SB 1037 and Cluster Subdivisions

Today's Oregonian covered the developments in the Senate with SB1037, an effort to deal with the confusion and inconsistencies created by Measure 37.  Sid at New Frames is dubious.

For people unfamiliar with the cluster subdivision concept, it sounds like a viable option because, as in the case above, it "preserves" open space.  The reality proves otherwise.  Just ask the Washington state land use planners and elected officials who had to place a moratorium on cluster subdivision development in 1993 due to the complete mess it was resulting in for tax payers, land use planners and surrounding property owners.  Washington state's current land use laws prohibit cluster subdivision development due to the complications it created during the 80s and early 90s.

On the affordable housing front, cluster subdivisions do absolutely nothing to ease the problem despite what advocates may tell us. Cluster subdivisions are McMansion subdivisions on rural land.  Take a drive around "rural" Clark County Washington and you'll see what I mean.  It's tough to find anything under a half million.

More analysis at New Frames--go have a look.

[Editor's Note:  Comments are closed on this topic. We're using this 'elsewhere' feature to point folks to other good stuff in the blogosphere, but we're not interested in grabbing their traffic. Comment over there.]

May 11, 2005 Posted in elsewhere.