One home. Three tests.
Build it.
Afford it.
Keep it.
A home has to get built, fit a household’s budget, and keep working for decades. Portland needs all three.
Follow the storyA very real set of choices.
A short visual guide, with the budgets and evidence one click deeper.Updated November 1, 2026
01Build it
A permit is only one piece of a home.
Land, plans and money have to come together. A stalled site may be waiting for any one of them. The fix depends on what is actually missing.
Follow one home · 01 / 08
First, a site has to work
A fence can surround a site while surveys, testing and financing work proceed.
Illustration, not a real project. Stages overlap; their order and duration vary.
A funding wait is different from a permit delay. Fixing one does not automatically fix the other.
What does the price of a home include?Explore a project budget
Land, construction, infrastructure, financing and reserves all sit inside the total. Compare the same cost year, apartment sizes and scope before judging which project is cheaper.
Land: $3,000,000
Site acquisition. A donated site still has economic value even when its cash price is zero.
| Use of funds | Total | per home |
|---|---|---|
| Land | $3,000,000 | $30,000 |
| Homes and shared space | $22,000,000 | $220,000 |
| Site and public improvements | $2,500,000 | $25,000 |
| Design and professional costs | $2,000,000 | $20,000 |
| Financing | $1,500,000 | $15,000 |
| Fees | $2,000,000 | $20,000 |
| Contingency and initial reserves | $2,000,000 | $20,000 |
| Full project | $35,000,000 | $350,000 |
These are teaching assumptions, not Albina One’s budget. Gross floor area includes circulation and shared space; rentable area is smaller. Public subsidy is a financing source within the total, not a cost to add on top.
Where do Portland’s rules and taxes fit?The local policy context
Rules can add uncertainty.
Conflicting requirements can force redesign. Portland’s Code Alignment 1 temporarily suspends selected upgrade triggers for alterations and additions; it does not cover new construction. The City’s published plan puts Code Alignment 2 changes in 2028.
Status checked October 27, 2026. A rule change is not yet evidence of measured time or cost savings.
Costs do not disappear.
Public infrastructure still needs funding when a project charge is reduced. Oregon’s Measure 50 also means similar properties can have different taxable values. New construction uses assessment rules; it is not simply taxed at full market value.
Sources: Code Alignment changes effective October 24, 2025 · Code Alignment Project 2 scope and timetable · Ordinance 192095 and budget analysis
How funding reaches a project: OHCS application and funding stages ↗
02Afford it
Affordable to whom?
A regulated rent is a limit on the price. Affordability is whether a household can pay it. Those are different tests.
Try it · an illustrative household
The line marks 30% of income.
$400/month would close the gap to that benchmark.
A home costing $1,400 a month can be affordable for one household and out of reach for another.
Change rent & utilities
A teaching example, not a benefits or eligibility calculation. No rental assistance is assumed. Program rent limits and household budgets are different measures.
Building a lower-rent home and helping a household pay the rent solve different problems. Some households need both.
How eligibility and rent limits workWhy qualifying is not the same as affording
Tax-credit housing uses area-income benchmarks to set eligibility and rent limits. A household earning much less may still need rental assistance. Actual eligibility depends on household size and program rules.
An existing tenant’s income increasing does not generally mean automatic eviction under federal tax-credit law. Other funding agreements also matter.
Sources: Federal tax-credit eligibility and rent rules, 26 USC 42 · PHB underwriting metrics, January 2026 · OHCS policy and guideline manual, July 2026
03Keep it
Opening day is the beginning.
Rent has to cover years of insurance, maintenance, staffing and debt. When the numbers stop working, existing affordable homes can be at risk.
The partnership question
Who shares the rescue?
A public debt payment can save a building while leaving its lender’s expected return intact. OHCS says it has struggled to share the financial consequences with lenders without putting the homes at greater risk.
One viable agreement
For public-private partnerships: agree on each partner’s contribution, who carries future shortfalls, and what residents receive. Lower interest, new equity or public operating support may help. The mix must keep the property viable. This is the Lab’s recommendation, not a uniform formula in the OHCS memo.
What makes a building’s budget work?Try the operating-budget model
A reserve pays for a temporary problem. It does not cure a recurring deficit. Debt restructuring, repair grants and ongoing operating support do different jobs.
What happens when the assumptions change?
Remaining cash is after the modeled operating costs, debt payments and reserve contribution.
At full occupancy, billed rent would be $1,560,000. Vacancy removes $78,000; uncollected rent on occupied homes removes another $44,460. These are separate losses.
Read the assumptions and limits
This is not a REACH property or a Portland portfolio estimate. Other operating costs are fixed at $650,000 annually, debt payments at $500,000 and replacement reserve contributions at $50,000. All homes have the same modeled rent. Support is a separate revenue assumption; no program promises this amount. Extra repairs are paid in this year without a reserve withdrawal. The model omits inflation, taxes on income, refinancing, future capital needs and multi-year effects. Initial capital funding and reserve deposits are not counted as recurring income.
What would a more durable choice have to save?
Compare a higher initial cost with future maintenance and energy savings. The answer depends on replacement cycles, who receives the savings and how long the building operates.
$51/year in constant-dollar savings breaks even over 30 years at a 3% real discount rate.
Illustration only. Equal savings at year-end; no residual value, grants or taxes. This is a required saving, not a measured saving from a particular material.
Sources: PHB underwriting metrics, January 2026 · OHCS policy and guideline manual, July 2026 · OHCS preservation memo to the House Housing and Homelessness Committee, June 24, 2026 (PDF, pp. 1–2)
Build new homes or preserve existing ones?Compare four Portland projects
New construction adds physical homes. Buying and preserving existing buildings can protect affordability sooner. These projects bought different things; their costs are not a controlled comparison.
These transactions bought different things
Buying an existing building can protect affordability for less upfront money in these examples. It also leaves the city with the same number of physical apartments. This is a descriptive comparison, not a controlled cost experiment.
Estimated total development cost per total home, in nominal dollars. Acquisition totals include purchase, minor renovations and soft costs. Paramount has 66 total homes, of which 65 are regulated. Budgets, unit sizes, services and building ages differ; no final market-rate comparator is established.
Project totals and comparison limits
Albina One: $66,752,016 / 94 total homes. Family-focused new building with community space. PHB estimate; Metro separately reports $68.3M. Neither establishes a reconciled final cost. PHB project profile
Paramount: $13,430,000 / 66 total homes. Built in 1923; purchase, minor renovations and soft costs. Total includes one manager’s home. Shares access to Albina One’s community facilities. PHB project profile
Acqua: $23,490,792 / 100 total homes. Built in 2020, foreclosed in 2024; purchase, minor renovations and soft costs. Serves housing-insecure students and their families. PHB project profile
Goose Hollow Lofts: $14,347,040 / 61 total homes. Built in 2018; purchase, minor renovations and soft costs. Existing market-rate homes converted to regulated affordability. PHB project profile
Albina One’s alternative Metro total is available in Metro’s project profile. No complete matched final-cost comparison is available here. Do not turn the bars into an estimate of savings from eliminating affordability requirements.
Match the intervention to the problem
Build new homes
Too few homes in the places people need them.
- Housing stock
- Adds physical homes
- Affordability
- Adds affordable homes when restrictions and subsidy support them.
- Timing
- Land, funding, approvals and construction precede occupancy.
The limit: Capital funding alone does not ensure affordable rents or healthy operations.
What to measure: Track homes completed, income served, total cost, ongoing support and years of affordability.
Read the preservation evidence and limits
The June 24 memo uses broad per-home subsidy assumptions. It describes risks, not homes already lost, and does not establish an annual budget or a current unfilled funding request.
OHCS also discusses using tax-credit equity across multiple properties to address wider portfolio problems. Buying down individual loans will not solve every ongoing financial challenge.
Portland separately reports stabilization agreements with four organizations and restructured financing for five projects. These are actions taken, not proof of long-term financial stability. As of October 27, OHCS’s draft 2027 competitive 9% tax-credit plan prioritizes preservation in 2027 and new construction in 2028; the final plan was expected in December.
Federal law provides specified three-year tenant protections following certain terminations of tax-credit extended use. Foreclosure does not automatically mean every resident must immediately leave; agreements and other laws also matter.
Sources: OHCS preservation memo to the House Housing and Homelessness Committee, June 24, 2026 (PDF, pp. 1–2) · Portland housing strategy progress, sections D and E · OHCS preservation and stabilization resources · Proposed 2027 Oregon tax-credit allocation plan · Federal tax-credit eligibility and rent rules, 26 USC 42
04Change it
Match the fix to the problem.
A faster permit cannot fill a funding gap. A construction grant cannot pay every future bill. Better housing policy starts by making the right promise.
Get viable projects moving.
Resolve conflicting reviews, identify the actual funding gap, and line up approvals with financing.
Who can act: City reviewers, public funders, lenders and developers.Make the payment affordable.
Measure what residents actually pay. Pair lower-rent homes with rental assistance where household incomes require it.
Who can act: Housing funders, assistance providers and property managers.Fund the years after opening.
Match repair, debt and operating support to the problem. Put partner contributions and resident protections in the agreement.
Who can act: Owners, lenders, investors, OHCS and local housing agencies.The Lab’s proposed priorities. Each needs project evidence, funding and decisions from the institutions responsible.
Could funders use one set of information?Explore coordinated review
Washington’s 2027 Combined Funders Application shares core narrative and budget materials. Program addenda and separate decisions remain. Portland already adapts the OHCS financial template; the next opportunity is to reconcile assumptions and decision dates.
Shared data can reduce re-entry. It does not eliminate program-specific rules, inspections, privacy safeguards or approval decisions. Actual annual forms must be compared before claiming that Portland and Oregon request identical information.
One concrete issue: PHB’s January 2026 guidance generally requires at least $375 per home in annual replacement reserves ($325 for senior housing); OHCS’s July guidance uses $450 ($500 for supportive housing). A higher, jointly accepted reserve may meet both. These are selected general rules; project agreements and exceptions control.
Sources: Washington Combined Funders Application instructions, 2027 · SKHHP funding and underwriting addenda · PHB underwriting metrics, January 2026 · OHCS policy and guideline manual, July 2026
Go a little deeper
Put the assumptions to work.
The tax, development and property tools remain here for readers who want to explore the wider system.
Compare property-tax billsExplore how taxable value changes a bill.
Test a building’s financial feasibilityChange costs and delays in a hypothetical project.
Explore a housing-shortage scenarioAssumptions about scarcity, not a measured rent premium.
Explore a tax-funding scenarioA policy scenario, not an adopted rule or forecast.
Look up your own propertyExplore public parcel information and tax assumptions.
What success looks like
More homes.
Manageable rents.
A future that holds.
Judge a policy by homes completed, what residents pay, and whether those homes remain affordable and well maintained.
Work on this with usSources, dates & model notesWhat the evidence does—and does not—establish
Public sources were checked October 27, 2026. The June 24 OHCS preservation memo was added November 1. Its statewide estimates describe that assessment, not a current funding balance. Policy recommendations are the Lab’s analysis.
Financial models use disclosed teaching assumptions. Project costs are publisher estimates, not final audited totals. None of the models establishes the financial health of an individual property. Illustrations depict a conceptual building, not a real project.
Housing and preservation
- OHCS application stages and funding availability
- Federal tax-credit eligibility and rent rules, 26 USC 42
- PHB underwriting metrics, January 2026
- OHCS policy and guideline manual, July 2026
- Portland housing strategy progress, sections D and E
- OHCS preservation and stabilization resources
- OHCS preservation memo to the House Housing and Homelessness Committee, June 24, 2026 (PDF, pp. 1–2)
- Proposed 2027 Oregon tax-credit allocation plan
- Code Alignment changes effective October 24, 2025
- Code Alignment Project 2 scope and timetable
- Ordinance 192095 and budget analysis
- Washington Combined Funders Application instructions, 2027
- SKHHP funding and underwriting addenda
- Walsh construction-cost cases, June 2022
Taxes and the wider housing system
- Multnomah County: Property Assessment FAQs
- Multnomah County: Estimating Taxes on Changed Property
- Multnomah County: 2025-2026 Changed Property Ratios
- Oregon Department of Revenue: Maximum Assessed Value Manual
- Oregon Legislative Revenue Office: Fairness problems under Measure 50
- OregonLive: Measure 50 winners and losers map
- City of Portland: 2045 Housing Needs Analysis and Housing Production Strategy
- City of Portland: Middle housing progress report
- City of Portland: Permit Improvement Project background
- Portland Auditor: Audit update on permit reforms
- City of Portland: Temporary SDC exemptions for new housing units
- Portland Housing Bureau: Inclusionary Housing affordability requirements
- Oregon Legislature: SB 1521 affordable housing offset requirement
- Oregon Legislature: HB 4037 housing approvals and surplus property
- Oregon Office of Economic Analysis: Rent Stabilization
- Portland Housing Bureau: Mandatory Renter Relocation Assistance
- Portland Revenue Division: Personal Income Tax Filing and Payment Information
- Portland Revenue Division: Business Tax Filing and Payment Information
- Oregon Department of Revenue: Personal Income Tax
- Oregon Department of Revenue: Property tax exemptions
- Oregon Department of Revenue: Senior and Disabled Property Tax Deferral
- Metro: Urban Growth Boundary
- City of Portland: Historic Resource Reviews
- City of Portland: Design Standards
- City of Portland: On-Site Tree Preservation
- City of Portland: Deconstruction permit requirements
- U.S. Census Bureau: QuickFacts: Portland city, Oregon
- Portland State University HRAC: 2025 Portland Tri-County Point in Time Count