A bipartisan Arizona State Senate bill that looks to increase the state’s affordable housing supply by eliminating many municipalities’ home design aesthetic guidelines was recommended by the House Commerce Committee and will now go to the Rules Committee before advancing to a floor vote.
Phoenix Sen. Shawnna Bolick is Senate Bill 1431’s primary sponsor. The proposal bans requirements for screening, walls or fences, and eliminates aesthetic design standards for a broad range of materials, design elements, architectural styles, floor plans, outdoor improvements, driveway surfacing and other components.
Local jurisdictions would also be prevented from requiring the formation of homeowners’ associations in new developments.
Bolick said the bill does not impact health or safety codes and does not apply to historic homes or other exempted types.
Building and fire codes, dark sky considerations, minimum parking requirements and utility easements are also unaffected.
Municipalities would be barred from denying building permits or other entitlements based on covered design restrictions.
The proposal has drawn harsh criticism from some municipal leaders around the state, who allege it eliminates “community input” and local oversight.
Bolick and other supporters say the bill will help housing affordability by preventing municipalities from driving up the costs of homes through aesthetic mandates and aesthetic requirements on amenities.
The League of Arizona Cities and Towns has expressed its opposition, alleging it would reduce the quality of homes in the state. “There’s a difference between cheap and affordable,” LACT representative Nick Ponder said. “We can do affordable here in Arizona without product that lacks quality.”
Ponder also said the Legislature required cities to maintain objective design standards under House Bill 2447, which passed last year.
Susan Edward of the Arizona Neighborhood Alliance alleged the bill could harm public safety, since it could lead to homes without fences near roadways, which she said could put children at risk.
Supporters say the measure respects legitimate considerations about health and public safety issues but sets firm guidelines to make sure “subjective preferences” do not block basic property rights and add unnecessary costs.
Jake Kinman of Arizona Neighborhood Project said his HOA payment was equal to nearly 10% of his monthly mortgage. “So, if I didn’t have to pay the HOA, my house would become 10% (more) affordable overnight just like that,” he said.
Arizona State University architecture and planning teacher Rocky Hanish said HOAs have degenerated to the point they are now “destroying the local character they claim to protect,” adding their mandated uniformity is “the aesthetic output of authoritarian governance at their neighborhood scale.” (Source)