Planning Commission

AGENDA EUGENE PLANNING COMMISSION McNutt Room, City Hall Phone: 541‐682‐5481 777 Peal Street www.eugene‐or.gov/pc Eugene, OR 97401 The Eugene Planning Commission welcomes your interest in these agenda items. Feel free to come and go as you please at any of the meetings. This meeting location is wheelchair‐accessible. For the hearing impaired, FM assistive‐listening devices are available or an interpreter can be provided with 48 hours notice prior to the meeting. Spanish‐language interpretation will also be provided with 48 hours notice. To arrange for these services, contact the receptionist at 541‐682‐5481. Telecommunications devices for deaf assistance are available at 541‐682‐5119. MONDAY, OCTOBER 31, 2011 – REGULAR MEETING (11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.) 11:30 a.m. I. PUBLIC COMMENT The Planning Commission reserves 10 minutes at the beginning of this meeting for public comment. The public may comment on any matter, except for items scheduled for public hearing or public hearing items for which the record has already closed. Generally, the time limit for public comment is three minutes; however, the Planning Commission reserves the option to reduce the time allowed each speaker based on the number of people requesting to speak. 11:40 a.m. II. ENVISION EUGENE: SINGLE‐FAMILY HOUSING LAND NEED Staff: Heather O’Donnell, 541‐682‐5451 Alissa Hansen, 541‐682‐5508 1:00 p.m. III. CLUTAC JOINT SUBCOMMITTEE: DISCUSSION OF UPCOMING WORK Planning Commissioner Mills 1:15 P.M. IV. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION AND STAFF A. Other Items from Staff B. Other Items from Commission Commissioners: Steven Baker; Jonathan Belcher; Rick Duncan; Randy Hledik, Vice Chair; Jeffery Mills, Chair; William Randall PC AIS OCTOBER 31, 2011 - Page 2  AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 31, 2011 To: Eugene Planning Commission From: Heather O’Donnell and Alissa Hansen, City of Eugene Planning Division Subject: Envision Eugene Update: Single‐Family Land Need ACTION REQUESTED This work session provides the Planning Commission with an update and opportunity to provide feedback on analysis regarding the future single‐family housing land need. BRIEFING STATEMENT This is part of an ongoing conversation about Eugene’s 20‐year land need for all land types, including: • Public and semi‐public land • Single‐family housing • Multi‐family housing • Commercial • Industrial There are several components that make up how we determine our future land need for single family homes. These components are identified below along with the status of each component. COMPONENT COMPONENT DETAIL STATUS1 Housing Demand • Projected number of Units for 20 yrs • 14,951 units • Single‐family/Multi‐family mix • Staff Recommendation: 55 SF/ 45 MF • Single‐family Units needed • 8,223 units Existing Capacity • Vacant land • 4,299 units • Partially vacant land • 1,886‐2,643 units • Redevelopment • 589 units New Capacity through • Alley access lots • 60 units Efficiency Strategies • Secondary dwelling units • 100 units • Re‐designations • TBD Remaining land need • Approximate UGB expansion • TBD This work session will focus on the four highlighted components which have been the subject of recent work: partially vacant land, redevelopment, re‐designations, and remaining land need. 1 Numbers cited here will be refined over the next couple of months. 1 PC AIS OCTOBER 31, 2011 - Page 3 Partially Vacant Lands State statute requires that we identify partially vacant lands within the urban growth boundary (UGB) and attribute future development to those lands. Partially vacant lands are those that have some level of development, but also have a vacant portion of the property with potential for additional development without demolishing the existing structure. In general, it was found that Low Density Residential partially vacant lands are those that are one acre in size or larger. Lots smaller than one acre in size are addressed under the “Redevelopment” category below. Staff worked closely with the Technical Resource Group (TRG) and a sub‐committee of the TRG that was dedicated to this task. The resulting analysis goes beyond what is required by the state and provides a thoughtful and reasonable approach to predicting future development activity on these lands. The attached white paper provides a summary overview of the analysis that has determined how many single‐family homes can be accommodated on lands identified as partially vacant. A map will be displayed at the work session that shows the location and approximate capacity of these lands. Redevelopment Redevelopable lands are those that are less than one acre in size and have some level of development that may or may not be removed to add new housing. It is not feasible to identify specific properties that will redevelop over the next 20 years because the factors that go in to the decision to redevelop are highly unpredictable. The City also has limited data to help understand the historic redevelopment rate for single‐family homes. However, by reviewing the amount of new dwellings on Low Density Residential lots less than one acre in size that have occurred historically, a reasonable prediction of the future amount of new dwellings can be made. The TRG and its sub‐committee worked closely with staff to develop the methodology and analysis: Category Total Lots2 Total Lot Acres Historic Amount of Assumed Dwelling New Dwellings Units Produced in Created on Lots 20 years Under 1 ac Tax lots under 1 44,920 9,687 231 in 8 years 589 acre Re‐designation of Parcels to Low‐Density Residential Staff provided Planning Commission with an update on property re‐designations at the September 20, 2011 work session. At that time, staff had identified and sent letters to a group of landowners to explore their interest in changing their property’s current land use designation from Medium Density Residential (MDR) to Low Density Residential (LDR). This may make development of single‐ family homes more feasible on certain properties, thus helping to address our need for additional land for single‐family home development. Direction from the Planning Commission indicated that there is no interest in pursuing re‐ designation of properties if the property owner is not willing. After conversations with many 2 “Total Lots” includes all ECLA developed tax lots that have all or a portion of the tax lot designated LDR. This is the total base for consideration. 2 PC AIS OCTOBER 31, 2011 - Page 4 property owners in the study areas, and staff analysis of future land use patterns, a preliminary recommendation has been generated to solicit feedback and provide initial numbers for the purpose of calculating the future single‐family housing need. This recommendation may be revised in the future to reflect additional property owner feedback and further analysis regarding the impact of re‐designating MDR property to LDR on the multi‐family housing need. A map of the preliminary recommendation of proposed properties for re‐designation will be displayed at the work session. Remaining Land Need There are a number of considerations before one can confidently translate units needed into acreage. Expansion areas must be identified and an analysis of the capacity of those lands must be made. This capacity analysis is underway and preliminary results will be shared at the work session. It should also be noted that there are public land uses that often take place on land designated for single‐family homes. These public uses were discussed at the October 24, 2011 work session and include approximately 170 acres of additional land need for purposes such as parks and infrastructure. Some employment such as neighborhood commercial or home occupations also often take place on land designated for single‐family homes. These uses will be discussed as part of the work session on commercial lands in November. In the event of a UGB expansion, the state has specific steps that must be followed to identify areas for expansion. Property owners who live outside the current UGB and have a Lane County land use designation that makes them a priority for consideration have been notified of this process. In addition to a letter sent on October 5, 2011 (see attached), two drop‐in information sessions have been held, and a phone line has been established to answer questions from property owners. Attached is a map of the properties that received these letters. NEXT STEPS On November 9, 2011, staff will discuss the public land need and the single‐family housing land need with the City Council. Feedback from the Planning Commission on these topics will be forwarded to the City Council. A Public Hearing on public land need and single‐family housing land need will take place on November 21, 2011. Council will not be asked to make any decisions before the end of the calendar year or before adequate opportunity for public comments is provided. FOR MORE INFORMATION Heather O’Donnell, 541‐682‐5488 or heather.m.odonnell@ci.eugene.or.us Alissa Hansen, 541‐682‐5508 or alissa.h.hansen@ci.eugene.or.us ATTACHMENTS A. Low Density Residential Partially Vacant Lands Summary B. Letter sent to Property Owners in Expansion Study Area including map of area 3 PC AIS OCTOBER 31, 2011 - Page 5 PC AIS OCTOBER 31, 2011 - Page 6 Low Density Residential Partially Vacant Lands Summary Enclosed is a table summarizing the results of the committee work and staff analysis of partially vacant lands with a plan designation of LDR. All lots identified as partially vacant will be assigned capacity as part of the revised Buildable Lands Inventory (BLI). It is important to note that the language utilized in this document is meant to be broadly descriptive and does not represent legal or findings-level language. Some of the key assumptions of this analysis are as follows:  The analysis is much more detailed than the safe harbor provisions for partially vacant lands and represents a methodology that the committee members felt was more thorough and reasoned than the safe harbor assumptions would have been. (see end of document for list of methodologies/variables that were considered but discarded)  All lots that were in a non-residential use (church, neighborhood commercial, etc.) were excluded from the analysis.  All lots under 1 acre in size will not be identified as partially vacant lands, nor will they be included on a list or map of partially vacant lands. While some of these lots are assumed to have additional capacity, this capacity will be assigned to the entire pool of lots and will be based on recent trends for similar lots. These trends suggest that 589 dwelling units will be produced on these lands in the next 20 years.  All lots over 1 acre in size were examined individually. All lots are assumed to have some partially vacant capacity, dependent on their location and their size, with the following exceptions: o Developed with or owned by a non-residential use o Needs to be reclassified from “developed” to “vacant” land  Densities were applied using the densities identified during the ECLA process with the following exception: o The one exception to the ECLA densities applies to lots over 1 acre and above 5% slope. It is assumed that most of these lots will develop as part of a Planned Unit Development (PUD). Recent data shows that densities achieved in PUD’s are slightly lower than those achieved outside of PUD’s, so this lower density will be applied to these lots. Staff is still reviewing relevant data to confirm that 1 acre is the appropriate cutoff point.  Lots with wastewater constraints are in areas that are not currently served by wastewater utilities. There are two options for how these lots will be treated at the conclusion of Envision Eugene: o The City believes that these areas can be served during the planning period and will document this in relevant plans if it is not already adequately documented. The lots will be categorized as partially vacant and will be assigned capacity. o The City does not believe that these areas can be served during the planning period. The lots will not be assigned partially vacant capacity. Further work would be needed to determine what additional actions may be necessary to address these areas. Eugene Planning Commission -10/31/11 1 PC AIS OCTOBER 31, 2011 - Page 7   Lots with transportation constraints are in areas that due to ODOT regulations may have limited or no ability to have additional capacity. There are two options for how these lots will be treated at the conclusion of Envision Eugene: o ODOT (and the City as necessary) believe that these areas can be served with adequate transportation infrastructure during the planning period that will support additional capacity on these lots. The lots will be categorized as partially vacant and will be assigned capacity. o ODOT (and the City as necessary) does not believe that these areas can be served with adequate transportation infrastructure during the planning period that will support additional capacity on these lots. This may impact the partially vacant capacity of these lots, with the potential result that no capacity would be assigned. Further work would be needed to determine what additional actions may be necessary to address these areas.  There are no lots currently categorized at this time as stormwater constrained. This category of lots is representative of the fact that lots may become stormwater constrained within the next five years as a result of new state and/or city regulations. At that time, the capacity of some lots that are currently categorized as partially vacant could be reduced in part or entirely. Methodologies or Variables that were Considered but Discarded The following represent ideas that were considered as part of the process in pursuit of a way to categorize similar lots that may have potentially had similar capacity characteristics. While informative, each of these methodologies was discarded for various reasons including that the number of similar lots was too small, data was incomplete or not sufficient or that the lots did not differ from a larger pool of lots in a significant way.  Improvement value (high or low)  Land to improvement value ratio  Lots lacking an address point  Lot frontage (eligibility for subdivision/partition)  Proximity to developable (vacant) land  Surrounding development pattern  Lots larger than 5 acres Eugene Planning Commission -10/31/11 2 PC AIS OCTOBER 31, 2011 - Page 8  Summary of LDR Lots Considered for Categorization as Partially Vacant Category Partially Partially Deduction for Buildable Density of Infill Dwelling Units Vacant Lots² Vacant Acres Existing Acreage Lots Created⁴ Produced⁵ Development (amount per lot)³ Tax Lots > or = 1 acre: Lots > 900’ elevation (SHS)⁶ 33 57 NA NA 1.0 33 Lots straddling 900’ elevation (SHS)⁶ 4 12 NA NA varies varies Lots < 5% slope (500’) 158 360 0.33 308 4.1-4.4 1,263-1,355 Lots > 5% slope (500’) 151 327 0.5 251 2.35-2.55 590-640 Lots with wastewater constraints 35 122 0.5 105 2.9-4.1 304-430 (Willow Creek area)⁷ Lots with transportation constraints⁸ 24 50 0.33 42 4.1-4.4 172-185 Lots with stormwater constraints Unknown Unknown NA NA NA NA Total 2,362-2,643 Total (without wastewater and transportation constrained lots) 1,886-2,028 Notes: ¹“Total Lots” includes all ECLA developed tax lots that have all or a portion of the tax lot designated LDR. This is the total base for consideration. ²“Partially Vacant Lots” are partially vacant tax lots that are >= 1 acre. Tax lots determined not to be partially vacant include those that are: o Completely residentially developed; o Developed with or owned by a non-residential use; or o Needs to be reclassified from “developed” to “vacant” land ³ Deduction for existing development accounts for existing houses or structures on the lot. This acreage, as well as any committed/protected acreage or acreage under a different plan designation, is removed from the total lot acreage. Only the remaining acreage on the lot is assigned density. ⁴ Range in density is due to different densities based on lot size. Buildable areas from 1-5 acres would receive the smaller density, while areas larger than 5 acres would receive the larger density. This accounts for the greater net to gross deduction for larger lots, as documented in ECLA. Densities are based on documented densities from the 2001-2008 period, as established during ECLA. Staff will analyze data from development during the 2009-2010 period to determine if the density data should be updated. As such, minor changes to this density data may result. ⁵ All numbers are approximate for purposes of creating a preliminary estimate of dwelling units. Estimates are based on aggregate acreage. Ranges are not a result of uncertainty in assumptions but rather that different densities will be applied to individual lots based on their buildable area size Eugene Planning Commission -10/31/11 3 PC AIS OCTOBER 31, 2011 - Page 9 (1-5 acres or 5+ acres). Final values will be based on a lot by lot assignment of capacity, which is not expected to produce results substantially different from the number of dwelling units shown above. ⁶ The South Hills Study (SHS) limits development above 900’ and is addressed in the Eugene Code. ⁷ Lots with wastewater constraints are primarily over 5% slope, thus the use of 0.5 ac deduction. The final capacity assignment on these lots (and all lots) would be done on a lot-specific basis, thus the deduction for existing development could be 0.33 for lots that have less than 5% slope. ⁸ Lots with transportation constraints are all in areas with below 5% slope. Eugene Planning Commission -10/31/11 4 PC AIS OCTOBER 31, 2011 - Page 10 October 5, 2011 Dear Property Owner, Envision Eugene is the City of Eugene’s long‐range planning effort to determine how the city will accommodate population growth over the next 20 years. The goals of Envision Eugene are to: 1) Determine how much land will be needed for residential, commercial and industrial uses, as required by state law, and 2) Describe how we want to use our existing and new land as we grow, to shape what our community will look like and feel like in the future. Oregon law and community values require that the city grow as efficiently as possible. That means using land inside the current urban growth boundary to the greate st extent possible, before looking to expand the city’s urban growth boundary. Technical analysis is unde rway to determine how many jobs and homes we can fit inside the existing urban growth boundary while still maintaining the high quality of life we currently experience in our community. Although our analysis is not complete, it is possible that Eugene may need to add additional land to its urban growth boundary for single‐family homes. To help protect farm and forest land, state law has specific requirements about where a city can expand its urban growth boundary. The first or highest priority type of land the city must consider for expansion is land that is planned for residential, commercial, or industrial uses or currently has those uses on it, or is completely surrounded by those uses. The identification of first priority lands is based on the planning designation assigned to each property by Lane County. Once this first priority land is identified, the city must check to see if it meets the city’s land need (i.e. does it provide suitable or appropriate land for single‐family residential housing). A map of first priority areas around Eugene is on the back of this letter. It is important for you to know that your property is located in a first priority area. The City is required to consider all of these lands first if the urban growth boundary is expanded. This does not mean that the urban growth boundary will expand, or that your property would be included if an expansion is necessary. It does mean that your property is included in the current study area. There may be obvious reasons why your property is not suitable to include for residential land. Over the next few months, the City will be determining if expansion is necessary for single‐family residential housing and if so, where it would occur. For More Information If you have questions or would like additional information Visit our website: www.envisioneugene.org about Envision Eugene, there are several ways to get in Click on “Expansion Analysis” on left side touch with us (see the information provided in the grey box at right). Attend a Drop‐In Info Session: Tuesday October 18 Thank you for your time. The planning team and I look Drop in between 12pm and 2pm forward to discussing our community’s future with you. or between 4pm and 6pm 99 W. 10th Avenue (10th & Olive) Send an email: Lisa Gardner envisioneugene@ci.eugene.or.us Planning Director Call our property owner phone message line: City of Eugene Planning Division 541‐682‐5686  First Priority Land Surrounding Eugene MEADOWVIEW RD RIVE R RD HWY 99N PRAIRIE RD E PEARL ST GREEN HILL RD BEACON DR AWBREY LN SCENIC DR LYNNBROOK DR I5 NB E ENID RD IRVINGTON DR AIRPORT RD WILKES DR AIRPORT RD BLACKFOOT AVE MC K PRAIRIE EN ZIE VIE W DR CLEAR LAKE RD RD IRVING RD HUNSAKER LN COUNTY FARM RD AYRES R D WB BELTLINE RD LAKEVIEW DR RIVER AVE BODENHAMER RD WB DELTA ONRP GILHAM RD CRESCENT AVE I5 SB RIVER EB BELTLI NC COBURG RD Y CUBIT CH SB D HOWARD AVE N PARK AVE L AR AD Y INTERNATIONAL WA FIR BUTTE RD BARGER DR D ELTA NE RD RD R LEGACY ST ST EY S HW N TERRY ST HORN LN MINDA DR BELTLINE RD TANEY ST T N GATEWAY ST BE OR ECHO HOLLOW RD I5 TH TH CAL YOUNG RD EL WE BAILEY LN NB D GREEN HILL RD OAKWAY RD D R ST ROYAL AVE EX PR ES ELTA HARLOW RD ELMIRA RD SW HW Y ROOSEVELT BLVD AY Y BELTLINE RD HW EB I105 I105 EB I105 WB I105 W 1ST AVE WB Q ST 99 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR BLVD N W 2ND AVE MENLO LP BAILEY HILL RD CENTE W 6TH AVE E 4TH AVE NNIAL RAINBOW DR E BLVD BLVD ASPEN ST ED CON W 7TH PL W 7TH AVEE 7TH AVE POLK ST S BERTELSEN RD W 11TH AVE N Y ST OAK PATCH RD HIGH ST W D ST W 13TH AVE S A ST CITY VIEW ST SB SENECA RD OAK ST W 18TH AVE I5 PATTERSON ST E 19TH AVE RP AUGUSTA ST ON LINCOLN ST E K RD S 2N CHAMBERS ST WILLO W CRE BRITT A W 24TH AVE HAWKINS DS HILYARD ST RD WILLAMETTE ST OW T CR LN W 28TH AVE HARRIS ST AGATE ST SPR WA IN G R CREST D BLV DR R ON D D E 30TH AV E I5 SB BRAE BURN M AZ E 40TH AVE E 46 VE TH A RD A V E E 43 RD ST GIMPL HILL DONALD MCBETH RD DILLARD RD S WILLAMETTE ST LORANE HWY RD OL LO W FO XH ´ DIL L AR DR D Study Areas Caution: This map is based on imprecise Eugene Urban Growth Boundary source data, subject to change, and for general reference only. 10/5/11