Michael Andersen
@andersem.bsky.social
Believer, skeptic, humanist, typist & dad. Trying to make places fairer as director of cities + towns for @Sightline.org, here in Portland OR. Views here: mine, all mine.
Btw sorry for the sloppy chart, Y axis unlabeled etc. laptop is packed & I’m on my phone before trip!
November 26, 2025 at 8:01 AM
Btw sorry for the sloppy chart, Y axis unlabeled etc. laptop is packed & I’m on my phone before trip!
My numbers are actual units but (because I was testing IZ trends) they’re units submitted for permit, not permits issued. I agree the latter is the best measure of feasibility, though on a delay. Again, IZ hurt, but not a “lost decade.”
Why do you think WashCo & Gresham fell by the same amount?
Why do you think WashCo & Gresham fell by the same amount?
November 26, 2025 at 7:59 AM
My numbers are actual units but (because I was testing IZ trends) they’re units submitted for permit, not permits issued. I agree the latter is the best measure of feasibility, though on a delay. Again, IZ hurt, but not a “lost decade.”
Why do you think WashCo & Gresham fell by the same amount?
Why do you think WashCo & Gresham fell by the same amount?
It’d never have been fully funded when demand was hottest, construction was everywhere & rents were rising. Politics wouldn’t allow it.
This is a political window for cutting costs & cruft. That’s good policy in both high & low tides but it can actually be achieved at low tide.
This is a political window for cutting costs & cruft. That’s good policy in both high & low tides but it can actually be achieved at low tide.
November 26, 2025 at 6:58 AM
It’d never have been fully funded when demand was hottest, construction was everywhere & rents were rising. Politics wouldn’t allow it.
This is a political window for cutting costs & cruft. That’s good policy in both high & low tides but it can actually be achieved at low tide.
This is a political window for cutting costs & cruft. That’s good policy in both high & low tides but it can actually be achieved at low tide.
If that other work succeeds, we’ll want to be ready. Also, zoning isn’t just size - it’s a zillion processes & reviews that add cost & often also benefit, but should be reevaluated for current conditions. IZ is one.
November 26, 2025 at 6:56 AM
If that other work succeeds, we’ll want to be ready. Also, zoning isn’t just size - it’s a zillion processes & reviews that add cost & often also benefit, but should be reevaluated for current conditions. IZ is one.
2. I agree that we’re fighting the last battle but I prefer to think of it as fighting the next battle.
Completely agreed that our main challenge right now is making people want to live & work here, & the core yimby agenda doesn’t really do this.
Completely agreed that our main challenge right now is making people want to live & work here, & the core yimby agenda doesn’t really do this.
November 26, 2025 at 6:52 AM
2. I agree that we’re fighting the last battle but I prefer to think of it as fighting the next battle.
Completely agreed that our main challenge right now is making people want to live & work here, & the core yimby agenda doesn’t really do this.
Completely agreed that our main challenge right now is making people want to live & work here, & the core yimby agenda doesn’t really do this.
1. I think you overstate the costs of unfunded IZ somewhat. It was bad & we definitely lost projects but here are annual multifamily (12+) permits 2012-2023. Rents have been flat since 2017 due to the drop in demand you mention, which was already underway (growth rate was slowing) as IZ arrived.
November 26, 2025 at 6:49 AM
1. I think you overstate the costs of unfunded IZ somewhat. It was bad & we definitely lost projects but here are annual multifamily (12+) permits 2012-2023. Rents have been flat since 2017 due to the drop in demand you mention, which was already underway (growth rate was slowing) as IZ arrived.
Wow, what company tho!
November 26, 2025 at 6:41 AM
Wow, what company tho!
great question. discussion in thread bsky.app/profile/ande...
The crucial grain of salt: due to Portland's slow housing market, this data doesn't yet include many projects at all.
Since March 2024, only 35 new projects of 12+ homes have been proposed in Portland. Of these, 6 were 12-19.
Many projects of 20+ homes have been small, too: 20, 22, 29, 28, 25.
Since March 2024, only 35 new projects of 12+ homes have been proposed in Portland. Of these, 6 were 12-19.
Many projects of 20+ homes have been small, too: 20, 22, 29, 28, 25.
November 25, 2025 at 8:21 PM
great question. discussion in thread bsky.app/profile/ande...
nice catch! This is a very important detail to me
November 25, 2025 at 8:20 PM
nice catch! This is a very important detail to me
I wouldn't think this is a good idea if the funding came out to more than the cost of just building an affordable home the normal way! But happily it's cheaper this way, & has the added benefits of:
- mixed-income buildings
- high-demand neighborhoods
Not a fix for everything. But functional!
- mixed-income buildings
- high-demand neighborhoods
Not a fix for everything. But functional!
November 25, 2025 at 8:19 PM
I wouldn't think this is a good idea if the funding came out to more than the cost of just building an affordable home the normal way! But happily it's cheaper this way, & has the added benefits of:
- mixed-income buildings
- high-demand neighborhoods
Not a fix for everything. But functional!
- mixed-income buildings
- high-demand neighborhoods
Not a fix for everything. But functional!
Yes, exactly - in the closer-in neighborhoods, mixed-income rental buildings don't have to pay property taxes on their building for the first 10 years. (They still pay taxes on the land, which btw gets reset under Measure 50 so there is often still an immediate tax boost.)
November 25, 2025 at 8:17 PM
Yes, exactly - in the closer-in neighborhoods, mixed-income rental buildings don't have to pay property taxes on their building for the first 10 years. (They still pay taxes on the land, which btw gets reset under Measure 50 so there is often still an immediate tax boost.)
In fast times (& we should be ready for population growth to return at some point, lest it fuck us up when it does) having a fully funded program will let us grow gracefully.
We won't drive away construction at the moment we'll need it most. And every new building will serve a range of incomes. 👍
We won't drive away construction at the moment we'll need it most. And every new building will serve a range of incomes. 👍
November 25, 2025 at 7:41 PM
In fast times (& we should be ready for population growth to return at some point, lest it fuck us up when it does) having a fully funded program will let us grow gracefully.
We won't drive away construction at the moment we'll need it most. And every new building will serve a range of incomes. 👍
We won't drive away construction at the moment we'll need it most. And every new building will serve a range of incomes. 👍
And to bring things around again: reforming our IZ program until it's no longer a cost barrier was *exactly* the sort of thing Portland should be doing.
In slow times, this will let homes get built at today's prices while still cost-effectively achieving the goal of mixed-income buildings.
In slow times, this will let homes get built at today's prices while still cost-effectively achieving the goal of mixed-income buildings.
November 25, 2025 at 7:38 PM
And to bring things around again: reforming our IZ program until it's no longer a cost barrier was *exactly* the sort of thing Portland should be doing.
In slow times, this will let homes get built at today's prices while still cost-effectively achieving the goal of mixed-income buildings.
In slow times, this will let homes get built at today's prices while still cost-effectively achieving the goal of mixed-income buildings.
I wrote here about how to think about Portland's housing policy goals in this new environment: we should be eliminating the cost barriers to development. www.sightline.org/2024/02/07/a...
A Housing Agenda for Oregon: More Homes without Higher Prices | Sightline Institute
The usual way to get more homes built is wait for prices go up. But there is another way.
www.sightline.org
November 25, 2025 at 7:35 PM
I wrote here about how to think about Portland's housing policy goals in this new environment: we should be eliminating the cost barriers to development. www.sightline.org/2024/02/07/a...
These flat rents have been a relief for most renters (though only those with wages...without them, no way to keep up with inflation).
But fewer people means Portland can no longer feed its homebuilding market the way builders got used to: with ever-rising rents. This is more good than bad IMO!
But fewer people means Portland can no longer feed its homebuilding market the way builders got used to: with ever-rising rents. This is more good than bad IMO!
November 25, 2025 at 7:32 PM
These flat rents have been a relief for most renters (though only those with wages...without them, no way to keep up with inflation).
But fewer people means Portland can no longer feed its homebuilding market the way builders got used to: with ever-rising rents. This is more good than bad IMO!
But fewer people means Portland can no longer feed its homebuilding market the way builders got used to: with ever-rising rents. This is more good than bad IMO!
Why is Portland's housing market so weak? It's always reassuring to point fingers, and some are still under the impression that IZ is a big problem, as it was in 2017-2024.
But the fact is that Portland's population has fallen about 3% since its 2019 peak, and rents have been flat after inflation.
But the fact is that Portland's population has fallen about 3% since its 2019 peak, and rents have been flat after inflation.
November 25, 2025 at 7:27 PM
Why is Portland's housing market so weak? It's always reassuring to point fingers, and some are still under the impression that IZ is a big problem, as it was in 2017-2024.
But the fact is that Portland's population has fallen about 3% since its 2019 peak, and rents have been flat after inflation.
But the fact is that Portland's population has fallen about 3% since its 2019 peak, and rents have been flat after inflation.
But for those of us interested specifically in Portland's inclusionary zoning program, this is actually extra encouraging.
Those projects of 20-30 homes are *exactly* the ones that would previously have avoided an underfunded program by underbuilding their zoning (or never existing at all).
Those projects of 20-30 homes are *exactly* the ones that would previously have avoided an underfunded program by underbuilding their zoning (or never existing at all).
November 25, 2025 at 7:16 PM
But for those of us interested specifically in Portland's inclusionary zoning program, this is actually extra encouraging.
Those projects of 20-30 homes are *exactly* the ones that would previously have avoided an underfunded program by underbuilding their zoning (or never existing at all).
Those projects of 20-30 homes are *exactly* the ones that would previously have avoided an underfunded program by underbuilding their zoning (or never existing at all).
The crucial grain of salt: due to Portland's slow housing market, this data doesn't yet include many projects at all.
Since March 2024, only 35 new projects of 12+ homes have been proposed in Portland. Of these, 6 were 12-19.
Many projects of 20+ homes have been small, too: 20, 22, 29, 28, 25.
Since March 2024, only 35 new projects of 12+ homes have been proposed in Portland. Of these, 6 were 12-19.
Many projects of 20+ homes have been small, too: 20, 22, 29, 28, 25.
November 25, 2025 at 7:13 PM
The crucial grain of salt: due to Portland's slow housing market, this data doesn't yet include many projects at all.
Since March 2024, only 35 new projects of 12+ homes have been proposed in Portland. Of these, 6 were 12-19.
Many projects of 20+ homes have been small, too: 20, 22, 29, 28, 25.
Since March 2024, only 35 new projects of 12+ homes have been proposed in Portland. Of these, 6 were 12-19.
Many projects of 20+ homes have been small, too: 20, 22, 29, 28, 25.
We have a counterfactual though
November 25, 2025 at 6:39 PM
We have a counterfactual though
Here's the key finding, from 18 months of multifamily permit intakes.
Before the city put an affordability mandate on buildings of 20+ homes, almost 1/4 of multifamily projects came in just under 20 homes ✅
When the program was underfunded (2017-2024), almost half 😬
Since last year, 1/4 again 😎
Before the city put an affordability mandate on buildings of 20+ homes, almost 1/4 of multifamily projects came in just under 20 homes ✅
When the program was underfunded (2017-2024), almost half 😬
Since last year, 1/4 again 😎
November 25, 2025 at 6:37 PM
Here's the key finding, from 18 months of multifamily permit intakes.
Before the city put an affordability mandate on buildings of 20+ homes, almost 1/4 of multifamily projects came in just under 20 homes ✅
When the program was underfunded (2017-2024), almost half 😬
Since last year, 1/4 again 😎
Before the city put an affordability mandate on buildings of 20+ homes, almost 1/4 of multifamily projects came in just under 20 homes ✅
When the program was underfunded (2017-2024), almost half 😬
Since last year, 1/4 again 😎