Rep. Darcy Edwards presented a concept labeled House Bill 3757 at an informational meeting of the House Committee on Housing and Homelessness on April 21, proposing a one-time, narrowly tailored allowance for certain rural landowners to subdivide large parcels to create housing for family members.

Edwards said the idea responds to families who own land that is ‘‘not ideal for farming, grazing or timber’’ and who have been prevented by current land-use rules from placing additional homes on their parcels. She described the concept as limited: it would apply only to parcels over roughly 33 acres with an existing home, allow up to five parcels to be created once, and expire at the end of 2028. ‘‘This concept does not apply inside urban growth boundaries and it leaves farmland and reserves untouched,’’ Edwards said.

Why it matters: Proponents framed the proposal as a narrowly focused way to permit multigenerational living, aging-in-place, and modest rural infill on parcels that are not serving productive agricultural or forest uses. Edwards described the measure as designed for families building homes for relatives rather than large-scale development or subdivision for profit.

Committee members asked about definitions and limits. Representative Mannix and others described examples of large, underutilized parcels adjacent to developed ranchette neighborhoods and asked whether the concept would allow additional homes on those parcels. Edwards said the bill would not require public infrastructure to be provided by the state or county; property owners would bear costs for water, septic and road access as needed. When asked if the bill would restrict occupancy to relatives, Edwards said she did not want to ‘‘put a label on what a family is’’ and noted that some household arrangements may be groups of friends or multi‑generational households.

Questions about site suitability were raised; Edwards and questioners said parcel-level factors such as soil quality, slope, access and environmental constraints should limit eligibility and that not every parcel would qualify. Edwards characterized the proposal as ‘‘focused’’ and framed it as restoring agency to families to care for land and relatives.

No formal motion or committee vote occurred in the informational session. Representative Edwards said she intends to return with the concept in future sessions and invited stakeholders to work on refinements.