| PPPM 410/510 |
|
[Home | Overview | Syllabus | Schedule | Links]
Background
Recent trends are placing increased development pressures on the City of Canyonville (1996 pop. 1,235). The construction of the Cow Creek Gaming Center has added about 250 new jobs to the small community. According to Tribal officials, the gaming center could employ as many as 800 people when all phases of development are completed
While a substantial number of new jobs have been created in the community, no major housing development has occurred in the past 10 years. The Canyonville City Council believes the City has a deficit of buildable residential land—particularly larger parcels that can be subdivided. Council members have requested that staff conduct a buildable lands analysis.
According to Statewide Planning Goal 14 (Urbanization) and the Goal 14 refinements adopted as HB 2709 (ORS 197.296), cities are required to maintain a 20-year supply of buildable land. The City is also initiating a periodic review of its comprehensive plan; the buildable lands analysis is one component of the plan that will need to be updated during the review process.
Your analysis should be presented in the form of a memorandum to the City Council and should include appropriate analysis, narrative, and tables. The Council expects you to submit your analysis in class on Thursday, April 16.
Your Assignment
Your assignment is to complete the land needs analysis. You review the Goal 14 and HB 2709 requirements and clearly understand the supply (inventory) and demand (need) components of a land needs analysis.
Fortunately, the City Public Works Department has a sophisticated GIS system and is able to provide detailed and reasonable accurate inventory data. The public works manager provided the attached summary tables of the land supply data. Data sources and assumptions are described in more detail in the next section.
You should use the techniques discussed in class to determine whether the City needs to add more land to the UGB. Beyond that basic question, you should address the following issues:
- How does the distribution of developed land by plan designation match with the distribution of vacant land? In other words, if 50% of the developed land is designated and used for residential use, is there a comparable vacant amount designated for residential use?
- What type of land, if any is needed? For example, the City may have a surplus of residential land but a deficit of commercial land.
- Is there a surplus of certain types of land?
- If the City needs additional land of any or all types, do any alternatives exist to expanding the UGB? What policy changes would be necessary to implement those alternatives?
Data Available/Assumptions
The 1997 population for Canyonville (as estimated by Portland State University) was 1,235. The City has an adopted and acknowledged forecast of about 2,500 residents by the year 2010.
Employment
The 1997 employment for Canyonville was 557. The City has an adopted and acknowledged forecast of about 1,675 residents by the year 2010. You should assume that all of the employment occurred on developed commercial, industrial and public land. This assumption will allow you to develop a reasonable range of employee per acre ratios.
Housing
The City housing breakdown in 1997 is shown in Table 1. You should assume the city has no group quarters, that household size will remain constant at 2.5 persons per household, and that vacancies will average 5%.
Table 1. Housing Stock Summary for Canyonville, 1997
Number
Percent of Total
Number of Housing Units 484
100%
Single Family 324
67%
Multi-family 75
16%
Manufactured 80
17%
Other 5
1%
Source: US Census of Population and Housing, 1990
You'll also need to make some assumptions about the distribution of housing in 2017 (i.e., single family, multi-family), and the density of development. You can use data from Table 3 and the information on plan designations below to make a judgement about average densities for single family and multi-family residential development during the analysis period.
Vacant and Buildable Land Supply
The Canyonville Comprehensive Plan defines the following plan designations:
- Residential—2 dwelling units/acre
- Residential—4.6 dwelling units/acre
- Residential—8 dwelling units/acre
- Residential —18 dwelling units/acre
- Commercial—Retail
- Commercial—Highway Related
- Office/Professional
- Industrial
- Public
- Semi-Public
- Open Land
- Forest Land
Table 2. Total Acres by City Limits/UGB and Plan Designation
Area/Plan Designation Parcels
Acres
Flood/ Riparian Acres
Slope/ Slide Acres
Uncon-strained Acres
City Limits Commercial 132
38.3
1.2
-
37.1
Forest/Open Land 12
28.8
1.74
9.5
17.6
Public/Semi-Public 51
85.3
1.26
6.8
77.2
Industrial 6
9.1
0.4
-
8.7
Residential 505
240.2
3.9
17.6
218.7
City Limits Total 706
401.7
8.6
33.9
359.3
Unincorporated Urban Growth Area Commercial 10
25.9
-
-
25.9
Industrial 3
238.5
9.2
144.4
84.9
Forest/Open Land 9
26.6
20.0
-
6.6
Public/Semi-Public 6
30.5
-
1.7
28.8
Residential 50
147.3
11.9
76.0
59.5
UGA Total 78
468.8
43.6
222.1
203.1
Canyonville UGB Total 784
870.5
52.2
256.0
562.4
Source: Analysis of Douglas County Assessment Data, Winterowd Planning Services & MLP Associates, 1997
Table 3. Developed Land in Canyonville by Designated Use
Use/Designation DU
Acres
Percent of Total Developed Area
Residential 471
277.8
54.3%
Commercial -
35.9
7.0%
Industrial 6
26.1
5.0%
Public 58.2
11.4%
Semi-Public 3
113.7
22.2%
Total 479
511.8
100.0%
Source: Analysis of Douglas County Assessment Data, Winterowd Planning Services & MLP Associates, 1997
Table 4. Vacant Land in Canyonville by Plan Designation Categories
Plan Designation Parcels
Vacant
Acres
Flood/ Riparian Acres
Slope/ Slide Acres
Uncon- strained Acres
City Limit Commercial Total 12
4.6
0.5
-
4.1
Residential Total 68
60.3
0.9
11.5
48.0
Industrial 6
1.5
-
-
1.5
Forest/Open Land Total 8
13.9
-
3.7
10.3
City Limit Total 104
80.3
1.2
15.2
63.9
UGB Industrial Total 1
221.9
9.2
144.4
68.3
Commercial Total 4
13.9
-
-
13.9
Residential Total 6
50.2
-
48.6
1.6
UGB Total 11
286.0
9.2
193.0
83.8
Canyonville Total 115
366.3
10.4
208.2
147.7
Source: Analysis of Douglas County Assessment Data, Winterowd Planning Services & MLP Associates, 1997
[Home | Overview | Syllabus | Schedule | Links]
This page maintained by Bob Parker, ©2000
March 25, 2000