Planning Commission

AGENDA Meeting Location: Sloat Room—Atrium Building Phone: 541-682-5481 99 W. 10th Avenue 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 hour notice prior to the meeting. Spanish-language interpretation will also be provided with 48 hour notice. To arrange for these services, contact the Planning Division at 541-682-5675. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 23, 2015 – 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. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM Staff: Twylla Miller, Finance, 541-682-8417 12:25 p.m. III. REVISED RESIDENTIAL UGB RECOMMENDATION Staff: Alissa Hansen, 541-682-5508 1:15 p.m. IV. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION AND STAFF A. Other Items from Staff B. Other Items from Commission C. Learning: How are we doing? Commissioners: Steven Baker; John Barofsky; Rick Duncan; John Jaworski (Vice-Chair); Jeffery Mills; Kristen Taylor; William Randall (Chair)  AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY February 23, 2015 To: Eugene Planning Commission From: Alissa Hansen, City of Eugene Planning Division Subject: Capital Improvement Program Overview ACTION REQUESTED This work session is an opportunity to provide the Planning Commission with an overview of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Twylla Miller from Finance will provide information on the process for developing and approving the CIP and projects that are in the recently adopted plan. Staff from Facilities and Public Works are expected to be on hand as well to provide information about specific projects. BACKGROUND The Draft Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2016-2021 can be found at this link: www.eugene-or.gov/CIP FOR MORE INFORMATION For questions about the process for developing the CIP, contact Twylla Miller at 541-682-8417 or twylla.j.miller@ci.eugene.or.us ATTACHMENTS A. CIP presentation slides B. Multi-Year Financial Plan project list PC Agenda - Page 1 ATTACHMENT A PC Agenda - Page 2 PC Agenda - Page 3 PC Agenda - Page 4 PC Agenda - Page 5 PC Agenda - Page 6 PC Agenda - Page 7 PC Agenda - Page 8 PC Agenda - Page 9 PC Agenda - Page 10 PC Agenda - Page 11 PC Agenda - Page 12 PC Agenda - Page 13 PC Agenda - Page 14 ATTACHMENT B PC Agenda - Page 15 PC Agenda - Page 16  AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY February 23, 2015 To: Eugene Planning Commission From: Alissa Hansen, City of Eugene Planning Division Subject: Envision Eugene: Revised UGB Recommendation for Housing ACTION REQUESTED The Planning Commission will hold a work session to learn about the revised recommendation for accommodating homes to meet the community’s 20 year land need. This recommendation was provided to the City Council on February 18, 2015. BRIEFING STATEMENT The preliminary urban growth boundary recommendation was presented to the City Council and Planning Commission in December 2014. For housing, the recommendation included no urban growth boundary expansion for multi-family housing and a modest expansion for single family housing, including: • Adding 230 acres near Bloomberg Road, north of 30th Avenue and Lane Community College, to provide land for about 400 homes. • Adding 60 acres near Bailey Hill and Gimpl Hill Roads to provide land for 135 homes. Public Input Following the preliminary recommendation, comments from the public were solicited through surveys, in-person and online open houses, emails and meetings, and a January 20, 2015 City Council public forum. While much of the public input focused on the proposed urban growth boundary expansion areas, some aspects of public input addressed the technical framework for the December 10, 2014 preliminary staff recommendation. Comments focused on two main topics: housing mix and density assumptions on sloped land. • The topic of housing mix was addressed by City Council in June of 2012, resulting in a decision to assume a future housing mix of 55% single family and 45% multifamily. Staff has updated the mix calculations with new data through 2014. While recent development activity shows a significant increase in the share of multi-family housing, a majority of this shift was shown to be driven by the recent boom in student housing. Taking this into consideration, the variations we’re seeing appear to be consistent with the housing market shift anticipated by Council’s previous decision. While concerns continue to be expressed around housing mix, staff recommends proceeding with the current assumption while closely monitoring actual development trends in accordance with Pillar 7 (Flexible Implementation). • The assumed density of future housing has a strong effect on the capacity of vacant and partially vacant lands inside the current UGB. Two main concerns were identified and PC Agenda - Page 17  reviewed by the TRG in late January/early February. First, evidence was presented that densities on sloped lands – mainly located in the South Hills – should be applied differently to accurately reflect the intent of the density analysis originally vetted by the TRG. Second, evidence was presented that confirmed a higher density should be assumed for homes built above 900 feet elevation. Combined, these factors indicate there is sufficient capacity for single family homes inside Eugene’s existing UGB, thus eliminating the need for single-family residential expansion at this time. Staff concur that these adjustments are necessary to more accurately reflect the City’s 20-year capacity for single family homes. Revised Recommendation In light of new information concerning the capacity of residential lands, the staff recommendation for the Eugene-only UGB is revised to include no expansion for housing. In addition, staff recommends initiating a process to identify urban reserves following the release of the new population forecast later this year. Urban reserve planning will enable the community to more comprehensively and predictably plan for growth over a time horizon of 50 years, anticipating the likely need for future UGB expansion. Although urban reserves may only be adopted after a new, Eugene-only UGB has first been formally adopted, initial preparations can be made. NEXT STEPS Public input opportunities on the revised recommend have been scheduled, including an open house and information session that was held on February 19, 2015, and a City Council forum being held on February 23, 2015. The City Council is scheduled to hold a work session on February 25, 2015 to provide direction to staff on the formal UGB adoption package for housing. A single adoption package for jobs, parks, schools and housing will be brought to the City and Lane County Planning Commissions for a public hearing and recommendations. Subsequently, the City Council and Board of County Commissioners will hold a joint public hearing, and will take action to consider adoption of the new urban growth boundary. FOR MORE INFORMATION Alissa Hansen: 541-682-5508, alissa.h.hansen@ci.eugene.or.us ATTACHMENTS A. Updated Housing Mix Data Provided to City Council at February 18, 2015 work session PC Agenda - Page 18  Attachment A Memorandum Date: February 18, 2015 To: Mayor Piercy and City Council From: Planning Division Subject: Housing Mix Update The topic of housing mix was raised at the City Council’s January 20, 2015 public forum on the urban growth boundary recommendation for jobs, parks, schools and homes. Specifically, public comment asserted that the data had not been updated to reflect development over the past few years. As you may recall, housing mix was addressed by City Council in June of 2012, resulting in a decision to assume a future housing mix of 55% single family and 45% multifamily for new housing. This assumption was based on a wide variety of information including analysis of past development trends in Eugene and other Oregon communities, changing demographics, and economic considerations such as housing affordability. The decision reflected a gradual transition to a greater share of multifamily housing in comparison to past trends, which historically has yielded an overall mix of 61% single family and 39% multifamily for existing housing stock. As part of the TRG’s analysis work carried out over the past few months, the housing mix calculations have been updated with new data through 2014. A summary of this data is provided on the reverse page. As shown on Table 1, development activity between 2009 and 2014 included a significant increase in the share of multi-family housing. However, further analysis of the multi-family building permits shows that a majority of this shift was driven by the recent boom in student housing. When those multifamily projects that are considered student housing are factored out of the mix data, the resulting mix of housing built between 2001 and 2014 is 59% single family and 41% multifamily. As noted previously, the University of Oregon is not expecting to grow significantly during the next 20 years. In addition, the economic crisis of 2008 triggered a diversion of investment into student housing projects across the US. The result of this boom has already been accounted for, and future assumptions for Eugene’s multifamily need do not include planning for additional student housing outside of campus. Taking this into consideration, the variations we’re seeing appear to be consistent with the gradual housing market shift anticipated by Council’s previous decision. While concerns continue to be expressed around housing mix, staff recommends proceeding with the current assumption while closely monitoring actual development trends in accordance with Pillar 7 (Flexible Implementation). PC Agenda - Page 19 Table 1: Housing Mix: Issued Building Permits Housing Mix Grand Total Averages* 2001-2008 average 2001-2012 average 2001-2014 average 70% 59% 50% 30% 41% 50% 100% 100% 100% *total SF du/total du & total MF du/total du Table 2: Multi-Family Student Housing: Housing Mix Grand total Averages with no multi-family student housing included in 2009-2014 2001-2008 average 2001-2012 average 2001-2014 average 70% 65% 59% 30% 35% 41% 100% 100% 100% PC Agenda - Page 20