For more a decade, the Pacific Northwest has been hailed as the urban planning center of the American landscape. Activists across the country have applauded the region for its careful zoning and permitting processes, which aim to create tight urban centers and limit suburban sprawl.

But a backlash of sorts now is gathering in the rain clouds over Washington state and Oregon, where legislators are considering drastic changes to state planning laws.

A property rights war is shaping up in Oregon, where multiple bills have been introduced in the legislature in hopes of protecting property owners. The state was the first to adopt a statewide land use policy more than 25 years ago. But the state's population skyrocketed in the 1990s, putting pressure on planners to make more land available for development.

One proposed measure would open up more than 750,000 acres of rural residential land for urban use, including commercial and retail development. Another would map the state's now-restricted prime farm and forest land to determine whether these areas are actually being used as farms and forests. If not, these millions of acres eventually could be opened up for suburban development.

Now lawmakers are considering changes to a regulation that currently punishes small farmers by preventing them from building homes on their property. While these farmers are engaged in commercial enterprises, the state says that they cannot live on prime farmland unless they have grossed at least $80,000 in agricultural income from the land for at least two years.

Farmers are essentially small business owners whose primary investment is a large piece of real estate. What other enterprises are denied use of their land based on income? Yet this absurd rule applies to about 4 million acres across the state.

The original intention of the legislation was to prevent residential development on open land. Under the new bill, farmers would have "options" that might allow them to build a home on their land. In other words, if the parcel of land was too small to produce $80,000 a year in revenue, they might get an exception.

But Oregon Gov. John Kitzhaber may veto the bill even if it passes. Many government officials believe the current law is working, since the number of homes constructed on farmland has decreased by one-half each year since its enactment.

Meanwhile, in Washington state, a panic over power and water shortages is leading may restrict the mega-houses of the super-rich. In Medina, a Seattle suburb that counts Microsoft founder Bill Gates and Amazon.com billionaire Jeff Bezos as residents, the mayor has declared a six-month moratorium on homes over 13,500 square feet.

Rich tekkies also will be limited in their choice of toys. No helicopter pads will be allowed. And residents won't be able to add to their man-made salmon streams or the private trams running across their properties.

One major problem is a strain on utility infrastructure. Last year, Gates' house used 4.7 million gallons of water, compared to average household use of 80,000 gallons. Those salmon has to swim somewhere.

Expect little sympathy for the property rights of the mega-rich in Medina or elsewhere -- restrictions also are being considered in cities like Los Angeles, New York and Washington, D.C.

For more articles by Lesley Hensell, please press here.