.

Did you catch what the study said?  You can see this in the chart in the study – approval delays, in other words application and permitting review and approval processes – impose the largest drag.

We’ve had bills in past legislative sessions aimed at this issue, often by proposing to put time limits on review processes.  Such limitations have been enacted for building permit applications and review.  In this session, there are a couple of bills that make some moves to address such process issues, like HB470 and SB284.

I think this is going to be a continuing, growing issue.