Oregon’s legislature just passed Bill HB 2138:
In recent years, Oregon did 2 things to make housing more affordable :
Oregon reformed zoning.
Most american cities require single individual homes, the most expensive form of housing. You want to build something else? Good luck. They will try to stop you. Oregon changed zoning rules to make it easier to build duplexes, triplexes and condos.
Oregon banned parking requirements
Most american cities ban new buildings that don’t add parking. If you want to build housing without parking, it’s illegal. Basically, buyers and renters are forced to pay for parking spots, whether they like it or not. Even if they don’t have a car. Even if they are blind. Oregon ended mandatory parking requirements. Eliminating parking requirements doesn’t mean 0 parking. It just means it’s up to buyers and sellers now.
These 2 reforms delivered some good results:
https://www.streetroots.org/news/2023/04/12/parking-reform-secret-new-oregon-housing
https://www.sightline.org/2025/06/04/oregons-zoning-reforms-are-working-but-they-need-some-upgrades/
But unfortunately, they didn’t go far enough.
This new bill makes it significantly easier to build housing.
For the first time in my life, I can say Oregon has a realistic chance to fix the housing crisis.
Let’s hope Bill HB 2138 is signed. This was long overdue. 🎉🥳🎊
On-street parking is not practical for an apartment building - not for more than 3 or 4 of the tenants.
Exactly, I’m advocating for not building any on-street parking. At all.
I agree! You aren’t OP, so I’m unclear whether you were agreeing or disagreeing with my skepticism about letting developers off the hook for providing parking being a good idea. It seems good for developers, but bad for urban planning.
Especially in Oregon, which is not known for its extensive and comprehensive public transport systems. The regional rail is Spartan, and Portland is the only city with any light rail at all, and it’s aenemic at best. Eugene’s bus system is adequate, largely thanks to the University, but getting around the state and within cities completely without a car is impractical. It would be a different story if the state boasted rail, light rail, and bus systems at the European level, but it doesn’t; letting developers build housing without allowing for parking seems like it only benefits developers.
I think in a paradigm where neither developers nor municipal governments are forced to subsidize the very significant cost of parking, and instead put their focus on providing better transportation systems in the form of transit in bicycle infrastructure, we would all be better off.