HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009 10 20 RS Residential Land StudyMEMORANDUM CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
DATE OF HEARING: October 20, 2009
TO: Springfield Planning Commission PLANNING COMMISSION
TRANSMITTAL
FROM: Greg Mott MEMORANDUM
Linda Pauly
SUBJECT: Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis
LRP2007-00030
ACTION REQUESTED: The Planning Commission shall conduct a public hearing to accept
testimony on the Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis. The Planning Commission is
asked to forward a recommendation to the City Council to adopt the analysis to provide
Springfield with a baseline inventory, analysis and housing needs determination for the plan
period 2010-2030 as an incremental step towards the City’s compliance with its statutory
obligations under ORS 197.304(1)(a)&(b),(2) and (3).
ISSUE: The City has completed a Residential Lands Study to determine the sufficiency of land
available for residential uses. The draft Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs
Analysis presents 1) a forecast of Springfield’s residential growth based on the adopted Lane
County coordinated population projection; 2) an inventory of buildable residential land; and 3) a
determination of the number and type (e.g. single family and multi-family) of housing units that
will need to be constructed to house the projected population residing within Springfield's
jurisdictional share of the area subject to the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area, (e.g. the
area east of Interstate 5) for the plan period 2010-2030. The findings and conclusions of the
study indicate that 5,980 additional units will be needed to provide a 20-year supply of housing
to meet Springfield’s needs and that the housing mix (single family vs. multi-family dwellings)
will need to change to meet shifting population demographics.
The study also provides technical analysis to determine the amount of land that would be
required to provide for the needed dwelling units, based on the inventory of land available under
existing Metro Plan residential designations and Plan policies. The conclusions of the study
indicate that the available capacity in the residential buildable lands inventory will not provide a
20-year supply of land to meet Springfield’s housing needs, density and mix under current plan
designations and policies. Springfield will have a deficit of 344 acres of land in the plan period.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1: Draft Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis
Attachment 2: Staff Report and Findings
Attachment 3: Residential Lands Study Process Summary 2006-2009 and next steps
Attachment 4: Proposed Land Use Efficiency Measures implementation to provide for needed
housing density and mix
Attachment 5: 10-12-09 Staff Addendum to Draft Springfield Residential Land and Housing
Needs Analysis
Attachment 6: Planning Commission Recommendation
Attachment 7: Comments received
Springfield Residential
Land and Housing Needs
Analysis
Prepared for
City of Springfield
by
ECONorthwest
99 W. Tenth, Suite 400
Eugene, OR 97401
(541) 687-0051
Draft Report
August 2009
Written by:
Robert Parker, Project Director
Beth Goodman, Project Manager
Whit Perkins, Research Assistant
Date submitted: August 2009
ECO Project Number 7139
ECONorthwest
99 W. Tenth, Suite 400
Eugene, OR 97401
(541) 687-0051
Table of Contents
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... I
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1
BACKGROUND ................................................................................................................................... 1
PURPOSE ........................................................................................................................................... 2
ORGANIZATION ................................................................................................................................. 3
CHAPTER 2: FRAMEWORK FOR A HOUSING NEEDS ANALYSIS .............................................................. 4
OREGON HOUSING POLICY ................................................................................................................ 4
CHAPTER 3: RESIDENTIAL LAND INVENTORY 9
METHODS, DEFINITIONS, AND ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................................... 9
RESULTS ........................................................................................................................................... 12
Land base ............................................................................................................................ 12
Vacant buildable land .......................................................................................................... 15
Redevelopment potential..................................................................................................... 18
Residential capacity ............................................................................................................. 18
CHAPTER 4: HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT TRENDS ............................................................................... 20
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TRENDS .............................................................................................. 20
TRENDS IN HOUSING MIX AND TENURE ........................................................................................... 23
DENSITY ........................................................................................................................................... 25
CHAPTER 5: HOUSING DEMAND AND NEED ....................................................................................... 27
STEP 1: PROJECT NUMBER OF NEW HOUSING UNITS NEEDED IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS .................. 27
Population .......................................................................................................................... 27
Persons in group quarters .................................................................................................... 28
Household size and composition .......................................................................................... 29
Vacancy rate ....................................................................................................................... 29
STEP 2: IDENTIFY RELEVANT NATIONAL, STATE, AND LOCAL DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC
TRENDS AND FACTORS THAT MAY AFFECT THE 20‐YEAR PROJECTION OF STRUCTURE TYPE MIX .. 31
National Housing Trends ...................................................................................................... 31
STEP 3: DESCRIBE THE DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE POPULATION AND, IF POSSIBLE,
HOUSING TRENDS THAT RELATE TO DEMAND FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF HOUSING ..................... 34
Summary of key demographic and housing trends ................................................................. 45
Implications of demographic and housing trends for housing need ......................................... 47
Step 4: Determine the types of housing that are likely to be affordable to the projected
population based on household income ................................................................................ 49
Step 5: Estimate the number of additional needed units by structure type and tenure ............ 58
Step 6: Determine the needed density range for each plan designation and the average needed
net density for all designations ............................................................................................. 59
CHAPTER 6: COMPARISON OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND ........................................................................ 63
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL LAND NEED, 2010‐2030 .................................................................................... 63
Land needed for new residential dwelling units ..................................................................... 63
Land needed for other uses .................................................................................................. 63
BUILDABLE LAND INVENTORY AND CAPACITY .................................................................................. 65
COMPARISON AND CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................... 66
APPENDIX A: CONTEXT FOR ASSESSING HOUSING NEEDS .................................................................. 68
WHAT IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING? .................................................................................................... 68
WHAT OBJECTIVES DO HOUSING POLICIES TYPICALLY TRY TO ACHIEVE? .......................................... 69
DEMAND VERSUS NEED ................................................................................................................... 70
APPENDIX B: NATIONAL HOUSING TRENDS ........................................................................................ 74
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page i
Executive Summary
The 2007 Oregon Legislature passed HB 3337 which requires Springfield to
establish a separate urban growth boundary (UGB). In response to HB 3337, the
City is conducting this study to evaluate the sufficiency of land available for
residential uses in its UGB. To make this determination, the draft Residential
Lands Study (RLS) presents a housing needs analysis consistent with
requirements of HB 3337, Goal 14, ORS 197.296, and OAR 660-008.
The Springfield Residential Lands Study is intended to provide technical
analysis required to determine the 20-year need for residential land for
Springfield's jurisdictional share of the area subject to the Eugene-Springfield
Metropolitan Area, i.e., the area east of Interstate 5, and whether the city has
enough capacity within the area east of I-5 inside the current regional UGB to
meet that need. The Executive Summary provides key findings from the
Springfield Residential Lands Study.
The purpose of the Residential Study is to (1) present growth forecasts, (2)
inventory how much buildable residential land the City has, (3) identify housing
needs, (4) identify land needed for housing and other uses, and (5) determine how
much land the City will need to accommodate growth between 2010 to 2030.
HOW MUCH GROWTH IS SPRINGFIELD PLANNING FOR?
Population forecasts provide the foundation for assessing land needs.
Springfield must have a population forecast to project expected population change
over the 20-year planning period (in this instance, 2010-2030). Lane County
adopted coordinated population forecasts for the County and its incorporated
cities in June 2009. The forecasts include figures for Springfield for 2030 and
2035.
Table S-1 shows the coordinated population forecast for the area within the
current Springfield city limits, the current unincorporated urban area (the area
between the city limit and UGB), and within Springfield's jurisdictional share f
the current Metro Plan UGB for 2010 to 2030. The Springfield UGB forecast for
2030 is 81,608 persons—an increase of 14,577 persons during the 20-year
planning period.
Page ii ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Table S-1. Springfield coordinated population
forecast, Springfield UGB, 2010 to 2030
Source: Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan, 1984 (Amended in 2009),
Table 1-1, pg 5
HOW MUCH BUILDABLE RESIDENTIAL LAND DOES SPRINGFIELD CURRENTLY
HAVE?
Springfield has 2,485 acres in tax lots that are designated for residential uses.
Of these, about 935 acres within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) are
considered vacant and buildable. Table S-2 shows vacant land by plan
designation.
Table S-2. Vacant residential land by plan designation, Springfield
UGB, 2008
Source: City of Springfield GIS data; analysis by ECONorthwest
The purpose of the residential buildable lands inventory is to estimate the
capacity of buildable land in dwelling units. The capacity of residential land is
measured in dwelling units and is dependent on densities allowed in specific
zones as well as redevelopment potential. In short, land capacity is a function of
buildable land and density.
The buildable lands inventory indicates that Springfield has about 935 acres of
vacant and partially-vacant residential land and an additional 21 acres in the
Glenwood mixed-use refinement plan area (these acres were included in the
commercial and industrial lands inventory and are included here only for the
purpose of estimating residential capacity).1 This yields a total of 956 buildable
acres.
1 Capacity in the Glenwood mixed-use area was calculated as follows: 21 buildable acres (45% of the 47-acre site; the policy requires 30%
to 60% of the site be used for housing) multiplied by 15 dwelling units per gross acre equals 317 dwelling units, minus 47 dwelling units
that would be displaced from the River Bank Mobile Home Park equals 270 dwelling units.
Year City Limit
Urban
Area UGB
2010 58,891 8,140 67,031
2030 74,814 6,794 81,608
Change 2010-2030
Number 15,923 (1,346) 14,577
Percent 27% -17% 22%
AAGR 1.2% -0.9% 1.0%
Plan Designation Tax Lots
Total Acres
in Tax Lots
Developed
Acres
Constrained
Acres
Buildable
Acres
Low Density Residential 981 2,137 72 1,241 824
Medium Density Residential 126 329 132 102 95
High Density Residential 8 19 1 2 16
Total 1,115 2,485 205 1,345 935
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page iii
Table S-3 provides an estimate of how much housing could be accommodated
by those lands based on needed densities after making deductions for
development constraints. It includes capacity for areas with approved master
plans that were not included in the acreage estimates. This includes Marcola
Meadows (518 dwellings in the MDR designation) and RiverBend (730 dwellings
in the MDR designation). Additionally, the housing needs analysis assumes that
5% of new housing (299 dwelling units) will be a result of redevelopment. Table
S-3 shows that Springfield has capacity for 6,920 dwelling units within the
existing UGB.
Table S-3. Estimated residential development capacity,
Springfield UGB, 2009
Source: City of Springfield residential BLI; analysis by ECONorthwest
Note: Estimated residential development capacity includes sites with
approved master plans (RiverBend – 730 DU and Marcola Meadows – 518 DU.
All of this capacity is in the Medium Density Residential plan designation).
HOW MUCH HOUSING WILL THE CITY NEED?
Springfield will need to provide about 5,980 new dwelling units to
accommodate growth between 2010 and 2030. About 3,588 dwelling units (60%)
will be single-family types, which includes single-family detached, manufactured
dwellings, and single-family attached housing. About 2,392 units (40%) will be
multi-family housing.
HOW MUCH LAND WILL BE REQUIRED FOR HOUSING?
Table S-4 shows the capacity for residential development by plan designation
both before and after subtracting acreage needed for other uses, such as parks,
schools, churches, etc.). ECO estimates Springfield will need 463 acres for other
uses during the 2010-2030 period.
The results lead to the following findings:
• Springfield has a need for additional residential land. The Springfield
UGB has enough land for 6,920 new dwelling units including
redevelopment capacity without taking into account the need for 493 acres
of this land for other uses. The housing needs forecast projects a need for
5,980 dwelling units and 145 group quarter dwellings.
Plan Designation
Buildable
Acres
Residential
Capacity
(DU)
Percent
of
Capacity
Low Density Residential 824 3,714 54%
Medium Density Residential 95 2,312 33%
High Density Residential 16 325 5%
Mixed-Use (Glenwood) 21 270 4%
Redevelopment na 299 4%
Total 956 6,920 100%
Page iv ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
• The Low Density Residential designation has a deficit of approximately
293 gross acres when the need for 347 acres of such lands for other uses is
taken into account.
• The Medium Density Residential designation has a deficit of
approximately 15 gross acres when the need for 93 acres of such lands for
other uses is taken into account.
• The High Density Residential designation has a deficit of approximately
35 gross acres when the need for 23 acres of such lands for other uses is
taken into account.
• The total residential land deficit is 344 gross acres including residentially-
designated lands needed for other uses.
Table S-4. Residential capacity for needed dwelling units by plan designation,
Springfield UGB, 2010-2030
Source: ECONorthwest
Column Notes:
1. Plan designations
2. Needed dwellings by plan designation (table 5-30)
3. Capacity by plan designation (table 6-2); Note: MDR capacity includes capacity in master planned areas
(Glenwood, Marcola Meadows, Riverbend); redevelopment capacity is included in MDR (150 DU) and HDR (150 DU)
4. Capacity (column 3) minus Need (column 2); Note: a positive number denotes enough capacity within the existing
UGB
5. Needed Gross Density (from bottom of page 5)
6. Total additional land needed (if a deficit exists). Equals -column 4 divided by column 5
7, Surplus/deficit gross acres. Equals Column 4 divided by Column 5
8. Other residential land need (land needed for parks, etc)
9. Total surplus/deficit. Equals column 7 minus column 8,
Note: Total Surplus/Deficit (column 9) adds to 344 acres due to rounding errors.
123456789
Plan Designation
Need
(DU)
Capacity
(DU)
Surplus/
Deficit
(DU)
Needed
Density
(DU/GRA)
Housing
Land
Need
(Gross
Acres)
Housing
Surplus/
Deficit
(Gross
Ac)
Other
Residential
Land Need
Total
Surplus/
Deficit
(Gross
Ac)
Low Density Residential 3,468 3,714 246 5 -54 54 347 -293
Medium Density Residential 1,794 2,731 937 12 0 77 93 -15
High Density Residential 718 475 -243 20 12 -12 23 -35
Total 5,980 6,920 939 0 -42 119 463 -344
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 1
Chapter 1 Introduction
This report presents a housing needs analysis for the City of Springfield. The
primary purpose of this report is to address the requirement of H.B. 3337 that
Springfield “demonstrate, as required by ORS 197.296, that its comprehensive
plan provides sufficient buildable lands within an urban growth boundary
established pursuant to statewide planning goals to accommodate estimated
housing needs for 20 years.” The study is intended to comply with statewide
planning policies that govern housing, including Goal 10 (Housing), ORS
197.296, and OAR 660 Division 8.
The primary goals of this study are to (1) project the amount of land needed to
accommodate the city’s future housing needs of all types, and (2) evaluate the
existing residential land supply within the Springfield Urban Growth Boundary to
determine if it is adequate to meet that need. The methods used for this study
generally follow the Planning for Residential Growth guidebook, published by
the Oregon Transportation and Growth Management Program (1996).
BACKGROUND
The City of Springfield has not conducted a housing needs analysis since the
Eugene-Springfield Residential Lands and Housing Study was completed in 1999.
In the six years since the study was completed, Springfield’s population has
increased by nearly 3,000 residents, an increase of more than 5% over the six-year
period.
In 2007, the Oregon State Legislature passed House Bill 3337 which requires
Springfield to:
(a) Establish an urban growth boundary, consistent with the jurisdictional area
of responsibility specified in the acknowledged comprehensive plan; and
(b) Demonstrate, as required by ORS 197.296, that its comprehensive plan
provides sufficient buildable lands within an urban growth boundary
established pursuant to statewide planning goals to accommodate estimated
housing needs for 20 years.
The analysis and determination of land sufficiency required under section (b)
must be completed by December 31, 2009. This study is intended to meet the
requirements of section (b) by determining whether the City has sufficient land
within the Springfield Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to accommodate expected
future housing needs. To make this determination, this report presents a housing
needs analysis consistent with requirements of Goal 14, ORS 197.296, and OAR
660-008. As required by HB 3337, the City intends to "complete the inventory,
analysis and determination required under ORS 197.296(3)" before the end of
2009, and to complete the remainder of its obligations under HB 3337 and ORS
Page 2 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
197.296 early in 2010. Consistent with the requirements of ORS 197.296(2) the
planning period for this study is 2010-2030.
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to provide an assessment of residential
development capacity and demand for residential land. The study will serve two
purposes: (1) to inform policy makers about planning options and (2) to fulfill state
planning requirements for a twenty-year supply of residential land. Consistent with
the requirements of ORS 197.296, communities engaged in a buildable lands
analysis and housing need assessment must complete, in part, the following:
• Inventory the supply of buildable lands within the current urban growth
boundary;
• Determine the actual density and the actual mix of housing types of
residential development that have occurred within the urban growth
boundary since the last periodic review or five years, whichever is greater.
Development activity used for this review was between 1999 and June
2008.2
• Conduct an analysis of housing need by type and density range, in
accordance with ORS 197.303 and statewide planning goals and rules
related to housing, to determine the amount of land needed for each
needed housing type for the next 20 years (2010-2030).
This report presents an analysis consistent with the above outlined
requirements, and draws upon previous work that ECONorthwest for a number of
Oregon cities and regions. The report is intended to serve as the basis for
subsequent discussions and policy choices regarding the management of growth
in Springfield and to enable the city to complete the residential lands inventory,
analysis and determination required by ORS 197.296(3) and Section 3 of 2007 Or
Laws Chapter 650 (HB 3337). It does not address land use efficiency measures as
required by ORS 197.296 and OAR 660-024. Land use efficiency measures will
be addressed through a separate process.
In general, a housing needs analysis contains a supply analysis (existing
housing, planned housing, and buildable land) and a demand analysis (population
and employment growth leading to demand for more built space: housing by type
and density). The geographic scope of the housing needs analysis is all land inside
the current acknowledged Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Urban Growth
Boundary east of Interstate 5.
2 The City uses the 1999-2006 period for analysis due to limited availability of permit data that can be cross-referenced to tax lot data to
develop density estimates. Moreover, the 1990 and 2000 Census provides an accurate source for analysis of housing mix trends during the
1990s.
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 3
ORGANIZATION
The rest of this report is organized as follows:
• Chapter 2, Framework For A Housing Needs Analysis, describes the
theoretical and policy underpinnings of conducting a Goal 10 housing
needs analysis for Oregon cities.
• Chapter 3, Residential Land Inventory, describes the supply of
residential land available to meet the 20-year need for housing.
• Chapter 4, Historical Development Trends, summarizes building permit
and subdivision data to evaluate residential development by density and
mix for the period beginning September 1, 1988, through June 30, 2000.
• Chapter 5, Housing Needs Analysis, presents a housing needs analysis
consistent with HB 2709 requirements and the HB 2709 Workbook.
• Chapter 6, Comparison of Supply and Need, compares buildable land
supply with estimated housing need.
The report also includes two appendices:
• Appendix A, Context for Assessing Housing Needs provides an
overview of planning for housing and typical local policy objectives
related to affordable housing.
• Appendix B, National and Regional Housing Trends presents research
ECO has performed over the course of several years describing key factors
affecting housing at the national and regional level.
Page 4 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Framework for a
Chapter 2 Housing Needs Analysis3
Economists view housing as a bundle of services for which people are willing
to pay: shelter certainly, but also proximity to other attractions (job, shopping,
recreation), amenity (type and quality of fixtures and appliances, landscaping,
views), prestige, and access to public services (quality of schools). Because it is
impossible to maximize all these services and simultaneously minimize costs,
households must, and do, make tradeoffs. What they can get for their money is
influenced by both economic forces and government policy. Moreover, different
households will value what they can get differently. They will have different
preferences, which in turn are a function of many factors like income, age of
household head, number of people and children in the household, number of
workers and job locations, number of automobiles, and so on.
Thus, housing choices of individual households are influenced in complex
ways by dozens of factors; and the housing market in Lane County and
Springfield are the result of the individual decisions of thousands of households.
These points help to underscore the complexity of projecting what types of
housing will be built between 2010 and 2030.
The complexity of a housing market is a reality, but it does not obviate the
need for some type of forecast of future housing demand and need, and its
implications for land demand and consumption. Such forecasts are inherently
uncertain. Their usefulness for public policy often derives more from the
explanation of their underlying assumptions about the dynamics of markets and
policies than from the specific estimates of future demand and need. Thus, we
start our housing analysis with a framework for thinking about housing and
residential markets, and how public policy affects those markets.
OREGON HOUSING POLICY
The passage of the Oregon Land Use Planning Act of 1974 (ORS Chapter
197), established the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC),
and the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). The Act
required the Commission to develop and adopt a set of statewide planning goals.
Goal 10 addresses housing in Oregon and provides guidelines for local
governments to follow in developing their local comprehensive land use plans and
implementing policies.
At a minimum, local housing policies must meet the requirements of Goal 10
(ORS 197.295 to 197.314, ORS 197.475 to 197.490, and OAR 600-008). Goal 10
requires incorporated cities to complete an inventory of buildable residential lands
3 This chapter is based on studies ECONorthwest has completed for other Oregon cities and regions.
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 5
and to encourage the availability of adequate numbers of housing units in price
and rent ranges commensurate with the financial capabilities of its households.
Goal 10 defines needed housing types as “housing types determined to meet
the need shown for housing within an urban growth boundary at particular price
ranges and rent levels.” ORS 197.303 defines needed housing types:
(a) Housing that includes, but is not limited to, attached and detached single-
family housing and multiple family housing for both owner and renter
occupancy;
(b) Government assisted housing;4
(c) Mobile home or manufactured dwelling parks as provided in ORS 197.475
to 197.490; and
(d) Manufactured homes on individual lots planned and zoned for single-
family residential use that are in addition to lots within designated
manufactured dwelling subdivisions.
ORS 197.296 defines factors to establish sufficiency of buildable lands within
urban growth boundary and requires analysis and determination of residential
housing patterns. It applies to cities with populations of 25,000 or more and
requires cities to:
• Demonstrate that its comprehensive plan or regional plan provides
sufficient buildable lands within the urban growth boundary established
pursuant to statewide planning goals to accommodate estimated housing
needs for 20 years (ORS 197.296(2));
• Inventory the supply of buildable lands within the urban growth boundary
and determine the housing capacity of the buildable lands (ORS
197.296(3)(a)); and
• Conduct an analysis of housing need by type and density range to
determine the number of units and amount of land needed for each needed
housing type for the next 20 years (197.296(3)(b)).
ORS 197.296 also defines a process for cities to following when considering
UGB expansions to meet identified residential needs. ORS 197.296(6) requires
cities to take one or more of the following actions if the housing need is greater
than the housing capacity to accommodate the additional housing need:
a. Amend its urban growth boundary to include sufficient buildable lands to
accommodate housing needs for the next 20 years. As part of this process,
4 Government assisted housing can be any housing type listed in ORS 197.303 (a), (c), or (d).
Page 6 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
the local government must consider the effects of “land use efficiency
measures.” The amendment must include sufficient land reasonably
necessary to accommodate the siting of new public school facilities;
b. Amend its comprehensive plan, regional plan, functional plan or land use
regulations to include new measures that demonstrably increase the
likelihood that residential development will occur at densities sufficient to
accommodate housing needs for the next 20 years without expansion of
the urban growth boundary; or
c. Adopt a combination of the actions described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of
this subsection.
ORS 197.296 is also explicit about what must be considered in a housing
needs analysis and the buildable lands inventory. For the purpose of the inventory,
“buildable lands” includes:
(A) Vacant lands planned or zoned for residential use;
(B) Partially vacant lands planned or zoned for residential use;
(C) Lands that may be used for a mix of residential and employment uses
under the existing planning or zoning; and
(D) Lands that may be used for residential infill or redevelopment.
To visually display the buildable lands inventory, the inventory includes a
map that identifies lands that are vacant, partially vacant, or designated for mixed-
use development.
The needs analysis includes an analysis of historical housing density and mix.
This analysis, which must include data in the last periodic review or five years,
whichever is greater.5
(A) The number, density and average mix of housing types of urban
residential development that have actually occurred;
(B) Trends in density and average mix of housing types of urban residential
development;
(C) Demographic and population trends;
(D) Economic trends and cycles; and
5 A local government can make a determination to use a shorter time period than the time period described if the local government finds
that the shorter time period will provide more accurate and reliable data related to housing capacity and need. The shorter time period may
not be less than three years.
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 7
(E) The number, density and average mix of housing types that have occurred
on the buildable lands.
Figure 2-1 provides a graphic representation of the housing needs analysis
process as defined in ORS 197.296.
Page 8 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis Figure 2-1. Process for determining the sufficiency of residential lands Is needed density the same as or less than actual density? Is needed mix the same as actual mix? ORS 197.296(5)Determine actual density/mix of housing ORS 197.296(3)(b)Actions Related to UGBLand Supply/Demand AnalysisLand SupplyLand DemandDoes UGB contain enough buildable land needed at actual residential densities?ORS 197.296(4)No UGB expansion required.Priority 1Amend plan/regulations to include new measures that increase likelihood that residential densities will occur at densities sufficient to accommodate housing needs for the next 20 years without expansion of the UGB.Priority 2Adopt a combination of Priorities 1 and 3.Inventory supply of buildable1residentiallands within the UGB:2•Determine 20-year supply of buildable lands for housing.ORS 197.296(2) and 197.296(3)(a)Conduct housing needs analysis. ORS 197.296(3)(c) and ORS 197.296(7)Use population forecast from coordinating body. ORS 195.036YesIdentify and evaluate measures to increase likelihood that needed residential development will occur. ORS 197.296(6) and (7)No measures for housing needed.Do the measures for needed housing forego the need to expand the UGB?Yes to bothNoNoYesPriority 3Amend the UGB to include sufficient buildable lands to accommodate housing needs.61 Buildable lands means vacant and redevelop-able lands in urban and urbanizable areas that are suitable, available and necessary for residential uses. ORS 197.295(2)2 Goal 14 requires UGB amendments to be adopted by City and County County. OAR 660-015-0000(14)Footnotes:Take one of several actions:No
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 9
Residential
Chapter 3 Land Inventory
The residential lands inventory is intended to identify lands that are available
for development within the UGB. The inventory is sometimes characterized as
supply of land to accommodate growth. Population and employment growth drive
demand for land. The amount of land needed depends on the density of
development.
This chapter presents the residential buildable lands inventory for the City of
Springfield. 6 The results are based on analysis of Geographic Information System
data provided by City of Springfield GIS and Lane County Assessment data. The
analysis also used aerial orthophotographs for verification.
METHODS, DEFINITIONS, AND ASSUMPTIONS
The first step of the residential buildable lands inventory was to identify the
“land base.” The land base includes all lands in the Springfield portion of the
Metro UGB that are either fully or partially within a residential plan designation.
The following plan designations were included in the residential land base:
• High Density Residential
• Medium Density Residential
• Low Density Residential
The foundational assumptions for the residential lands inventory were
reviewed and discussed by the Residential Lands Stakeholder Committee. The
committee recommended a package of definitions and assumptions for use in the
residential land inventory. These were reviewed with the Planning Commission
and Council and approved for use in the study. The draft acreages presented in
this chapter utilize the definitions and assumptions and also incorporate more
detailed information from the Lane County Assessor’s Office to determine the
character of the parcels.
Property Class and Stat Class codes from the Lane County Assessor’s Office
were used to help determine if a property is vacant and what type of structure (if
any) is present on the land. Property Class is a three digit code to define the
current use of the land (residential, commercial, industrial, multi-family, etc) and
whether is vacant or developed. Stat Class is also a three digit code used by the
Assessor’s Office to describe the type of structure on a parcel (single-family
home, multi-family structure, agricultural outbuilding, etc.). Aerial Photos were
6 The residential buildable lands inventory was a collaborative effort between City of Springfield staff and
ECONorthwest.
Page 10 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
also used in some cases to help determine presence and extent of development on
a site if other information was not clear.
A key step in the buildable lands analysis was to classify each tax lot into a set
of mutually exclusive categories. All tax lots in the UGB are classified into one of
the following categories:
• Vacant and Partially Vacant Land. This category includes parcels with no
structures or with structures with a value of less than $10,000; parcels
have not been precluded from development by a CUP or other
commitment.
• Unbuildable, Not Serviceable Land. This category includes land that is
undevelopable. It includes tax lots or areas within tax lots with one or
more of the following attributes: (1) slopes greater than 25%; (2) within
the floodway; (3) in areas with severe landslide potential (DOGAMI map);
(4) within wetlands and riparian corridors and setbacks; (5) with an
easement a 230KV transmission line; (6) small irregularly shaped lots; and
(7) publicly owned land.
• Developed land. Land that is developed at densities consistent with zoning
and improvements that make it unlikely to redevelop during the analysis
period. Lands not classified as vacant, partially-vacant, or undevelopable
are considered developed.
• Potentially redevelopable land. Land on which development has already
occurred but on which, due to present or expected market forces, there
exists the potential that existing development will be converted to more
intensive uses during the planning period. Redevelopable land is a subset
of developed land and includes lands in MDR and HDR plan designations
that have single-family dwellings.
The initial classifications, while not perfect, provided a starting point. The
initial classification was used to help City staff to define a list of parcels that meet
the assumptions and criteria in the definitions listed below. The next step in the
process was verification. City staff and ECONorthwest spent considerable effort
to review and verify land classifications. Verification steps included review of
classifications on top of 2008 aerial photographs, cross referencing data with
LCOG land use data, and in selected instances, field verification.
The land classifications result in identification of lands that are vacant or
partially vacant. The inventory includes all lands within the Springfield UGB.
Public and semi-public lands are generally considered unavailable for
development. Map 3-1 shows residential lands by plan designation within the
Springfield UGB.
A
MAIN
Q
BI-5D
I-105
JASPER5TH28TH42ND MARCOLACAMP CREEK
E
THURSTON
G
CENTENNIAL
MI
LL7TH2ND58TH21STOLYMPIC
10TH69THMCKE NZIEGATEWAY
32NDMCVAY31ST70THHARLOW
67THDAISY14TH19TH 66TH30THASPENBELTLINE
FRANKLIN36TH48TH35THHWY 58
FAIRVIEW
HAYDEN BRIDGE
YOLANDA
57THLAURAPI
ONEER PARKWAY EAST52ND18THHIGH BANKS
COMMERCIAL
INTERNATIONAL
HWY
9
9
SGONYEARAINBOWP ARKW AYI-
5
ONRAMPPRIVATE
BOB STRAUBM E N L O
GAME FARM
I-5 OFFRAMPOLD COBURGBRACKENFERNGAME FARMDAISY
30TH
A
FR A N K LIN
JASPERPRIVATEG
I-5 OFFRAMPI-5HWY 58
M AIN
E
City of SpringfieldO r e g o n
Map 3-1.Residential Land byPlan Designation
ECONorthwest, April 2009
0 1,900 3,800950
Feet¯
Legend
PUBLICPUBLIC
City Limits
Urban Growth Boundary
Plan Designation
High Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Res Mixed
Medium Density Residential
Page 12 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
RESULTS
LAND BASE
The first step in the residential land inventory was to determine the land base.
This step was necessary because the inventory only covers a subset of land in the
Springfield UGB. The land base is the subset of tax lots that fall within the plan
designations included in the residential portion of the inventory.
Table 3-1 shows acres within the Springfield UGB and city limits in 2008.
According to the City GIS data, Springfield has about 14,603 acres within its
UGB. Of the 14,603 acres, 12,139 acres (about 83%) are in tax lots. Land not in
tax lots is primarily in streets and waterways. Springfield has about 9,958 acres
within its City Limits; of these 8,060 acres (about 81% of total acres in the City
Limit) are in tax lots. Additionally, the City has about 4,645 acres between the
City Limits and Urban Growth Boundary (the UGA); of this about 4,079 acres are
in tax lots.
Table 3-1. Acres in Springfield UGB and
City Limit, 2008
Source: City of Springfield GIS data; analysis by ECONorthwest
Note: Urban Growth Area is the unincorporated area between the City Limits
and Urban Growth Boundary
Table 3-1 summarizes all land in the Springfield UGB. The next step is to
identify residential land base (e.g., lands with plan designations that allow
housing or “residential lands”). The land base includes traditional residential
designations, as well as mixed-use designations Note that not all of the land in
mixed-use designations will be used for employment.
Table 3-2 shows that about 7,483 acres within the Springfield UGB is
included in the residential land base. Thus, about 62% of land within the
Springfield UGB is included in the residential land base. The database includes all
land in tax lots that have any portion that is in a residential plan designation.
Area Tax Lots
Total
Acres
Acres in
Tax Lots
Percent
in Tax
Lots
City Limits 19,477 9,958 8,060 81%
Urban Growth Area 3,150 4,645 4,079 88%
Total 22,627 14,603 12,139 83%
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 13
Table 3-2. Lands designated for residential uses,
Springfield UGB, 2008
Source: analysis by ECONorthwest
Table 3-3 shows residential acres by classification and constraint status for the
Springfield UGB in 2009. Analysis by constraint status (the table columns) shows
that about 4,585 acres are classified as built or committed (e.g., unavailable for
development), 1,962 acres were classified as constrained, and 935 were classified
as vacant buildable.
Table 3-3. Residential acres by classification, Springfield UGB, 2009
Source: City of Springfield data; analysis by ECONorthwest
Note: No buildable acres are shown for master planned areas because the master plan identifies the number of
dwelling units. This capacity is reflected in Table 3-7.
Area Value
Springfield UGB
Number of Tax Lots 22,627
Acres in Tax Lots 12,139
Springfield CIBL
Tax Lots in Residential Designations 20,159
Acres in Land Base in Residential Designations 7,483
Land available
for housing
Classification Tax Lots Total Ac
Developed
Ac
Constrained
Ac Buildable Ac
Land with no development capacity
Developed 18,745 4,408 3,944 464 0
Park/School 96 335 292 43 0
Public 58 79 17 62 0
Right of Way 145 175 127 48 0
Subtotal 19,044 4,997 4,380 617 0
Land with development capacity
Master Planned 18 151 128 23 See notes
Partially Vacant 234 841 77 308 456
Vacant 863 1,493 0 1,014 479
Subtotal 1,115 2,485 205 1,345 935
Total 20,159 7,482 4,585 1,962 935
Land not avialable for
housing
I-5A MAIN
Q
I-105
B
D
JASPER5TH28TH MARCOLA42NDCAMP CREEK
THURSTON
E
G
CENTENNIAL
MILL7TH2ND58TH21STOLYMPIC
10THMC KENZ I E69THHARLOWGATEWAY
32NDMCVAY31ST70THBELTLINE
67THDAISY14TH19TH 66TH30THASPENFRANKLIN36TH48TH35THHWY 58
FAIRVIEW
HAYDEN BRIDGE
YOLANDA
57THLAURAPI
ONEER PARKWAY EAST52ND18THHIGH BANKS
HWY
9
9
SCOMMERCIAL
INTERNATIONAL
GONYEARAINBOWI
-5 ONRAMPGARDENPAR KW A YPRIVATE
BOB STRAUBM E N L O
GAME FARMOLD COBURGBRACKENFERNMA I NGAME FARMI-530THGAME FARMDAISY
GPRIVATE
E
HWY 58
A
JASPER
I-
5
ONRAMPCity of SpringfieldO r e g o n
Map 3-2Residential Landby Classification
ECONorthwest, July 2009
0 1,900 3,800950
Feet¯
Legend
PUBLICPUBLIC
Classifications
MASTER PLAN
PARTIALLY VACANT
VACANT
City Limit
Urban Growth Boundary
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 15
VACANT BUILDABLE LAND
The next step in the buildable land inventory is to net out portions of vacant
tax lots that are unavailable for development. Areas unavailable for development
fall into two categories: (1) developed areas of partially vacant tax lots, and (2)
areas with physical constraints (in this instance areas with steep slopes, waterway
buffers, or wetlands).
Table 3-4 shows vacant land by development and constraint status. The data
show that about 1,710 acres within tax lots with development capacity are
developed. An additional 1,345 acres have development constraints that are
unbuildable, leaving about 935 vacant buildable residential acres within the UGB.
Table 3-4. Vacant residential land by constraint status, Springfield
UGB, 2009
Source: City of Springfield GIS data; analysis by ECONorthwest
Note: No buildable acres are shown for master planned areas because the master plan identifies
the number of dwelling units. This capacity is reflected in Table 3-7.
Table 3-5 shows vacant land by plan designation. Map 3-3 shows the location
of vacant land by plan designation. Map 3-4 shows vacant land with constraints
that are unbuildable.
Table 3-5. Vacant residential land by plan designation, Springfield
UGB, 2008
Source: City of Springfield GIS data; analysis by ECONorthwest
Acres unavailable for housing
Classification Tax Lots
Acres in
Tax Lots
Developed
Acres
Unbuildable
Acres
Buildable
Acres
Master Planned 18 151 128 23 See notes
Partially Vacant 234 841 77 308 456
Vacant 863 1,493 0 1,014 479
Total 1,115 2,485 1,710 1,345 935
Plan Designation Tax Lots
Total Acres
in Tax Lots
Developed
Acres
Constrained
Acres
Buildable
Acres
Low Density Residential 981 2,137 72 1,241 824
Medium Density Residential 126 329 132 102 95
High Density Residential 8 19 1 2 16
Total 1,115 2,485 205 1,345 935
I-5A MAIN
Q
I-105
B
D
JASPER5TH28TH MARCOLA42NDCAMP CREEK
THURSTON
E
G
CENTENNIAL
MILL7TH2ND58TH21STOLYMPIC
10THM CK E N ZIE69THHARLOWGATEWAY
32NDMCVAY31ST70THBELTLINE
67THDAISY14TH19TH 66TH30THASPENFRANKLIN36TH48TH35THHWY 58
FAIRVIEW
HAYDEN BRIDGE
YOLANDA
57THLAURAPIONEER PARKWAY EAST52ND18THHIGH BANKS
HWY 99
SCOMMERCIAL
INTERNATIONAL
GONYEARAINBOWI-5 ONRAMPGARDENPARKW AYPRIVATE
BOB STRAUBM E N L O
GAME FARM
I-5 OFFRAMPOLD COBURGBRACKENFERNA
30TH
DAISYI-5GAME
F
ARMMA I N
GGAME FARME
I-
5
ONRAMPHWY 58PRIVATE JASPER
City of SpringfieldO r e g o n
Map 3-3Residential Landby Classification
ECONorthwest, July 2009
0 1,900 3,800950
Feet¯
Legend
Spr_CL
sprugb_20070716
PUBLICPUBLIC
Classifications
MASTER PLAN
PARTIALLY VACANT
VACANT
I-5A
MAIN
Q
I-105
B
D
JASPER5TH28TH MARCOLA42NDCAMP CREEK
THURSTON
E
G
CENTENNIAL
MILL7TH2ND58TH21STOLYMPIC
10THM CKE NZIE69THHARLOWGATEWAY
32NDMCVAY31ST70THBELTLINE
67THDAISY14TH19TH 66TH30THASPENFRANKLIN36TH48TH35THHWY 58
FAIRVIEW
HAYDEN BRIDGE
YOLANDA
57THLAURAPI
ONEER PARKWAY EAST52ND18THHIGH BANKS
HWY
9
9
SCOMMERCIAL
INTERNATIONAL
GONYEARAINBOWI-5 ONRAMPGARDENPAR KW AYPRIVATE
BOB STRAUBM E N L O
GAME FARM
I-5 OFFRAMPOLD COBURGBRACKENFERNA
30TH
DAISYI-5GAME
F
ARMMAI N
GGAME FARME
I-
5
ONRAMPHWY 58PRIVATE JASPER
City of SpringfieldO r e g o n
Map 3-4Residential Land by Classificationand Constraint Status
ECONorthwest, July 2009
0 1,900 3,800950
Feet¯
Legend
PUBLICPUBLIC
Classifications
MASTER PLAN
PARTIALLY VACANT
VACANT
Constraints
Slope >25%
Riparian Resource Areas
Floodway
100-yr Floodplain
Wetlands
BPA Easement
City Limit
Urban Growth Boundary
Page 18 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
REDEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
Redevelopment potential addresses land that is classified as developed that
may redevelop during the planning period. While many methods exist to identify
redevelopment potential, a common indicator is improvement to land value ratio.
Different studies use different improvement to land value ratio thresholds.
This study does not use improvement-to-land value ratios as a redevelopment
threshold. The City of Springfield understands that low-value housing is an
integral part of the City’s affordable housing stock and that encouraging
redevelopment of such housing will likely result in an overall loss of affordable
housing in Springfield.
Springfield uses a capacity-based method to identify redevelopment potential.
Redevelopment capacity is estimated based on historical redevelopment rates.
Historical rates of redevelopment are analyzed in Chapter 4.
RESIDENTIAL CAPACITY
The final step in a residential buildable lands inventory is to estimate the
capacity of buildable land in dwelling units. The capacity of residential land is
measured in dwelling units and is dependent on densities allowed in specific
zones as well as redevelopment potential. In short, land capacity is a function of
buildable land and density.
The buildable lands inventory indicates that Springfield has about 935 acres of
vacant and partially-vacant residential land and an additional 21 acres in the
Glenwood mixed-use refinement plan area (these acres were included in the
commercial and industrial lands inventory and are included here only for the
purpose of estimating residential capacity).7 This yields a total of 956 buildable
acres.
Table 3-7 provides an estimate of how much housing could be accommodated
by those lands based on the needed densities identified in Table 5-25 after making
deductions for development constraints. It includes capacity for areas with
approved master plans that were not included in the acreage estimates. This
includes Marcola Meadows (518 dwellings in the MDR designation) and
RiverBend (730 dwellings in the MDR designation).
Table 3-7 shows that Springfield has capacity for 6,621 dwelling units within
the existing UGB. Note that this figure does not include capacity for
redevelopment.
7 Capacity in the Glenwood mixed-use area was calculated as follows: 21 buildable acres (45% of the 47-acre site; the policy requires 30%
to 60% of the site be used for housing) multiplied by 15 dwelling units per gross acre equals 317 dwelling units, minus 47 dwelling units
that would be displaced from the River Bank Mobile Home Park equals 270 dwelling units.
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 19
Table 3-7. Estimated residential development capacity,
Springfield UGB, 2009
Source: City of Springfield residential BLI; analysis by ECONorthwest
Note: Estimated residential development capacity includes sites with
approved master plans (RiverBend – 730 DU and Marcola Meadows – 518 DU.
All of this capacity is in the Medium Density Residential plan designation).
Plan Designation
Buildable
Acres
Residential
Capacity
(DU)
Percent
of
Capacity
Low Density Residential 824 3,714 54%
Medium Density Residential 95 2,312 33%
High Density Residential 16 325 5%
Mixed-Use (Glenwood) 21 270 4%
Total 956 6,621 96%
Page 20 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Chapter 4 Historical Development Trends
Analysis of historical development trends in Springfield provides insights into
how the local housing market functions. The housing type mix and density are
also key variables in forecasting future land need. Moreover, such an analysis is
required by ORS 197.296. The specific steps are described in Task 2 of the DLCD
HB 2709 Workbook:
1. Determine the time period for which the data must be gathered
2. Identify types of housing to address (all needed housing types)
3. Evaluate permit/subdivision data to calculate the actual mix, average
actual gross density, and average actual net density of all housing types
ORS 197.296 requires the analysis of housing mix and density to include the
past five years or since the most recent periodic review, whichever time period is
greater.8
The City of Springfield used the 1999- July 2008 period for this analysis. The
rationale for using this period is that permit data prior to 1999 could not be
associated with tax lots to develop density estimates. Moreover, the most recent
housing needs analysis and inventory for the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan
Area was conducted in 1999. With respect to housing mix, the 1990 and 2000
Census provide more accurate counts.
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TRENDS
Figure 4-1 shows dwelling units approved in the Springfield city limits
between 1980 and July 2008. Springfield approved 5,836 dwellings during this
26-year period. The number of dwellings approved annually ranges from a low of
14 in 1985 to a high of 616 in 1994. Springfield averaged about 217 dwelling unit
approvals per year during this period. The rate of development, however, shows
considerable variation from year to year. That variation can be largely tied to
economic conditions in the region.
8 Specifically, ORS 197.296(5) (b) states: “A local government shall make the determination described in paragraph (a) of this subsection
using a shorter time period than the time period described in paragraph (a) of this subsection if the local government finds that the shorter
time period will provide more accurate and reliable data related to housing capacity and need. The shorter time period may not be less than
three years.”
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 21
Figure 4-1. Dwelling units approved through building permits issued
for new residential construction, Springfield, 1980 – July 2008
Source: City of Springfield Planning Department, 2008
Note: 2008 includes January through July.
Between July 1999 and July 2008, Springfield issued a total of 1,971 building
permits for new residential construction that allowed 2,860 dwelling units. Figure
4-1 shows that the number of dwelling units approved varies from year to year
and peaked at 515 in 2002. The number of dwellings approved was slower in
1999 and 2001. Between 2003 and 2005, the number of dwellings approved
remained relatively steady at around 360 annually. By 2006, residential permits
reflected the downturn in the national housing market, but still remained relatively
strong averaging around 200 permits per year.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
19801981198219831984198519861987198819891990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008DU Approved Year
Page 22 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Figure 4-1. Dwelling units approved through building permits issued
for new residential construction, Springfield, July 1999 – July 2008
Source: City of Springfield Planning Department, 2006
Table 4-1 shows dwelling units approved through building permits issued for
new residential construction by type within Springfield. The data indicate that
about 54% of residential dwellings approved were for single-family detached
dwellings, manufactured homes accounted for about 10% of all permits issued,
and multifamily housing of all types accounted for 36% of permits issued.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 thru
July
2008Number of DwellingsYear
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 23
Table 4-1. Dwelling units approved through building permits issued for
new residential construction by type, Springfield, July 1999 – July 2008
Source: City of Springfield Planning Department, 2006
TRENDS IN HOUSING MIX AND TENURE
The housing mix by type (i.e., percentage of single family, multi-family, and
mobile/manufactured home units) is an important variable in any housing needs
assessment. Distribution of housing types is influenced by a variety of factors,
including the cost of new home construction, area economic and employment
trends, demographic characteristics, and amount of land zoned to allow different
housing types and densities.
Table 4-2 shows changes in Springfield’s housing mix from 1990-2000.
Between 1990 and 2000, Springfield increased its housing stock by 19%, adding
3,451 dwelling units. The mix of housing did not change substantially. In 1990
and 2000, 54% of dwelling units were single-family detached units. Over the ten-
year period, Springfield added more than 2,000 single- family detached dwellings.
Thirty-one percent of the new dwellings added between 1990 to 2000 were
multifamily or manufactured. However, the share of these more affordable
housing types did not increase in Springfield over the ten-year period. In 1990,
these housing types accounted for 37% of the housing stock and in 2000 they
accounted for 37% of the housing stock.
With respect to tenure, Springfield experienced a 4% increase in the
ownership rate between 1990 and 2000. About 49% of housing in the Springfield
city limits was owner-occupied in 1990 and 54% was owner-occupied in 2000.
Homeownership rates in Springfield are lower than County and State averages. In
1990, about 61% of homes were owner-occupied in Lane County, a figure that
increased to 63% by 2000. State homeownership rates were 63% in 1990 and 64%
in 2000.
Year Single
Family
Manufact‐
ured
Home
Duplex Tri‐Plex Four‐
Plex
Apart‐
ment
Total
Units
1999 30 9 22 0 0 0 61
2000 209 38 30 3 4 40 324
2001 121 46 16 6 0 6 195
2002 252 45 14 0 4 200 515
2003 230 31 18 6 84 0 369
2004 155 26 38 6 12 122 359
2005 144 31 38 6 140 0 359
2006 116 27 17 3 56 0 219
2007 180 30 0 4 61 275
thru July 2008 92 27 10 0 0 55 184
Total Units 1529 280 233 30 304 484 2860
% of Units 53.5% 9.8% 8.1% 1.0% 10.6% 16.9% 100.0%
Page 24 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Table 4-2. Dwelling units by type and tenure, Springfield city limits, 1990
and 2000
Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing; SF-3 1990 and 2000.
Table 4-3 shows type of dwelling by tenure (owner/renter-occupied) in 2000.
The results show that single-family and manufactured housing types have a much
higher ownership rate than other housing types—about 95% of owner-occupied
units were in these housing types. Multifamily housing types, including duplexes
were predominately renter occupied. It is also notable that 88% of the single-
family attached dwellings were renter occupied. By contrast, 20% of single-
family detached and 13% of mobile homes were renter occupied in 2000.
Table 4-3. Housing units by type and tenure, Springfield city limits, 2000
Source: US Census 2000, Summary File 3; Percentages calculated by ECONorthwest.
Note: Total number of units is slightly different than reported in Table 4-2 due to different data sources (this
table uses Summary File 3 sample data; Table 9.30.2 uses Summary File 1, 100% count data.
Table 4-4 shows changes in Springfield’s housing mix from 2000-July 2008
based on 2000 Census and residential building permit data provided by the City of
Springfield. Between 2000 and July 2008, Springfield increased its housing stock
about 13%, adding 2,799 dwelling units. The mix of housing changed slightly,
with multifamily dwellings accounting for about 0.9% greater share in July 2008
than 2000.
Housing Units Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent % Increase
Single-family detached 9,687 53.5% 11,721 54.3% 2,034 58.9% 21%
Single-family attached 1,755 9.7% 1,794 8.3% 39 1.1% 2%
Multifamily 4,777 26.3% 6,118 28.4% 1,341 38.9% 28%
Mobile/Manufactured 1,902 10.5% 1,939 9.0% 37 1.1% 2%
Total housing units 18,121 100.0% 21,572 100.0% 3,451 100.0% 19%
Occupied Housing Units 17,447 100.0% 20,514 100.0% 3,067 100.0% 18%
Owner-occupied 8,599 49.3% 10,987 53.6% 2,388 77.9% 28%
Renter-occupied 8,848 50.7% 9,527 46.4% 679 22.1% 8%
1990 Census 2000 Census New DU 90-00
Housing Type Number
% by
Tenure
% by
Type Number
% by
Tenure
% by
Type Number
% by
Type
Single-family detached 8,989 80% 82% 2,219 20% 23% 11,208 55%
Single-family attached 204 12% 2% 1,494 88% 16% 1,698 8%
Multifamily-duplex 118 10% 1% 1,113 90% 12% 1,231 6%
Multifamily-3+ units 89 2% 1% 4,447 98% 47% 4,536 22%
Mobile home 1,581 87% 14% 244 13% 2% 1,825 9%
Total 10,981 54% 100% 9,517 46% 100% 20,498 100%
Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Total
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 25
Table 4-4. Estimated dwelling units by type, Springfield city limits, 2000 and
July 2008
Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing; SF-3 1990 and 2000; City of Springfield Building Permit
Data, 2006.
Note: the City building permit data does not distinguish between single-family attached and detached
dwellings. Thus, the 2008 estimate probably overestimates single-family detached dwellings and
underestimates single-family attached dwellings.
DENSITY
Table 4-5 summarizes approved net residential densities by housing type from
July 1999 through July 2008. During this period, 2,860 dwelling units were
approved by residential building permits. The dwellings are associated with
individual tax lots to calculate the net residential density (expressed in dwelling
units per acre).9 This development consumed 436.3 net vacant acres. New
housing in Springfield developed at an average net density of 6.6 dwelling units
per net buildable acre between 1999 and July 2008.
The data indicate that single-family detached housing types averaged a density
of 5.4 dwelling units per net acre, while manufactured homes achieved a lower
density of 4.6 dwelling units per net acre. Multifamily housing types show more
variation—from 25 units per net acre for triplexes, to 8.5 dwelling units per net
acre for fourplexes, and 24.4 dwellings per net acre for apartment buildings with
five or more units.
9 OAR 660-024-0040(9) defines a net buildable acre as follows: For purposes of this rule, a "Net Buildable Acre" consists of 43,560 square
feet of residentially designated buildable land, after excluding present and future rights-of-way, restricted hazard areas, public open spaces
and restricted resource protection areas.
Housing Units Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent % Increase
Single-family detached 11,721 54.3% 13,220 54.2% 1,499 53.6% 13%
Single-family attached 1,794 8.3% 1,794 7.4% na na 0%
Multifamily 6,118 28.4% 7,147 29.3% 1,029 36.8% 17%
Mobile/Manufactured 1,939 9.0% 2,210 9.1% 271 9.7% 14%
Total housing units 21,572 100.0% 24,371 100.0% 2,799 100.0% 13%
2000 Census 2006 Est. New DU 00-06
Page 26 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Table 4-5. Actual residential density by housing type, in net acres,
Springfield, July 1999 – July 2008
Source: City of Springfield building permit data
REDEVELOPMENT TRENDS
Analysis of historical redevelopment of residential lands provides context for
determining how much redevelopment will occur over the 20-year planning
period. Specifically, the analysis addressed redevelopment by analyzing new
dwellings on developed lots. This includes lots that had addresses coded before
1999 and received additional addresses after 1999. In other words, it focuses on
lands that were identified as “developed” in the buildable lands inventory, but had
additional residential development in the 1999-2008 period.
The analysis found 102 new dwellings were added on developed lots between
1999 and 2008. This is about 4% of 2,860 dwellings added in Springfield during
this period.
Housing Type
Dwelling
Units
Percent
of DU
Net
Acres
DU/Net
Acre
Single‐Family Detached 1,529 53% 280.7 5.4
Manufactured Home 280 10% 61.2 4.6
Duplex 233 8% 37.5 6.2
Triplex 30 1% 1.2 25.0
Fourplex 304 11% 35.9 8.5
Apartments 5+ Units 484 17% 19.8 24.4
Total 2,860 100% 436.3 6.6
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 27
Chapter 5 Housing Demand and Need
Chapter 2 described the framework for conducting a housing "needs" analysis.
ORS 197.296 (HB 2709) requires cities over 25,000 or fast growing cities to
conduct a housing needs analysis. A recommended approach is described in Task
3 of the HB 2709 Workbook. The specific steps in the housing needs analysis are:
1. Project number of new housing units needed in the next 20 years.
2. Identify relevant national, state, and local demographic and economic
trends and factors that may affect the 20-year projection of structure type
mix.
3. Describe the demographic characteristics of the population and, if
possible, housing trends that relate to demand for different types of
housing.
4. Determine the types of housing that are likely to be affordable to the
projected households based on household income.
5. Estimate the number of additional needed units by structure type.
6. Determine the needed density ranges for each plan designation and the
average needed net density for all structure types.
STEP 1: PROJECT NUMBER OF NEW HOUSING UNITS NEEDED IN THE
NEXT 20 YEARS
Step 1 in the housing needs analysis is to project the number of new housing
units needed during the planning period. This section describes the key
assumptions and estimates of new housing units needed in Springfield between
2000 and 2020.
POPULATION
Springfield must have a population forecast to project expected population
change over the 20-year planning period (in this instance, 2010-2030). Lane
County adopted coordinated population forecasts for the County and its
incorporated cities in June 2009. The forecasts include figures for Springfield for
2010 and 2030.
Table 5-1 shows the coordinated population forecast for the Springfield city
limit, urban area (the area between the city limit and UGB), and the UGB for
2010 to 2030. The UGB forecast for 2030 is 81,608 persons—an increase of
14,577 persons during the 20-year planning period.
Page 28 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Table 5-1. Springfield coordinated population
forecast, Springfield UGB, 2010 to 2030
Source: Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan, 1984 (Amended in 2009),
Table 1-1, pg 5
PERSONS IN GROUP QUARTERS
Persons in group quarters do not consume standard housing units: thus, any
forecast of new people in group quarters is typically backed out of the population
forecast for the purpose of estimating housing need. Group quarters can have a
big influence on housing in cities with colleges (dorms), prisons, or a large elderly
population (nursing homes). In general, one assumes that any new requirements
for these lodging types will be met by institutions (colleges, state agencies, health-
care corporations) operating outside what is typically defined as the housing
market. Group quarters, however, require land and are typically built at densities
that are comparable to multiple-family dwellings.
Table 5-2 shows persons in group quarters in the City of Springfield as
reported by the 1980, 1990, and 2000 Census.
Table 5-2. Persons in group quarters, City of Springfield, 1980, 1990,
and 2000
Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, Summary File 1
For the purpose of estimating housing needs for Springfield, ECO assumed
that 1% of new persons (148 persons) will reside in group quarters. The majority
of these new persons will live in assisted living quarters.
A final note on persons in group quarters: persons in group quarters require
land. While the HB 2709 workbook backs this component of the population out of
total population that needs housing, it does not otherwise make accommodations
for land demand for new group quarters. For the purpose of this analysis, we
assume that persons in group quarters require land at approximately the same
density as multiple family housing. Land needed for group quarters is estimated at
the end of this chapter.
Year City Limit
Urban
Area UGB
2010 58,891 8,140 67,031
2030 74,814 6,794 81,608
Change 2010-2030
Number 15,923 (1,346) 14,577
Percent 27% -17% 22%
AAGR 1.2% -0.9% 1.0%
VARIABLE 1980 1990 2000
Total Population 41,621 44,683 52,864
Persons in Group Quarters 184 298 635
Percent in Group Quarters 0.44% 0.67% 1.20%
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 29
HOUSEHOLD SIZE AND COMPOSITION
Twenty years ago, traditional families (married couple, with one or more
children at home) accounted for 29% of all households in Oregon. In 1990 that
percentage had dropped to 25%. It will likely continue to fall, but probably not as
dramatically. The average household size in Oregon was 2.60 in 1980 and 2.52 in
1990. One and two person households made up the majority of Oregon
households in 1990. The direct impact of decreasing household size on housing
demand is that smaller households means more households, which means a need
for more housing units even if population were not growing.
Table 5-3 shows average household size for Springfield as reported by the
1980, 1990, and 2000 Census. OAR 660-024-0040(7)(a) established a “safe
harbor” assumption for average household size—which is the figure from the
most recent Census (2.54 persons). The estimate of future housing needs uses an
average household size of 2.54 persons, as allowed by the safe harbor.
Table 5-3. Average household size,
Springfield, 1980, 1990 and 2000
Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing,
Summary File 1
VACANCY RATE
Vacant units are the final variable in the basic housing need model. Vacancy
rates are cyclical and represent the lag between demand and the market’s response
to demand in additional dwelling units. Vacancy rates for rental and multiple
family units are typically higher than those for owner-occupied and single-family
dwelling units.
Table 5-4 shows that the average vacancy rate for Springfield varies by time
period. The most recent Census showed an overall vacancy rate of 5%. The HCS
housing needs model, however, requires separate vacancy rate figures for single-
family and multifamily units. The vacancy rate in 2000 was 4.7% for single-
family units and 5.7% for multifamily units.
Table 5-4. Average vacancy rate, Springfield, 1980, 1990 and 2000
Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, Summary File 1
Year
Average
household size
1980 2.57
1990 2.54
2000 2.54
Variable 1980 1990 2000
Housing Units 17,469 18,121 21,500
Occupied Housing Units 16,173 17,447 20,426
Vacant Housing Units 1,296 674 1,074
Vacancy Rate 7.42% 3.72% 5.00%
Page 30 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Thus study assumes an average vacancy rate of 5%--the same figure as
reported in the 2000 Census. The countywide vacancy rate was 6.1% in 2000.
FORECAST OF NEW HOUSING UNITS, 2010-2030
The preceding analysis leads to a forecast of new housing units likely to be
built in Springfield during the 2010 to 2030 period. Based on the assumptions
shown in Table 5-5, Springfield will need 5,980 new dwelling units to
accommodate forecast population growth between 2010 and 2030. These figures
do not include new group quarters. The forecast assumes 60% will be single-
family housing types (single-family detached and manufactured) and 40% will be
multifamily. The rationale for the household mix is described in the housing
needs analysis section of this chapter.
The results indicate that Springfield will need to issue permits for about 299
new dwelling units annually during the planning period. This figure is consistent
with the 300 dwelling units approved annually during the 1999 to July 2008
period, but is still significantly below the 515 dwellings approved in 2002.
The forecast of new units does not include dwellings that will be demolished
and replaced. This analysis does not factor those units in; it assumes they will be
replaced at the same site and will not create additional demand for residential
land.
Table 5-5. Demand for new housing units, Springfield UGB,
2010-2030
Source: Calculations by ECONorthwest based on safe harbor population forecast
and assumptions described above.
Variable Assumptions
/ Results
Change in persons 14,577
minus Change in persons in group quarters 145
equals Persons in households 14,432
Average household size 2.54
New occupied DU 5,682
Average vacancy rate 5%
Total new DU 5,980
Single-family dwelling units
Percent single-family DU 60%
New occupied single-family DU 3,588
Multiple family dwelling units
Percent multiple family DU 40%
New occupied multiple-family DU 2,392
Totals
equals Total new occupied dwelling units 5,980
Dwelling units needed annually 299
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 31
STEP 2: IDENTIFY RELEVANT NATIONAL, STATE, AND LOCAL
DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC TRENDS AND FACTORS THAT MAY
AFFECT THE 20-YEAR PROJECTION OF STRUCTURE TYPE MIX
NATIONAL HOUSING TRENDS
The overview of national, state, and local housing trends builds from previous
work by ECO and conclusions from The State of the Nation’s Housing, 2008
report from the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. The
Harvard report summarizes the national housing outlook for the next decade as
follows:
“Housing markets contracted for a second straight year in 2007. The
national median single-family home price fell in nominal terms for the
first time in 40 years of recordkeeping, leaving several million
homeowners with properties worth less than their mortgages. With the
economy softening and many home loans resetting to higher rates, an
increasing number of owners had difficulty keeping current on their
payments. Mortgage performance—especially on subprime loans with
adjustable rates—eroded badly. Lenders responded by tightening
underwriting standards and demanding a higher risk premium,
accelerating the ongoing slide in sales and starts.
“It is still uncertain how far, and for how long, the housing crisis will
drive down household growth. Regardless, given the solid underpinnings
of long-term demand—including the recent strength of immigration and
the aging of the echo-boom generation into young adulthood—household
growth will pick up again once the economy recovers. But if the nation
suffers a prolonged economic downturn that results in lower immigration
and more doubling up, household growth in 2010-2020 may fall short of
the 14.4 million level currently projected.
This evaluation presents a bleak outlook for housing markets and for
homeownership in the short-term brought on by the subprime mortgage crisis.
However, the image painted of the future looks brighter, as the increase in
housing demand is naturally induced by the growth of the population in the
necessary age groups. Following is a summary of key national housing trends:
• By 2006, higher prices and rising interest rates had a negative impact on
market demand. Investor demand, home sales and single-family starts
dropped sharply. Growth in national sales prices also slowed. By 2007 and
early 2008, housing market problems had reached the rest of the economy,
resulting in a nationwide economic slowdown and fear of recession.
• Homeownership rates are decreasing. After 12 successive years of
increases, the national homeownership rate slipped in 2005, again in 2006
to 68.8%, and again in 2007 to 68.1%. The Joint Center for Housing
Studies predicts that once the corrections made to work off the housing
oversupply and prices start to recover, a return to traditional mortgage
Page 32 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
products and the strength of natural demand will invigorate the
homeownership rate.
• The long-term market outlook shows that homeownership is still the
preferred tenure. Over the next decade, 88% of net household growth is
expected to come from gains in the number of homeowners. While further
homeownership gains are likely during this decade, they are not assured.
• Population increases will drive future demand. The Joint Center for
Housing Studies indicates that demand for new homes could total as many
as 14.4 million units nationally between 2010 and 2020. Nationally, the
vast majority of these homes will be built in lower-density areas where
cheaper land is in greater supply.
• People and jobs have been moving away from central business districts
(CBDs) for more than a century: the number of the country’s largest
metropolitan areas with more than half of their households living at least
10 miles from the CBD has more than tripled from 13 in 1970 to 46 in
2000; in six metropolitan areas more than a fifth of households live at least
30 miles out. While people older than 45 years are generally continuing to
move away from CBDs, younger people have begun to move nearer to
CBDs.
• Demand for higher density housing types exists among certain
demographics. They conclude that because of persistent income
disparities, as well as the movement of the echo boomers into young
adulthood, housing demand may shift away from single-family detached
homes toward more affordable multifamily apartments, town homes, and
manufactured homes. Supply-side considerations, however, outweigh
these demographic forces.
• Immigration will play a key role in accelerating household growth over
the next 10 years. Between 2000 and 2006, immigrants contributed to over
60% of household growth. Minorities will account for 68% of the 14.6
million projected growth in households for the 2005 to 2015 period.
Immigrants now comprise a growing share of young adults and children in
the United States. Twenty percent of Americans ages 25-34 are foreign
born, and an additional 9% are second generation Americans.
• An aging population, and of baby boomers in particular, will drive
changes in the age distribution of households in all age groups over 55
years. A recent survey of baby boomers showed that more than a quarter
plan to relocate into larger homes and 5% plan to move to smaller homes.
Second home demand among upper-income homebuyers of all ages also
continues to grow. Households aged 50 to 69 are expected to account for
the purchase of nearly half a million second homes between 2005 and
2015.
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 33
• The Joint Center for Housing studies expects rental housing demand to
grow by 1.8 million households over the next decade. Minorities will be
responsible for nearly all of this increased demand. The minority share of
renter households grew from 37% in 1995 to 43% in 2005. The minority
share is forecast to exceed 50% of renter households in 2015.
Demographics will also play a role.
• Ratios of rent to income are forecast to continue to increase. In 2006, one
in three American households spent more than 30% of income on housing,
and more than one in seven spent upwards of 50%. The national trend
towards increased rent to income ratios is mirrored regionally in that a
salary of two to three times the 2007 Federal minimum wage of $5.85 is
needed to afford rents in Lane County.
The U.S Bureau of Census Characteristics of New Housing Report presents
data that show trends in the characteristics of new housing for the nation, state,
and local areas. Several trends in the characteristics of housing are evident from
the New Housing Report:
• Larger single-family units on smaller lots. Between 1997 and 2007 the
median size of new single-family dwellings increased 15%, from
1,975 sq. ft. to 2,277 sq. ft. nationally and 18% in the western region
from 1,930 sq. ft. to 2,286 sq. ft. Moreover, the percentage of units
under 1,200 sq. ft. nationally decreased from 8% in 1997 to 4% in
2007. The percentage of units greater than 3,000 sq. ft. increased from
15% in 1997 to 26% of new one-family homes completed in 2007. In
addition to larger homes, a move towards smaller lot sizes is seen
nationally. Between 1994 and 2007 the percentage of lots under 7,000
sq. ft. increased by 13% from 29% of lots to 33% of lots. A
corresponding 4% decrease in lots over 11,000 sq. ft. is seen.
• Larger multifamily units. Between 1999 and 2007, the median size of
new multiple family dwelling units increased by 15%. The percentage
of multifamily units with more than 1,200 sq. ft. increased from 26%
to 47% in the western region and from 28% to 50% nationally. The
percentage of units with less than 600 sq. ft. stayed at 1% both
regionally and nationally.
• More household amenities. Between 1994 and 2007 the percentage of
single-family units built with amenities such as central air
conditioning, fireplaces, 2 or more car garages, or 2 or more baths all
increased. The same trend in increased amenities is seen in multiple
family units.
A clear linkage exists between demographic characteristics and housing
choice. This is more typically referred to as the linkage between life-cycle and
housing choice and is documented in detail in several publications. Analysis of
data from the Public Use Microsample (PUMS) in the 2000 Census to describe
Page 34 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
the relationship between selected demographic characteristics and housing choice.
Key relationships identified through this data include:
• Homeownership rates increase as income increases;
• Homeownership rates increase as age increases;
• Choice of single-family detached housing types increases as income
increases;
• Renters are much more likely to choose multiple family housing types
than single-family; and
• Income is a stronger determinate of tenure and housing type choice for all
age categories.
STEP 3: DESCRIBE THE DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
POPULATION AND, IF POSSIBLE, HOUSING TRENDS THAT RELATE TO
DEMAND FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF HOUSING
State and regional demographic and housing trends are important to a
thorough understanding of the dynamics of the Springfield housing market.
Springfield exists in a regional economy; trends in the region impact the local
housing market. This section documents state and regional demographic and
housing trends relevant to Springfield.
DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS
This section reviews historical demographic trends in the Lane County and
Springfield. Demographic trends provide a broader context for growth in a region;
factors such as age, income, migration and other trends show how communities
have grown and shape future growth. To provide context, we compare the
Springfield with Lane County and Oregon where appropriate. Characteristics such
as age and ethnicity are indicators of how population has grown in the past and
provide insight into factors that may affect future growth.
State Demographic Trends
Oregon’s 2006-2010 Consolidated Plan includes a detailed housing needs
analysis as well as strategies for addressing housing needs statewide.10 The plan
concludes that “Oregon’s changing population demographics are having a
significant impact on its housing market.” It identified the following population
and demographic trends that influence housing need statewide:
• 11th fastest growing in the United States
• Facing dramatic housing cost increases
10 http://www.ohcs.oregon.gov/OHCS/HRS_Consolidated_Plan_5yearplan.shtml
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 35
• Facing median and adjusted incomes less than those of 1999
• Growing faster than national rates: 4.0% v. 3.3% and expecting a non-
entitlement growth during this consolidated plan of about 6%, 82% of
which will come from in-migration.
• Increasingly older
• Increasingly diverse
• Increasingly less affluent11
Richard Bjelland, State Housing Analyst at the Housing and Community
Services Department of the State of Oregon, analyzed recent demographic
changes taking place in Oregon and discussed their implications in a 2006
presentation “Changing Demographics: Impacts to Oregon and the US.” Some of
Bjelland’s most significant findings are summarized below:
• Oregon’s minority population is growing quickly. Minorities made up
9.2% of the population in 1990 and 16.5% of the population in 2000, a
52% increase.
• Hispanics and Latinos make up a large share of that population and
their growth rate is higher than non-Hispanics/ Latinos. The growth rate of
Oregon’s non-Hispanic/ Latino population between 1990 and 2000 was
15.3% compared to 144.3% for Hispanics and Latinos.
• The birth rates of Hispanic/ Latino residents are higher than non-
Hispanic/ Latino residents. In 1998, for the US, white non-Hispanic/
Latino residents had a birth rate of 12.3 per 1,000, lower than Asians and
Pacific Islanders (16.4 per 1,000), black non-Hispanics (18.2 per 1,000)
and Hispanic/ Latino (24.3 per 1,000).
• The share of resident births and deaths in Oregon shows the implications
of that birthrate: Hispanic/ Latino residents accounted for 17.4% of births
but only 1.4% of deaths in Oregon for 2001. In addition, Hispanic/ Latino
Oregonians are younger than non-Hispanic/ Latino residents: in 2000,
75.9% of Hispanic/ Latino residents of Oregon are under age 35,
compared to 45.7% of non-Hispanic/ Latino residents.
• In Oregon, Hispanic/ Latino per capita income in 2005 was only 44% of
white per capita income.
• Hispanic/ Latino residents of Oregon become homeowners at younger
ages than non-Hispanic/ Latino residents. Table 5-6 shows that Hispanic/
Latino Oregonians under 45 have higher homeownership rates than non-
Hispanic/ Latino residents.
11 State of Oregon Consolidated Plan, 2006-2010, pg. 23.
Page 36 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Table 5-6. Oregon homeownership rates
by age of householder, 2000
Source: Richard Bjelland, State Housing Analyst at the
Housing and Community Services Department of the State of
Oregon, “Changing Demographics: Impacts to Oregon and
the US” 2006. He obtained his data from US Census 2000.
Note: Percentages represent percent of households in each
age group that own homes; columns do not sum to 100%.
Regional Demographic Trends
Regional demographic trends largely follow the statewide trends discussed
above, but provide additional insight into how demographic trends might affect
housing in Springfield.
Figure 5-1 shows the populations of Oregon, Lane County, and Springfield by
age for 2000. Springfield has a greater proportion of its population less than 40
years old than Oregon and Lane County, especially residents aged 20-29 and
under 9 years. Springfield has comparatively fewer residents over 40 than the
state.
Figure 5-1. Population distribution by age, Oregon, Lane County, and
Springfield, 2000
Source: U.S. Census, 2000
Some outlying communities in the region have populations similar in age
distribution to Springfield. Outlying communities with the largest percent of
Age of
householder
Non-Hispanic/
Latino
Hispanic/
Latino
25-34 10.2% 25.7%
35-44 20.6% 31.0%
45 and older 68.1% 39.4%
0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%
Under 9
10-19
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60-69
70 and older
AgePercent of populatio
OR Lane County Springfield
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 37
households with children from the 2000 census were: Creswell (41%), Veneta
(40%), Junction City (40%), and Coburg (38%). The communities with the
smallest percent of households with children were Eugene (27%), Oakridge
(28%), and Cottage Grove (35%).
In the communities with larger shares of children, attendance rates of children
in elementary school are not declining, unlike districts such as Oakridge,
McKenzie, and Pleasant Hill. School districts that have experienced increases in
the Kindergarten-2nd grade populations are Fern Ridge District 28J (increased
since 2003), Lowell 71 (since 2004), Creswell 40 (since 1999 with a dip in 2004),
and Junction City 69 (from 2002 to 2005). However, this data is based on small
districts with small class sizes, so it is not entirely conclusive.
Outlying communities with the largest percent of persons 65 and over from
the 2000 Census were: Oakridge (21%) and Cottage Grove (15%). The
community with the smallest percent of persons 65 and older was Veneta (9%).
These data indicate that some outlying communities’ trend toward older
populations, others trend towards younger populations with families with younger
children.
Table 5-7 shows population by age for Lane County for 2000 and 2006. The
data show that Lane County grew by 13,479 people between 2000 and 2006,
which is a 4% increase. The age breakdown shows that the County experienced an
increase in population for every age group over age 25. The fastest growing age
groups were aged 45 to 64 years and 65 and over. The group that experienced the
fastest negative growth was ages 18-24.
Table 5-7. Population by age, Lane County, 2000 and 2006
Source: U.S. Census, 2000 and Claritas, 2006
Table 5-8 shows Claritas Inc. population forecast by age for Lane County
from 2006 to 2011. The data show that, with the exception of the 5-17 and 18-24
year old groups, each age group will experience growth and that groups aged 65
years and older and 45 to 64 years will grow at the fastest rates. The forecast
shows that the 5 to 17 and 18 to 24 year age groups will decline.
Age Group Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Share
Under 5 18,584 6% 18,056 5% -528 -3% 0%
5-17 55,230 17% 52,730 16% -2,500 -5% -1%
18-24 38,662 12% 34,666 10% -3,996 -10% -2%
25-44 88,849 28% 95,171 28% 6,322 7% 1%
45-64 78,680 24% 88,926 26% 10,246 13% 2%
65 and over 42,954 13% 46,889 14% 3,935 9% 1%
Total 322,959 100% 336,438 100% 13,479 4% 0%
2000 2006 Change
Page 38 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Table 5-8. Claritas Inc. population projection by age, Lane County,
2006 and 2011
Source: Claritas, 2006
The data in Tables 5-7 and 5-8 suggest that Lane County is attracting older
people and experiencing comparatively slow growth (or negative growth) in
people under 44 years old. The age distribution in Figure 3 suggests a higher
percentage of young adults (20-29) and children live in Springfield, indicating
that Springfield’s population and age trends are somewhat different from the
projections for the county as a whole.
Between 1990 and 1999, almost 70% of Oregon’s total population growth was
from net migration (in-migration minus out-migration), with the remaining 30%
from natural increase (births minus deaths).12 Migrants to Oregon tend to have
many characteristics in common with existing residents, with some differences—
recent in-migrants to Oregon are, on average, younger and more educated, and are
more likely to hold professional or managerial jobs, compared to Oregon’s
existing population. The race and ethnicity of in-migrants generally mirrors
Oregon’s established pattern, with one exception: Hispanics make up more than
7% of in-migrants but only 3% of the state’s population. The number-one reason
cited by in-migrants for coming to Oregon was family or friends, followed by
quality of life and employment.13
Migration is a significant component of population growth in Lane County.
Seventy-three percent of population growth in Lane County between 1990 and
2000 was from in-migration. This figure remained at 73% for the 2000-2005
period.14
The U.S. Census collects information about migration patterns. Specifically, it
asks households where their residence was in 1995 (5 years prior to the Census
count). Table 5-9 shows place of residence in 1995 for Oregon, Lane County, and
Springfield. The data show that Springfield residents are more mobile than Lane
County and Oregon residents. Less than half of residents in Oregon, Lane County
or Springfield lived in the same residence in 1995 as in 2000. Twenty-four
12 Portland State University, Population Research Center, 2000. 1990-2000 Components of Population Change
13 State of Oregon, Employment Department. 1999. 1999 Oregon In-migration Study.
14 Portland State University, Population Research Center, 2005. 2005 Oregon Population Report and contents
Age Group Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Share
Under 5 18,056 5% 18,615 5% 559 3% 0%
5-17 52,730 16% 51,098 15% -1,632 -3% -1%
18-24 34,666 10% 31,827 9% -2,839 -8% -1%
25-44 95,171 28% 99,401 29% 4,230 4% 0%
45-64 88,926 26% 94,999 27% 6,073 7% 1%
65 and over 46,889 14% 52,765 15% 5,876 13% 1%
Total 336,438 100% 348,705 100% 12,267 4% 0%
2006 Change2011
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 39
percent of Oregonians, 20% of residents of Lane County and 19% of residents of
Springfield lived in a different county in 1995. Eleven percent of residents of
Springfield and 13% of residents of Lane County lived in a different state in 1995,
compared with 12% of Oregonians.
Table 5-9. Place of residence in 1995, Oregon, Lane County, and
Springfield, persons 5 years and over
Source: U.S. Census, 2000
Table 5-10 shows the number of persons of Hispanic or Latino origin for
Oregon, Lane County, and Springfield for 1990 and 2000. Springfield has a
lower proportion of Hispanic/Latino residents as Oregon and a higher proportion
than Lane County. In 2000, Springfield’s population was 6.6 % Hispanic/Latino,
compared with 4.5% of residents in Lane County.
The Hispanic/Latino population grew faster in Springfield than in Lane
County from 1990 to 2000. Springfield’s Hispanic/Latino population grew by
168% between 1990 and 2000. During the same period, Lane County’s
Hispanic/Latino population grew by 111% and Oregon’ Hispanic/Latino
population grew by 143%.
Table 5-10. Persons of Hispanic or Latino origin, Oregon, Lane
County, and Springfield, 1990 and 2000
Source: U.S. Census, 2000
Table 5-11 shows the number of Hispanic and Latino residents and the percent
of Hispanic/ Latino residents as a percent of the total population between 1990
and 2000. The number of Hispanic and Latino residents is growing in all outlying
Persons Percent Persons Percent Persons Percent
Population 5 years and older 3,199,323 100% 304,463 100% 48,403 100%
Same house in 1995 1,496,938 47% 142,447 47% 20,023 41%
Different house in 1995 1,702,385 53% 162,016 53% 28,380 59%
Same county 863,070 27% 94,788 31% 18,610 38%
Different county 755,954 24% 61,639 20% 9,085 19%
Same state 356,626 11% 23,526 8% 3,599 7%
Different state 399,328 12% 38,113 13% 5,486 11%
Oregon Lane County Springfield
Oregon
Lane
County Springfield
1990
Total population 2,842,321 282,912 44,683
Hispanic or Latino 112,707 6,852 1,299
Percent Hispanic or Latino 4.0% 2.4% 2.9%
2000
Total population 3,421,399 322,959 52,729
Hispanic or Latino 273,938 14,488 3,475
Percent Hispanic or Latino 8.0% 4.5% 6.6%
Change 1990-2000
Hispanic or Latino 161,231 7,636 2,176
Percent Hispanic or Latino 143% 111% 168%
Page 40 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
areas, especially in Cottage Grove and Junction City, according to the US Census
1990 and 2000.
Table 5-11. Persons of Hispanic or Latino origin, outlying
communities, 1990 and 2000
Source: US Census 1990 and 2000
Table 5-12 shows household size by ethnicity for Oregon, Lane County, and
Springfield. The number of people per household is similar for Oregon, Lane
County, and Springfield for non-Hispanic households and Hispanic households.
In each area, non-Hispanic households have a little less than 2.5 people per
household. Households for Hispanic residents are larger, with between 3.2 and 3.9
people per household. The data show that Hispanic residents have between 0.7
and 1.4 additional people per household than non-Hispanic residents.
Table 5-12. Household size by ethnicity for Oregon,
Lane County, and Springfield, 2000
Source: U.S. Census, 2000
In conclusion: (1) Springfield residents are younger than residents of Lane
County, even as county-wide age levels are trending older; (2) Springfield has a
growing population of Hispanic/ Latino residents, whose higher average
household size is larger than non-Hispanic/ Latino residents.
Household type and relationship also has implications for housing needs. For
example, one-person households need smaller dwellings than family households
with children. Table 5-13 shows household type and relationship in Springfield
for 1990, 2000, and the 2005-07 period. The data show an increase in all
household types during this period. With respect to share of household types, one-
person households increased from 25% to 30% of Springfield households. A
corresponding decrease in share occurred in two or more person households, with
most of the decrease in share coming from married couple family households.
Number
Percent
of total Number
Percent
of total Number Percent
Coburg 18 2% 29 3% 11 61%
Cottage Grove 162 2% 417 5% 255 157%
Creswell 109 4% 251 7% 142 130%
Eugene 3,051 3% 6,843 5% 3,792 124%
Junction City 73 2% 391 8% 318 436%
Oakridge 141 5% 158 5% 17 12%
Springfield 1,299 3% 3,651 7% 2,352 181%
Veneta 50 2% 115 4% 65 130%
1990 2000 Change
Oregon Lane County Springfield
Non-Hispanic/ Latino 2.42 2.39 2.49
Hispanic/ Latino 3.87 3.19 3.50
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 41
Table 5-13. Household type and relationship, Springfield, 1990, 2000 and 2005-07
Source: U.S. Census, 1990, 2000. American Community Survey (2005-07)
Note: 2005-07 American Community Survey is based on pooled data from household surveys conducted in 2005, 2006 and
2007.
HOUSING TRENDS
Table 5-14 shows the total number of permitted dwellings (single-family and
multi-family) by year for selected Lane County cities between 2000 and 2007.
Table 5-14 shows that Eugene had the highest number of permitted units during
the period, with Springfield and Creswell having the second- and third-highest.
Junction City and Oakridge had the lowest number of permitted units. Most cities
showed the highest numbers of permitted units over the time period either in 2004
or in 2005, although Springfield’s highest total was in 2003.
Table 5-14. Total permitted dwellings (all types) by year,
selected Lane County cities, 2000-2007
Source: U.S. Census, Building permits data site, http://censtats.census.gov/bldg/bldgprmt.shtml
Note: These numbers a different than those provided by the City of Springfield that were used for
the historical density analysis. We believe the data provided by the City are more accurate.
Table 5-15 shows the permits issued for new single-family dwellings in
selected Lane County cities between 1996 and 2007. Table 5-15 shows that
Springfield’s number of permits issued for single-family dwellings remained
consistently between 220 and 245 between 1998 and 2003, and has recently
fluctuated at lower levels.
Household Type Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Share
1-person household 4,346 25% 5,206 25% 6,646 30% 2,300 53% 5%
2 or more person household 13,101 75% 15,308 75% 15,707 70% 2,606 20% -5%
Family households: 11,593 66% 13,479 66% 13,915 62% 2,322 20% -4%
Married-couple family 8,572 49% 9,373 46% 9,832 44% 1,260 15% -5%
Other family: 3,021 17% 4,106 20% 4,083 18% 1,062 35% 1%
Male householder, no wife present 658 4% 1,164 6% 1,017 5% 359 55% 1%
Female householder, no husband present 2,363 14% 2,942 14% 3,066 14% 703 30% 0%
Nonfamily households: 1,508 9% 1,829 9% 1,792 8% 284 19% -1%
Total 17,447 100% 20,514 100% 22,353 100% 4,906 28%
1990 2000 2005-07 ACS Change 1990-2005/07
City 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Total
Eugene 744 760 828 611 876 1,327 731 555 6432
Springfield 274 272 290 324 164 231 211 265 2031
Creswell 26 67 82 93 153 62 56 84 623
Cottage Grove 2917286844865332 357
Junction City 15 12 12 13 10 13 8 78 161
Veneta 11 24 43 96 112 117 128 62 593
Oakridge 141084913 40
Total 1,100 1,156 1,284 1,205 1,367 1,840 1,196 1,089 10,237
Page 42 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Table 5-15. Permits issued for new single-family dwellings, selected Lane
County cities, 1996-2007
Source: www.city-data.com.
Table 5-16 shows the total permitted single-family and multifamily dwellings
(aggregated) by year between 2000 and 2007 for selected Lane County cities.
Table 5-16 shows that Eugene consistently issues permits for the most multi-
family units among the cities shown, whereas Oakridge, Veneta, Junction City
and Creswell only issue permits for the occasional multifamily unit. Springfield
typically issues permits for around 50 multifamily units each year, although it
issued permits for 133 units in 2005.
City 19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006 2007
Eugene 845 721 665 656 619 633 673 559 583 756 528 297
Springfield N/A 192 221 239 222 225 243 232 128 98 134 170
Coburg 12911103176264 1
Creswell 30 43 45 32 26 67 80 91 133 60 56 84
Cottage Grove3719544529171519347039 22
Junction City 53 19 13 28 15 12 34 13 10 13 8 78
Veneta 13 10 11 19 11 24 43 96 112 117 128 62
Oakridge 52112121084911
TOTAL 995 1,015 1,021 1,041 926 981 1,096 1,016 1,010 1,124 906 725
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 43
Table 5-16. Total permitted single-family and multifamily
dwellings (aggregated) by year, selected Lane County cities,
2000-2007
Source: U.S. Census, Building permits data site, http://censtats.census.gov/bldg/bldgprmt.shtml
Figure 5-2 and Table 5-17 show where residents of Springfield worked in
2006. Figure 5-2 and Table 5-17 show that more than 80% of residents of
Springfield worked in Lane County, with 26% of Springfield residents working in
Eugene and 28% working in Springfield. About 27% of Springfield residents
worked in unincorporated Lane County.
City 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Eugene
Single family 619 633 673 559 583 756 528 297
Multifamily 125 127 155 52 293 571 203 258
Springfield
Single family 222 225 243 232 128 98 134 170
Multifamily 52 47 47 92 36 133 77 95
Coburg
Single family N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Multifamily N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Creswell
Single family 26 67 80 91 133 60 56 84
Multifamily 0 0 2 2 20 2 0 0
Cottage Grove
Single family 29 17 15 19 34 70 39 22
Multifamily 0 0 13 49 10 16 14 10
Junction City
Single family 15 12 12 13 10 13 8 78
Multifamily 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Veneta
Single family 11 24 43 96 112 117 128 62
Multifamily 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oakridge
Single family 121084911
Multifamily 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2
PPage 44
Figure 5
Source: US
ECONorth
5-2. Places
S Census Bure
Ta
Sp
So
Ba
No
Sp
of
L
L
L
W
M
M
D
A
T
hwest
s where res
eau, LED Origin
able 5-17. P
pringfield w
ource: US Cens
ase (2nd Quarte
ote: Percent co
The implic
pringfield’s w
f Springfield
Location
ane County
Springfield
Eugene
Other Lane C
inn County
Washington C
Multnomah Co
Marion County
Douglas Coun
All Other Loca
Total
August
sidents in
n-Destination D
Places whe
were empl
sus Bureau, LE
er 2003)
lumn adds to 1
cation of the
workforce li
d. Residents o
Nu
1
County
ounty
ounty
y
ty
tions
2
2009
Springfield
Data Base (2nd
ere residen
oyed, 2003
ED Origin-Dest
101% due to ro
e data presen
ives in Lane
of Springfiel
umber Perce
18,706 8
6,512 2
6,034 2
6,160 2
641
619
488
468
463
1,837
23,222 10
DRAFT: S
d were em
d Quarter 2003
nts of
3
ination Data
ounding errors
nted in this se
County, but
ld are more
ent
1%
8%
6%
7%
3%
3%
2%
2%
2%
8%
0%
Springfield Ho
ployed, 20
)
ection is that
t many do no
likely to wor
ousing Needs
006
t majority of
ot reside in t
rk in Eugene
s Analysis
f
the City
e than in
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 45
Springfield. This analysis shows that businesses in Springfield have access to the
labor force in parts of Lane County.
SUMMARY OF KEY DEMOGRAPHIC AND HOUSING TRENDS
Springfield has a larger share of young people than Lane County as a
whole
• Springfield has a higher percentage of people under age 30 than Lane
County.
• Between 2000 and 2006, Lane County experienced changes in the age
structure of its residents. Age groups under age 25 experienced negative
growth; the fastest growing age groups were people aged 45 to 64 and 65
and over. This indicates that retirees or people nearing retirement are
moving to Lane County; Springfield’s share of young people shows that
its age structure is experiencing different age trends.
Migration is an important component of recent growth in Lane County
and will continue to be a key factor in future population growth.
• In-migration accounted for 73% of population growth in Lane County
between 1990 and 2000 and between 2000 and 2005.
• Springfield’s population was more mobile than the County’s as a whole.
Only 41% of the residents of Springfield lived in the same house in 2000
as they did in 1995 compared to 47% for all of Lane County. A greater
share of the population in Springfield moved within Lane County during
that time period (38%) than for Lane County as a whole (31%).
Single-person households are increasing faster than other household
types.
• Between 1990 and 2005/07 one-person households increased from 25% to
30% of Springfield households. A corresponding decrease in share
occurred in two or more person households, with most of the decrease in
share coming from married couple family households
Springfield is becoming more ethnically diverse.
• Springfield’s Hispanic/Latino population grew by 168% (2,352 persons)
between 1990 and 2000, compared with 111% growth in Lane County’s
Hispanic/Latino population during the same period.
• Other smaller communities near Springfield experienced significant
growth in Hispanic/ Latino populations. The communities experiencing
the largest increase in the Hispanic/ Latino populations were Eugene
(3,792), Junction City (318), Cottage Grove (255), and Creswell (142).
Page 46 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Hispanic/Latino residents have larger, younger households.
• The birth rates for Hispanic/ Latino residents (1998 data) are 24.3 per
1,000 compared to 12.3 per 1,000 for non-Hispanic/ Latino residents.
• Hispanic/ Latino residents accounted for 17.4% of births and only 1.4% of
deaths in Oregon in 2001.
• In 2000, 75.9% of Hispanic/ Latino Oregonians are under 35 compared to
45.7% of non-Hispanic/ Latino residents.
• The average size of a Hispanic/Latino household in 2000 in Lane County
was 3.2 people, compared with 2.4 people in non-Hispanic households.
Household sizes in Springfield were larger: 2.5 for non-Hispanic
households and 3.5 for Hispanic/ Latino households.
Hispanic/Latino residents typically have lower incomes but become
homeowners at younger ages than non-Hispanic/ Latino residents.
• Per capita income in Oregon in 2005 for Hispanic and Latino residents
was only 44% of white per capita income/
• 56.7% of Hispanic/ Latino residents of Oregon under age 45 are
homeowners, compared to 30.8% of non-Hispanic/ Latino residents
Springfield is part of a complex, interconnected regional housing market.
• Among selected Lane County cities, Springfield has the third-highest
permit average permit valuation for 2005 (behind Coburg and Eugene) and
average construction costs for 2005 were highest in Springfield.
• However, median sales prices for Springfield were lower between 1999
and 2007 than median prices in Lane County, and Springfield had the
lowest median sales prices in 2007 among all of the selected cities.
• Commuting is typical throughout the region: Springfield’s workforce lives
in Lane County, but many do not reside in the City of Springfield.
Since 2000, housing starts in the selected cities within Lane County have
been dominated by single-family types.
• The data show that new housing development in the 2000-2007 period
was predominately single-family housing types. In fact, only 32% of all
units for which building permits were issued in the 2000-2007 were for
multifamily housing types.
• Springfield’s number of permits issued for single-family dwellings
remained consistently above 220 between 1998 and 2003, and dropped to
below 135 per year between 2004 and 2007.
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 47
Housing types are trending towards larger units on smaller lots.
• Between 1997 and 2007 the median size of new single-family dwellings
increased 15%, from 1,975 sq. ft. to 2,277 sq. ft. nationally and 18% in the
western region from 1,930 sq. ft. to 2,286 sq. ft. Moreover, the percentage
of units under 1,200 sq. ft. nationally decreased from 8% in 1997 to 4% in
2007. The percentage of units greater than 3,000 sq. ft. increased from
15% in 1997 to 26% of new one-family homes completed in 2007.
• In addition to larger homes, a move towards smaller lot sizes is seen
nationally. Between 1994 and 2007 the percentage of lots under 7,000 sq.
ft. increased by 13% from 29% of lots to 33% of lots. A corresponding 4%
decrease in lots over 11,000 sq. ft. is seen.
• Even when controlling for income and savings, level of education, age,
marital status, family size, the housing market in which the unit was
located [and other factors], compared to whites both black families and
Hispanic families had significantly lower likelihood of homeownership,
lower house values (for owners) and lower rents (for renters).15
• Minority households have substantially lower rents than white
households.16
• Hispanic households, particularly low-income families, have higher levels
of mortgage debt than do white households, although their house values
are lower than whites. This suggests a substantial difference in borrowing
or loan terms for Hispanics. 17
IMPLICATIONS OF DEMOGRAPHIC AND HOUSING TRENDS FOR HOUSING NEED
The purpose of the analysis thus far has been to give some background on the
kinds of factors that influence housing choice, and in doing, to convey why the
number and interrelationships among those factors ensure that generalizations
about housing choice are difficult and prone to inaccuracies.
There is no question that age affects housing type and tenure. Mobility is
substantially higher for people aged 20 to 34. People in that age group will also
have, on average, less income than people who are older. They are less likely to
have children. All of these factors mean that younger households are much more
likely to be renters; renters are more likely to be in multi-family housing.
15 Boehm, Thomas P. and Alan M. Schlottmann, “Housing Tenure, Expenditure, and Satisfaction Across Hispanic, African American, and
White Households: Evidence from the American Housing Survey.” US Department of Housing and Urban Development, February 2006.
16 Boehm, Thomas P. and Alan M. Schlottmann, “Housing Tenure, Expenditure, and Satisfaction Across Hispanic, African American, and
White Households: Evidence from the American Housing Survey.” US Department of Housing and Urban Development, February 2006.
17 Boehm, Thomas P. and Alan M. Schlottmann, “Housing Tenure, Expenditure, and Satisfaction Across Hispanic, African American, and
White Households: Evidence from the American Housing Survey.” US Department of Housing and Urban Development, February 2006.
Page 48 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
The data illustrate what more detailed research has shown and what most
people understand intuitively: life cycle and housing choice interact in ways that
are predictable in the aggregate; age of the household head is correlated with
household size and income; household size and age of household head affect
housing preferences; income affects the ability of a household to afford a
preferred housing type. The connection between socioeconomic and demographic
factors, on the one hand, and housing choice, on the other, is often described
informally by giving names to households with certain combinations of
characteristics: the "traditional family," the "never marrieds," the "dinks" (dual-
income, no kids), the "empty nesters."18 Thus, simply looking at the long wave of
demographic trends can provide good information for estimating future housing
demand.
Thus, one is ultimately left with the need to make a qualitative assessment of
the future housing market. Following is a discussion of how demographic and
housing trends are likely to affect housing in Springfield for the next 20-years:
• On average, future housing will look a lot like past housing. That is the
assumption that underlies any trend forecast, and one that allows some
quantification of the composition of demand for new housing. As a first
approximation, the next five years, and maybe the first 10 years, of
residential growth will look a lot like the last five years.
• If the future differs from the past, it is likely to move in the direction (on
average) of smaller units and more diverse housing types. Most of the
evidence suggests that the bulk of the change will be in the direction of
smaller average house and lot sizes for single-family housing. In
summary, smaller households, an aging population, increasing housing
costs, and other variables are factors that support the conclusion of smaller
and less expensive units and a broader array of housing choices.
• No amount of analysis is likely to make the long-run future any more
certain: the purpose of the housing forecasting in this study is to get an
approximate idea about the long run so policy choices can be made today.
It is axiomatic among economic forecasters that any economic forecast
more than three (or at most five) years out is highly speculative. At one
year one is protected from being disastrously wrong by the shear inertia of
the economic machine. But a variety of factors or events could cause
growth forecasts to be substantially different.
18 See Planning for Residential Growth: A Workbook for Oregon's Urban Areas (June 1997).
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 49
STEP 4: DETERMINE THE TYPES OF HOUSING THAT ARE LIKELY TO BE
AFFORDABLE TO THE PROJECTED POPULATION BASED ON HOUSEHOLD
INCOME
Step four of the housing needs assessment results in an estimate of need for
housing by income and housing type. This requires some estimate of the income
distribution of future households in the community. ECO developed these
estimates based on estimated incomes of households that live in Springfield.
INCOME AND AFFORDABILITY OF HOUSING
This section summarizes regional and local income trends and housing cost
trends. Income is one of the key determinants in housing choice and households’
ability to afford housing. A review of historical income and housing price trends
provides insights into the local and regional housing markets.
Table 5-18 shows a set of inflation adjusted income indicators for Eugene,
Springfield and Lane County. The results paint a mixed picture, but generally
suggest that income (by most measures) decreased during the 1980s, and
increased during the 1990s. Overall, median household and median family
incomes remained relatively flat during the 20-year period between 1979 and
1999.
The data show that the percentage of persons below the poverty level
increased in Springfield and Lane County, and decreased slightly in Eugene
between 1979 and 1999.
Table 5-18. Inflation adjusted income indicators (in 1999 dollars),
Eugene, Springfield and Lane County, 1979, 1989, and 1999
Source: U.S. Census.
Notes: All dollar amounts in 1999 dollars. 1979 income converted to 1999 dollars using 3.06
inflation factor. 1989 income converted to 1999 dollars using 1.35 inflation factor.
City 1979 1989 1999
Eugene
Median HH income $34,493 $34,248 $35,850
Median Family income $46,960 $46,107 $48,527
Per Capita Income $18,029 $18,746 $21,315
% Persons Below Poverty Level 14.7% 17.0% 14.4%
Springfield
Median HH income $34,248 $29,608 $33,031
Median Family income $38,981 $34,332 $38,399
Per Capita Income $14,676 $13,800 $15,616
% Persons Below Poverty Level 15.2% 16.5% 17.1%
Lane County
Median HH income $37,521 $34,112 $36,942
Median Family income $44,920 $41,530 $45,111
Per Capita Income $16,837 $16,970 $19,681
% Persons Below Poverty Level 12.8% 14.5% 17.9%
Year
Page 50 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
A typical standard used to determine housing affordability is that a household
should pay no more than 30% of its total monthly household income for housing,
including utilities. According to the U.S. Census, nearly 19,000 households in the
region—about one-third—paid more than 30% of their income for housing in
2000.
One way of exploring the issue of financial need is to review wage rates and
housing affordability. Table 5-19 shows an analysis of affordable housing wage
and rent gap for households in Springfield at different percentages of median
family income (MFI). The data are for a typical family of four. The results
indicate that a household must earn about $14.00 an hour to afford a two-bedroom
unit according to HUD's market rate rent estimate.
Table 5-19. Analysis of affordable housing wage and rent gap by HUD income
categories, Eugene-Springfield, 2007
Source: HUD, Oregon office; analysis by ECONorthwest
MFI: Median family income
The total amount a household spends on housing is referred to as cost burden.
Total housing expenses are generally defined to include payments and interest or
rent, utilities, and insurance. HUD guidelines indicate that households paying
more than 30% of their income on housing experience “cost burden” and
households paying more than 50% of their income on housing experience “severe
cost burden.” Using cost burden as an indicator is consistent with the Goal 10
requirement of providing housing that is affordable to all households in a
community.
Table 5-20 shows housing costs as a percent of income by tenure for
Springfield households in 2000. The data show that about 26% of Springfield
households experienced cost burden in 2000. The rate was much higher for
homeowners (31%) than for renters (18%). This finding is unusual for Oregon
cities—it is much more common for renters to experience higher rates of cost
burden.
Income Level
Number
of HH Percent
Affordable Monthly
Housing Cost
Crude Estimate of
Affordable Purchase
Owner-Occupied Unit
Est.
Number
of Owner
Units
Est.
Number
of Renter
Units
Surplus
(Deficit) Notes
Less than $10,000 2,240 12% $0 to $250 $0 to $25,000 33 706 (1,501)
$10,000 to $14,999 1,574 8% $250 to $375 $25,000 to $37,000 14 825 (735)
$15,000 to $24,999 3,254 17% $375 to $625 $37,500 to $62,500 172 6,523 3,441
2007 HUD FMR studio: $478;
1 bdrm: $581; 2 bdrm: $654
$25,000 to $34,999 2,870 15% $625 to $875 $62,500 to $87,500 1,019 959 (892) HUD FMR 2 bdrm: $735
$35,000 to $49,999 3,625 19% $875 to $1,250 $87,500 to $125,000 4,791 152 1,318 HUD FMR 3 bdrm: $1028
$50,000 to $74,999 3,476 18% $1,250 to $1,875 $125,000 to $187,500 2,938 42 (496)
Lane County MFI: $52,200 $1,305 $130,500
$75,000 to $99,999 1,066 6% $1,875 to $2,450 $187,500 to $245,000 495 9 (563)
$100,000 to $149,999 573 3% $2,450 to $3,750 $245,000 to $375,000 133 0 (440)
$150,000 or more 188 1% More than $3,750 More than $375,000 56 0 (132)
Total 18,865 100% 9,650 9,215 0
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 51
Table 5-20. Housing cost as a percentage of household income,
Springfield, 2000
Source: 2000 Census
Table 5-21 shows a rough estimate of affordable housing cost and units by
income levels for Springfield in 2000. Several points should be kept in mind when
interpreting this data:
• Because all of the affordability guidelines are based on median family income,
they provide a rough estimate of financial need and may mask other barriers
to affordable housing such as move-in costs, competition for housing from
higher income households, and availability of suitable units. They also ignore
other important factors such as accumulated assets, purchasing housing as an
investment, and the effect of down payments and interest rates on housing
affordability.
• Households compete for housing in the marketplace. In other words,
affordable housing units are not necessarily available to low income
households. For example, if an area has a total of 50 dwelling units that are
affordable to households earning 30% of median family income, 50% of those
units may already be occupied by households that earn more than 30% of
median family income.
The data in Table 5-21 indicate that in 2000:
• About 20% of Springfield households could not afford a studio apartment
according to HUD's estimate of $478 as fair market rent;
• Approximately 45% of Springfield households could not afford a two-
bedroom apartment at HUD's fair market rent level of $735;
• A household earning median family income ($52,200) could afford a
home valued up to about $130,500.
Percent of Income Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent
Lest than 20% 4,125 12% 11,965 64% 16,090 30%
20% - 24% 8,852 26% 1,238 7% 10,090 19%
25% - 29% 6,376 19% 1,018 5% 7,394 14%
30% - 34% 4,437 13% 989 5% 5,426 10%
35% - 49% 5,551 16% 1,338 7% 6,889 13%
50% or more 4,988 15% 2,036 11% 7,024 13%
Total 34,329 100% 18,584 100% 52,913 100%
Cost Burden 10,539 31% 3,374 18% 13,913 26%
Severe Cost Burden 4,988 15% 2,036 11% 7,024 13%
Owners Renters Total
Page 52 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Table 5-21. Rough estimate of housing affordability, Springfield, 2000
Sources: 2000 Census, HUD Section 8 Income Limits, HUD Fair Market Rent. Based on Oregon Housing & Community
Services. Housing Strategies Workbook: Your Guide to Local Affordable Housing Initiatives, 1993.
Notes: FMR-Fair market rent
The conclusion based on the data presented in Table 5-21 is that in 2000
Springfield had a significant deficit of more than 2,200 affordable housing units
for households that earn less than $15,000 annually. Housing prices have
increased significantly in the past five years; the affordability gap for lower
income households has probably increased considerably. The next section
examines changes in housing cost since 2000.
Changes in housing cost
According to the Office of Federal Housing Enterprise Oversight, the average
sales price of a single-family home in the Eugene-Springfield MSA increased
229% between 2000 and 2006. A key concern expressed by the City was that the
housing needs analysis and runs of the HCS housing needs model reflect recent
trends in the regional housing market. To quantify these trends, ECO analyzed
data from two sources: (1) sales data from the Lane County Assessor; and (2)
rental data from Duncan & Brown, an Eugene-based real estate analysis firm that
conducts rent surveys for the Metropolitan Region.
The sales database provided to ECO by the City of Springfield included
34,680 property sales.19 For purposes of comparison, the database included
Creswell, Cottage Grove, Eugene, Junction City, Springfield, and Veneta.
Table 5-22 shows sales prices for single-family dwellings for Lane County
and Springfield between 1999 and 2006. Table 5-22 shows that Springfield
median sales prices have been lower than median sales prices in Lane County
over the entire time period. Median sales prices also increased at a slower rate in
Springfield; percent change in median sales prices between 1999 and 2006 for
Lane County was 73%; in Springfield it was 64%. Sales prices for single-family
dwellings peaked in 2007 and had declined to about $175,000 by the first quarter
of 2009.
19 The sales data was obtained through queries of the Regional Land Information Database (www.rlid.org).
Income Level
Number
of HH Percent
Affordable
Monthly Housing
Cost
Crude Estimate of
Affordable Purchase
Owner-Occupied Unit
Est.
Number of
Owner
Units
Est.
Number of
Renter
Units
Surplus
(Deficit) Notes
Less than $10,000 2,240 11.9% $0 to $250 $0 to $25,000 33 706 -1,501
$10,000 to $14,999 1,574 8.3% $250 to $375 $25,000 to $37,000 14 825 -735
$15,000 to $24,999 3,254 17.3% $375 to $625 $37,500 to $62,500 172 6,523 3,441
2007 HUD FMR studio: $478;
1 bdrm: $581; 2 bdrm: $654
$25,000 to $34,999 2,870 15.2% $625 to $875 $62,500 to $87,500 1,019 959 -893 HUD FMR 2 bdrm: $735
$35,000 to $49,999 3,625 19.2% $875 to $1,250 $87,500 to $125,000 4,791 152 1,318 HUD FMR 3 bdrm: $1028
$50,000 to $74,999 3,476 18.4% $1,250 to $1,875 $125,000 to $187,500 2,939 42 -495
Lane County MFI: $52,200 $1,305 $130,500
$75,000 to $99,999 1,066 5.7% $1,875 to $2,450 $187,500 to $245,000 495 9 -563
$100,000 to $149,999 573 3.0% $2,450 to $3,750 $245,000 to $375,000 133 0 -440
$150,000 or more 188 1.0% More than $3,750 More than $375,000 56 0 -132
Total 18,866 100.0% 9,651 9,215 0
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 53
Table 5-22. Sales price for single-family dwellings, Lane County and
Springfield, 1999-2006
Source: RLID, Analysis by ECONorthwest
Table 5-23 shows the average and median sales prices for single-family
dwellings in selected Lane County cities between 1999 and 2006. Table 5-23
shows that median sales prices increased throughout the county during this period.
In 2006, the highest median sales prices were in Eugene, the rest of the county,
and Creswell. Lowest median sales prices in 2006 were in Springfield and
Junction City. Prices increased the most in Creswell (87%) and Eugene (80%).
Prices increased the least in Springfield (64%) and Junction City (67%).
Table 5-23. Average and median sales price, single-family dwellings, Lane County
cities, 1999-2006
Source: RLID, Analysis by ECONorthwest
Year # of Sales
Average
Sales
Price
Median
Sales
Price # of Sales
Average
Sales
Price
Median
Sales
Price
1999 3,940 140,564 127,900 843 118,520 112,745
2000 3,171 144,142 129,900 687 119,152 112,750
2001 3,808 149,252 133,000 881 122,700 118,450
2002 4,291 156,603 138,165 886 129,432 121,900
2003 4,761 168,780 149,000 1,042 135,719 128,000
2004 5,092 183,497 162,500 1,112 149,082 137,900
2005 5,326 222,835 194,000 1,157 177,260 165,000
2006 4,291 249,438 221,000 973 201,000 185,000
Change 1999-2006
Number 351 108,874 93,100 130 82,480 72,255
Percent 9% 77% 73% 15% 70% 64%
Lane County Springfield
City 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Dollars Percent
Median Sales Price
Cottage Grove 112,000 103,500 109,750 110,000 120,000 128,000 157,000 195,000 83,000 74%
Creswell 112,500 118,000 109,000 121,750 125,000 142,500 180,750 210,500 98,000 87%
Eugene 136,900 140,000 143,500 149,900 163,000 179,900 215,000 247,000 110,100 80%
Junction City 113,250 112,500 115,150 119,638 120,750 138,000 162,000 189,000 75,750 67%
Springfield 112,745 112,750 118,450 121,900 128,000 137,900 165,000 185,000 72,255 64%
Veneta 115,250 110,000 112,000 119,950 126,500 139,500 173,635 200,000 84,750 74%
Rest of County 111,000 108,750 110,000 121,250 127,750 160,000 212,500 216,000 105,000 95%
Average Sales Price
Cottage Grove 118,112 106,767 113,150 116,152 122,298 134,854 168,828 193,157 75,045 64%
Creswell 115,662 121,697 114,497 130,475 129,891 162,095 200,008 223,307 107,645 93%
Eugene 152,872 159,920 165,366 173,351 188,484 202,750 246,272 275,674 122,802 80%
Junction City 120,218 116,282 120,164 131,761 130,170 149,294 169,287 191,574 71,356 59%
Springfield 118,520 119,152 122,700 129,432 135,719 149,082 177,260 201,000 82,480 70%
Veneta 121,039 111,754 111,961 118,976 134,297 148,313 178,916 213,220 92,181 76%
Rest of County 124,741 120,724 136,013 134,572 152,744 181,894 234,178 246,311 121,570 97%
Year Increase (1999-2006)
Page 54 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Table 5-24 shows the median contract rent for Lane County cities. The highest
median contract rents from the 2000 Census were in Eugene and Springfield. The
lowest median contract rents were in Oakridge and Creswell.
Table 5-24. Median contract rent,
Lane County cities, 1999
Source: US Census 2000
Vacancy rates have generally decreased in Eugene-Springfield rental market
since 2000. Vacancy rates for studio, 1- and 2-bedroom apartments all decreased
from between 4.1-4.7% to between 1.1-2.1% between fall 2000 and 2006.
Apartment rents have remained relatively stable, increasing between 4% and 10%
between 2000 and 2005.20
Table 5-25 shows average monthly cost of rental units in Springfield for the
2000 to 2005 period. Rental units were separated into two categories: (1) units
built prior to 1988 and (2) units built since 1988. The majority of Springfield's
units were built prior to 1988.
Rents increased based on the number of bedrooms. Rents ranged from $392
for a studio unit in 2000 to $646 for a three-bedroom unit in 2004. Rents for units
with a similar number of bedrooms were higher for newer units. For instance, the
average rental cost of a two-bedroom unit built prior to 1988 was $529 compared
to $620 for a two-bedroom unit built since 1988, a difference of $91 per month.
Over the six-year period, rents increased by between $19 and $56 per month.
Monthly rental costs of two-bedroom units had the largest increases, $34 per
month for older units and $56 per month for newer units. Rent for studio, one-
bedroom, and three-bedroom units increased all increased by about $20 per
month.
20 Duncan & Brown Apartment Report. Fall 2000-Fall 2006. Daniel J. Puffinburger, Corey S. Dingman, Duncan & Brown Real Estate
Analysts
Location Rent
Eugene 566$
Springfield 518$
Veneta 502$
Coburg 498$
Junction City 491$
Cottage Grove 456$
Creswell 417$
Oakridge 384$
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 55
Table 5-25. Average rental monthly costs by unit type, Springfield,
2000 to 2005
Source: Duncan & Brown Apartment Rent Report, 2000 to 2005; Calculations by ECONorthwest
Note: Blank values indicate that there were too few units in the survey to include in the summary.
Table 5-26 shows a comparison of change in rental costs during the 2000 to
2005 period for Springfield and Eugene. Rental costs were higher in Eugene than
in Springfield. The difference in rental costs for all units, regardless when they
were built, ranged from $39 per month for a studio unit to $211 per month for a
three-bedroom unit, increasing with the number of bedrooms.
The difference in average rental costs was greater for newer and larger units.
Newer one-bedroom units cost an average of $74 per month more to rent in
Eugene than Springfield. Newer two-bedroom units cost an average of $166 more
to rent in Eugene than Springfield.
Table 5-26. Comparison of average rental monthly costs by unit type,
Springfield and Eugene, 2000 to 2005
Source: Duncan & Brown Apartment Rent Report, 2000 to 2005; Calculations by ECONorthwest
Note: Blank values indicate that there were too few units in the survey to include in the summary.
Figure 5-4 shows a comparison of change in average rental costs and average
sales price in Springfield between 2000 and 2005. Over the five-year period
average sales price increased by 46%, compared to a 7% change in average rental
Year Studio
One
Bedroom
Two
Bedrooms
Three
Bedrooms Studio
One
Bedroom
Two
Bedrooms
Three
Bedrooms
2000 $392 $428 $514 $594 -- -- $588 --
2001 $394 $423 $523 $601 -- -- $583 --
2002 $389 $431 $526 $619 -- $575 $615 --
2003 $386 $438 $531 $600 $550 $550 $642 --
2004 $388 $437 $533 $633 -- $575 $646 --
2005 $414 $447 $548 $615 -- $575 $644 --
Amount $22 $19 $34 $21 -- -- $56 --
Percent 5.6% 4.4% 6.6% 3.5% -- -- 9.5% --
AAGR 1.10% 0.87% 1.29% 0.70% -- -- 1.84% --
Units Built Prior to 1988 Units Built Since 1988
Change 2000 to 2005
Studio
One
Bedroom
Two
Bedrooms
Three
Bedrooms
Springfield
Built prior to 1988 $394 $434 $529 $610
Built since 1988 -- $569 $620 --
All rentals $416 $488 $574 $610
Eugene
Built prior to 1988 $400 $483 $611 $719
Built since 1988 $623 $645 $786 $924
All rentals $456 $564 $699 $822
Difference (Eugene minus Springfield)
Built prior to 1988 $6 $49 $82 $109
Built since 1988 -- $76 $166 --
All rentals $40 $74 $124 $211
Page 56 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
costs. The greatest increases in average sales price occurred since 2003, while
average rental costs remained relatively flat since 2003.
Since 2005, average sales prices have continued increasing at a faster rate than
average rental costs. The increase in average sales price in Springfield between
2005 and 2006 was about 13%. According to the Fall 2006 Duncan & Brown
Apartment Report, changes in average rental costs in Springfield were
comparable to increases in recent years.21
Figure 5-4. Comparison of annual change in average rental costs and
average sales price, Springfield, 2000 to 2005
Source: Duncan & Brown Apartment Rent Report, 2000 to 2005; RLID; Calculations by
ECONorthwest
The analysis of housing starts, sales prices, and rents presented in this section
leads us to several conclusions:
• The housing market peaked in 2007 and sales prices declined in 2008 and
the first quarter of 2009. Springfield single-family housing starts have
declined since 2003. The overall number of permits for new single-family
residences issued regionwide has remained remarkably stable;
21 The Fall 2006 Duncan & Brown Apartment Report did not present average rent by unit type like they did in previous reports. As a result,
we were not able to include 2006 average rents in this analysis.
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
16.0%
18.0%
20.0%
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005Annual Percent ChangeYear
Average Rental Costs Average Sales Price
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 57
• New construction costs are higher than regional averages. Springfield’s
permit valuations and construction costs have generally been on or near
the middle or towards the high end compared with selected Lane County
cities;
• Price increases are lower than in other cities. Springfield’s median sales
prices for single-family dwellings have increased the smallest amount
compared with selected Lane County cities;
• Single-family development has dominated new construction. Multi-family
dwelling units do not make up a high percentage of units constructed in
Springfield and other selected Lane County cities;
• Sales prices increased much faster than rental rates. Over the five-year
period between 2000 and 2005 average sales price increased by 46%,
compared to a 7% change in average rental costs.
The implications of the data shown above are that ownership costs increased
much faster than rents and incomes, but declined as the housing bubble burst in
2008. Table 5-27 underscores this trend for the Eugene-Springfield MSA.22
Between 1990 and 2000, incomes increased about 46% while median owner value
increased 115%. Rents increased 44%--about the same as incomes. Since 2000,
the data show housing costs have increased faster than incomes. The owner values
include all units in the MSA; the sales data presented earlier in this section
suggest that owner costs have increased much faster than the Census data suggest.
Finally, the results show that the median owner value was 2.6 times median
household income—a figure that increased to 4.7 by 2005.
Table 5-27. Comparison of income, housing value, and gross rent,
Eugene-Springfield MSA, 1990, 2000, and 2005
Source: U.S. Census of Population and Housing, 1990 and 2000; American Community Survey,
2005
In summary, the data indicate that homeownership is increasingly expensive
in Springfield and that the cost of homeownership is prohibitive for low- and
22 2005 data from the American Community Survey is not available for Springfield.
Indicator 1990 2000 2005 1990-2000 2000-2005
Median HH Income $25,268 $36,942 $37,290 46% 1%
Median Family Income $30,763 $45,111 $49,555 47% 10%
Median Owner Value $65,600 $141,000 $173,600 115% 23%
Median Gross Rent $418 $604 $683 44% 13%
Percent of Units Owned 61% 62% 63%
Housing Value/Income
Median HH Income 2.6 3.8 4.7
Median Family Income 2.1 3.1 3.5
Change
Page 58 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
moderate-income households. The data indicate that homeownership rates in the
Metropolitan area and Springfield have increased, despite the rapid increase in
sales prices. This is probably due in large part to a much broader array of
financing options available to households than existed previously.
STEP 5: ESTIMATE THE NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL NEEDED UNITS BY STRUCTURE
TYPE AND TENURE23
Step five of the housing needs assessment results in an estimate of need for
housing by income and housing type. This requires some estimate of the income
distribution of future households in the community. ECO developed these
estimates based on (1) secondary data from the Census, and (2) analysis by
ECONorthwest.
The next step in the analysis is to relate income levels to tenure and structure
type. Table 4-3 showed tenure by structure type from the 2000 Census. Table 5-
28 shows an estimate of needed housing by structure type and tenure for the 2010-
2030 planning period. The housing needs analysis suggests that a higher
percentage of multifamily units will be needed, thus, the housing mix changes
from approximately 63% single-family/37% multifamily during the 1999-July
2008 period to 60% single-family/40% multifamily.24 The housing needs analysis
also suggests the City will see a higher rate of homeownership in the future. Thus,
the tenure split is increased from 54% owner-occupied/46% renter occupied to
57% owner-occupied/43% renter occupied.
Table 5-28. Estimate of needed dwelling units by type and tenure,
Springfield, 2010-2030
23 Note: Manufactured dwellings are a permitted use in all residential zones that allow 10 or fewer dwellings per net buildable acre. As a
result, Springfield is not required to estimate the need for manufactured dwellings on individual lots per OAR 660-024-0040 (7) (c).
24 Single-family attached dwellings typically achieve densities closer to multifamily housing types. If these higher density housing types are
included with multifamily, the housing mix is 53% lower density, and 47% higher density types.
Housing Type New DU Percent New DU Percent New DU Percent
Needed Units, 2010-2030
Single-family types
Single-family detached 2,756 81% 353 14% 3,109 52%
Manufactured in Parks 54 2% 6 0% 60 1%
Single-family attached 343 10% 75 3% 419 7%
Subtotal 3,153 92% 435 17% 3,587 60%
Multi-family
Multifamily 256 8% 2,136 83% 2,392 40%
Subtotal 256 8% 2,136 83% 2,392 40%
Total 3,409 100% 2,571 100% 5,980 100%
TotalRenter-OccupiedOwner-Occupied
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 59
The analysis (Table 5-28) indicated that Springfield needs 5,980 new dwelling
units for the 2010-2030 period. The next step in estimating units by structure type
is to evaluate income as it relates to housing affordability. Table 5-29 shows an
estimate of needed dwelling units by income level for the 2010-2030 period. The
analysis uses market segments consistent with HUD income level categories. The
analysis shows that about 49% of households in Springfield could be considered
high or upper-middle income in 2007 and that about 49% of the housing need in
the 2010-2030 period will derive from households in these categories.
Table 5-29. Estimate of needed dwelling units by income level,
Springfield, 2010-2030
Source: ECONorthwest
STEP 6: DETERMINE THE NEEDED DENSITY RANGE FOR EACH PLAN
DESIGNATION AND THE AVERAGE NEEDED NET DENSITY FOR ALL
DESIGNATIONS
This section summarizes the forecast of needed housing units in Springfield
for the period 2010-2030. Table 5-30 shows the forecast of needed housing units
in Springfield for the period 2010-2030. Springfield makes the following findings
in support of the density assumptions used in Table 5-30:
• Springfield had an average residential density of 6.6 dwelling units per net
acre or about 6,600 square feet of land per dwelling unit between 1999 and
2008 (Table 4-5). Average single-family detached density was 5.4 units
per net acre. Manufactured homes averaged 4.6 dwelling units per net
Market Segment
by Income
Income
range
Number of
Households
Percent of
Households
Owner-
occupied
Renter-
occupied
High (120% or
more of MFI)
$68,640 or
more
1,822 30% All housing
types; higher
prices
All housing
types; higher
prices
Upper Middle (80%-
120% of MFI)
$45,760 to
$68,640
1,141 19% All housing
types; lower
values
All housing
types; lower
values
Primarily
New Housing
Lower Middle (50%-
80% of MFI
$28,600 to
$45,760
1,296 22% Manufactured on
lots; single-
family attached;
duplexes
Single-family
attached;
detached;
manufactured on
lots; apartments
Primarily
Used
Housing
Low (30%-50% or
less of MFI)
$17,160 to
$28,600
756 13% Manufactured in
parks
Apartments;
manufactured in
parks; duplexes
Very Low (Less
than 30% of MFI)
Less than
$17,160
965 16% None Apartments; new
and used
government
assisted housing
Financially Attainable Products
Page 60 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
acre, while all multifamily housing types averaged 11.1 dwelling units per
net acre.
• National homeownership rates increased to nearly 70% in 2006 before
declining as the housing bubble burst. The homeownership rate in
Springfield in 2000 was considerably lower at 54%. It is the policy of the
City to provide homeownership opportunities to Springfield residents.
• National trends are towards larger units (both single-family and
multifamily) on smaller lots.
• More than 28% of dwelling units in Springfield in 2000 were multifamily
types.
• The “needed” density for single-family dwellings in the housing needs
analysis is 5.5 dwelling units per net acre. This assumption is a slight
increase over the historical density of 5.4 dwellings per net acre for single-
family detached units. Increasing the average density of single-family
detached dwellings should result in the provision of more affordable
single-family detached units as a result of decreased lot sizes.
• Topography, lot configurations, and other factors typically reduce land use
efficiency. The achieved density may be lower for single-family detached
dwellings in areas with slopes.
• The City assumes an average multifamily density of 18.0 dwellings per net
acre or a land area of about 2,420 square feet per dwelling unit. This
assumption is an increase of about 62% over historical density of 11.1
dwellings per net acre for all multifamily types.
• The City assumes an average density for all housing types of 7.9 dwelling
units per net acre. This is an increase of about 20% over the historical
density of 6.6 dwelling units per net acre.
In summary, the City assumes that average densities will increase
significantly (by about 20% over average historical densities) during the planning
period, that ownership rates will increase, and that an increasing percentage of
households will choose single-family attached housing types. These assumptions
are consistent with the housing needs analysis presented in this chapter. These
findings support the City’s overall density assumption of 7.9 dwelling unit per net
acre.
The forecast indicates that Springfield will need about 752 net residential
acres, or about 927 gross residential acres to accommodate new housing between
2010 and 2030. The forecast results in an average residential density of 7.9
dwelling units per net residential acre and of 6.3 dwelling units per gross
residential acre. This represents a 20% increase in density over the historical
average of 6.6 dwelling units per net acre.
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 61
Table 5-30. Forecast of new dwelling units and land needed by type,
Springfield 2010-2030
Source: ECONorthwest
Table 5-31 provides an allocation of housing units by Springfield’s three
residential plan designations. Dwelling units were allocated to plan designations
based, in part, on historic development trends within each plan designation and on
the type of development allowed in each plan destination. Table 5-31 also
provides an estimate of the gross acres required in each designation to
accommodate needed housing units for the 2010-2030 period. The acreages are
based on the gross density assumptions shown in Table 5-30. The residential land
needs presented in Table 5-31 may change based on policy decisions related to
land use efficiency measures, which may result in increased or decreased land
need.
Based on the housing needs analysis, dwellings have been allocated by plan
designation and type:
• The overall needed housing mix is 60% single-family (including
manufactured and single-family attached units) and 40% multifamily.
• The density assumptions increase by plan designations as shown in Table
5-30.
• Fifty-eight percent of needed dwelling units will locate in the Low Density
residential designation, which allows single-family detached and
manufactured homes. This designation also allows duplex, single-family
attached, and some multifamily dwellings in conjunction with
discretionary review.
• Thirty percent of needed dwellings will locate in the Medium Density
residential designation, which allows single-family detached, single-
family attached, manufactured home parks, townhomes, duplexes, and
multifamily dwellings.
• Twelve percent of needed dwelling units will locate in High Density or
Mixed-Use residential designations, which allow single-family detached,
Housing Type New DU Percent
Density
(DU/net
res ac)
Net Res.
Acres
Net to
Gross
Factor
Gross
Res.
Acres
Density
(DU/gross
res ac)
Needed Units, 2010-2030
Single-family types
Single-family detached 3,109 52% 5.5 565 20% 707 4.4
Manufactured in parks 60 1% 8.0 7 18% 9 6.6
Single-family attached 419 7% 9.0 47 15% 55 7.7
Subtotal 3,588 60% 5.8 619 770 4.7
Multi-family
Multifamily 2,392 40% 18.0 133 15% 156 15.3
Subtotal 2,392 40% 18.0 133 156 15.3
Total 5,980 100% 7.9 752 927 6.5
Page 62 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
townhomes, manufactured (single detached and manufactured home
parks), duplexes, and multifamily.
• Manufactured units in parks will locate in the Low-Density plan
designation.
Table 5-31. Allocation of needed housing units by plan designation,
Springfield 2010-2030
Source: ECONorthwest
In addition to the housing types shown in Table 5-31, Springfield needs to
plan for additional group quarters. The analysis assumes the City will add 145
persons in group quarters between 2010 and 2012.The City will need to add a
similar number of group quarter units during this period. Assuming that group
quarters achieve densities comparable to multifamily units, the City will need
approximately nine gross residential acres for these units (145 divided by 15.3
units per gross acre). The majority of these units will probably be residential care
facilities which are permitted as a discretionary use in the Low Density residential
designation and a special use in the Medium- and High-Density designations.
Housing Type DU Gross Ac DU Gross Ac DU Gross Ac DU Gross Ac
Single-family
Single-family detached 3,229 734 0 - 0 - 3,229 734
Manufactured in parks 60 9 0 - 0 - 60 9
Single-family attached 179 23 299 39 0 - 478 63
Subtotal 3,468 766 299 39 0 - 3,767 806
Multi-family
Multi-family 0 - 1,495 109 718 36 2,213 145
Subtotal 0- 1,495 109 718 36 2,213 145
Total 3,468 766 1,794 148 718 36 5,980 950
Percent of Acres and Units
Single-family
Single-family detached 54% 77% 0% 0% 0% 0% 54% 77%
Manufactured in parks 1% 1% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 1%
Single-family attached 3% 2% 5% 4% 0% 0% 8% 7%
Subtotal 58% 81% 5% 4% 0% 0% 63% 85%
Multi-family
Multi-family 0% 0% 25% 11% 12% 4% 37% 15%
Subtotal 0% 0% 25% 11% 12% 4% 37% 15%
Total 58% 81% 30% 16% 12% 4% 100% 100%
Plan Designation
TotalLow Density Medium Density
High Density/
Mixed-Use
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 63
Comparison of
Chapter 6 Supply and Demand
This chapter summarizes from data and analysis presented in Chapters 2
through 5 to compare “demonstrated need” for vacant buildable land with the
supply of such land currently within the Springfield UGB and city limits. Chapter
2 described the policy framework, Chapter 3 described land supply, Chapter 4
described historical development patterns, and Chapter 5 described residential
land needs.
The following section estimates land needed for other uses; the chapter
concludes with a comparison of land supply and land demand for the 2010-2030
time period.
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL LAND NEED, 2010-2030
This section estimates total residential land need for the period between 2010
and 2030. In additional to land needed for new residential units, it estimates land
needed for parks, public facilities, and other semi-public uses to arrive at an
estimate of total need for land designated for residential purposes.
LAND NEEDED FOR NEW RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS
Chapter 5 presented estimates of land needed for new residential dwellings
(see Tables 5-30 and 5-31). Table 6-1 summarizes land needed for new housing
by plan designation for the 2010-2030 period. Note that group quarters is a
separate category that can locate in any plan designation.
Table 6-1. Land needed for new housing by plan
designation, Springfield UGB, 2010-2030
Source: Table 5-31
LAND NEEDED FOR OTHER USES
Cities need to provide land for uses other than housing and employment.
Public and semi-public facilities such as schools, hospitals, governments, utilities,
churches, parks, and other non-profit organizations will expand as population
increases. Many communities have specific standards for parks. School districts
typically develop population projections to forecast attendance and need for
Plan Designation DU Gross Ac
Low-Density Residential 3,468 766
Medium-Density Residential 1,794 148
High-Density Residential/Mixed-Use 718 36
Group Quarters 145 9
Total 6,125 959
Page 64 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
additional facilities. All of these uses will potentially require additional land as a
city grows.
This section considers other uses that consume land and must be included in
land demand estimates. Demand for these lands largely occurs independent of
market forces. Many can be directly correlated to population growth. For the
purpose of estimating land needed for other uses, these lands are classified into
three categories:
• Lands needed for public operations and facilities. This includes lands for
city offices and maintenance facilities, schools, state facilities, substations,
and other related public facilities. Land needs are estimated using acres
per 1,000 persons for all lands of these types.
• Lands needed for parks and open space. The estimates use a parkland
standard of 14 acres per 1,000 persons based on the level of service
standard established in the Willamalane Park and Recreation
Comprehensive Plan, which projected need for parkland in Springfield
between 2002 and 2022.
• Lands needed for semi-public uses. This includes hospitals, churches, non-
profit organizations, and related semi-public uses. The analysis includes
land need assumptions using acres per 1,000 persons for all lands of these
types.
Table 6-2 shows land in public and semi-public uses by type. The data show a
total of 1,636 acres in public and semi public uses in the Springfield UGB in
2009. This equates to 24.8 acres per 1,000 persons.
Table 6-2. Summary of public and semi-public land need by type,
Springfield UGB, 2010-2030
Source: City of Springfield GIS data; analysis by ECONorthwest
Table 6-2 shows that there will be an additional need of about 463 acres of
land for all new public and semi-public uses or 21.1 acres per 1,000 people
between 2010 and 2030. The information in Table 6-1 is based on the following
assumptions:
Type of Use Acres
Acres /
1000
Persons
Assumed
Need
(Ac/1000
Persons)
Estimated
Acres 2010-
2030
Government 581 8.8 3.0 44
Utilities 134 2.0 2.0 30
Parks 563 8.5 14.0 357
Schools 277 4.2 0.9 14
Church/Charities/Other 81 1.2 1.2 18
Total 1,636 24.7 21.1 463
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 65
• Government land in 2007 includes a 271-acre site that is owned by the
Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the 115-acre Booth-Kelly
mixed-use site. Not including these sites, Springfield has 195 acres of
government land or 3.0 acres per 1,000 people. The assumed land need
for 2010 to 2030 is 3.0 acres per 1,000 people, assuming that the
City’s land need will not include more sites like the BLM or Booth-
Kelly site.
• Park land needs are based on the level-of-service established in
Willamalane’s parks plan of 14 acres per 1,000 persons, which will
require 207 new acres of parkland. In addition, park land includes need
for 150 acres of parkland for need identified in the Park and
Recreation Comprehensive Plan and to serve residents that moved to
Springfield between 2002 and 2008.25
• School land needs are based on the fact that the Springfield School
District will need to add one 14 acre site in the Jasper-Natron area over
the planning period. 26 The land need of 0.9 acres per 1,000 persons was
based on population growth and the District’s need for one 14 acre
site.
• Land needs for utilities, recreation, and churches/charities/other are
based on maintaining the same ratio of acre to population as currently
exists for these land uses.
BUILDABLE LAND INVENTORY AND CAPACITY
The capacity of residential land is measured in dwelling units and is
dependent on densities allowed in specific zones as well as redevelopment
potential. In short, land capacity is a function of buildable land and density.
The buildable lands inventory indicates that Springfield has about 935 acres of
vacant and partially-vacant residential land and an additional 21 acres in the
Glenwood mixed-use refinement plan area (these acres were included in the
commercial and industrial lands inventory and are included here only for the
purpose of estimating residential capacity).27 This yields a total of 956 buildable
acres.
25 According to Greg Hyde, the Planning and Development Manager with the Willamalane Park & Recreation District, Springfield has
acquired 37 acres of park land between 2002 and 2008. The Park and Recreation Comprehensive Plan identified a deficit of 130 acres to
serve population in 2002 (at the 14 acres per 1,000 person level of service). That deficit was reduced to 93 acres with the addition of the 37
acres of parkland. In addition, Springfield’s population grew by 4,095 people between 2002 and 2008, resulting in an additional need for 57
acres of parkland. Together, Springfield has a need for 150 acres of parkland to serve the City’s population in 2008 at the 14 acres per
1,000 person level of service.
26 According to Jeff DeFranco, the Springfield Public Schools Director of Communications and Facilities, the school district has one 14-
acre site that will be sold (the Rainbow (Chase) Property). The City owns a 65-acre site in East Springfield has no services. The District
owns a 15-acre site in the Clear Water area that is outside of the UGB, which will be developed when there is more residential development
in the area.
27 Capacity in the Glenwood mixed-use area was calculated as follows: 21 buildable acres (45% of the 47-acre site; the policy requires 30%
to 60% of the site be used for housing) multiplied by 15 dwelling units per gross acre equals 317 dwelling units, minus 47 dwelling units
that would be displaced from the River Bank Mobile Home Park equals 270 dwelling units.
Page 66 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Table 6-3 provides an estimate of how much housing could be accommodated
by those lands based on the needed densities identified in Table 5-30 after making
deductions for development constraints. It includes capacity for areas with
approved master plans that were not included in the acreage estimates. This
includes Marcola Meadows (518 dwellings in the MDR designation) and
RiverBend (730 dwellings in the MDR designation). Total residential capacity
includes capacity for redevelopment, which is assumed as 5% of needed new
dwellings, or 299 dwellings. The basis for this assumption is presented in Chapter
4. Table 6-3 shows that Springfield has capacity for 6,920 dwelling units within
the existing UGB.
Table 6-3. Estimated residential development capacity,
Springfield UGB, 2009
Source: City of Springfield residential BLI; analysis by ECONorthwest
Note: Estimated residential development capacity includes sites with
approved master plans (RiverBend – 730 DU and Marcola Meadows – 518 DU.
All of this capacity is in the Medium Density Residential plan designation).
COMPARISON AND CONCLUSIONS
Table 6-4 shows the capacity for residential development by plan designation.
It also shows an estimate of lands needed for other uses (e.g., parks, schools,
churches, etc.). ECO estimates Springfield will need 463 acres for other uses
during the 2010-2030 period.
The results lead to the following findings:
• Springfield has a need for additional residential land. The Springfield
UGB has enough land for 6,920 new dwelling units. The housing needs
forecast projects a need for 5,980 dwelling units and 145 group quarter
dwellings.
• The Low Density Residential designation has a deficit of approximately
293 gross acres.
• The Medium Density Residential designation has a deficit of
approximately 15 gross acres.
• The High Density Residential designation has a deficit of approximately
35 gross acres.
Plan Designation
Buildable
Acres
Residential
Capacity
(DU)
Percent
of
Capacity
Low Density Residential 824 3,714 54%
Medium Density Residential 95 2,312 33%
High Density Residential 16 325 5%
Mixed-Use (Glenwood) 21 270 4%
Redevelopment na 299 4%
Total 956 6,920 100%
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 67
• The total residential land deficit is 344 gross acres.
Table 6-4. Residential capacity for needed dwelling units by plan designation,
Springfield UGB, 2010-2030
Source: ECONorthwest
Column Notes:
1. Plan designations
2. Needed dwellings by plan designation (table 5-30)
3. Capacity by plan designation (table 6-2); Note: MDR capacity includes capacity in master planned areas
(Glenwood, Marcola Meadows, Riverbend); MDR and HDR includes capacity for redevelopment.
4. Capacity (column 3) minus Need (column 2); Note: a positive number denotes enough capacity within the
existing UGB
5. Needed Gross Density (from bottom of page 5)
6. Total additional land needed (if a deficit exists). Equals -column 4 divided by column 5
7, Surplus/deficit gross acres (negatives mean a UGB expansion). Equals Column 4 divided by Column 5
8. Other residential land need (land needed for parks, etc)
9. Total surplus/deficit. Equals column 7 minus column 8.
Note: Total Surplus/Deficit (column 9) adds to 344 acres due to rounding errors.
123456789
Plan Designation
Need
(DU)
Capacity
(DU)
Surplus/
Deficit
(DU)
Needed
Density
(DU/GRA)
Housing
Land
Need
(Gross
Acres)
Housing
Surplus/
Deficit
(Gross
Ac)
Other
Residential
Land Need
Total
Surplus/
Deficit
(Gross
Ac)
Low Density Residential 3,468 3,714 246 5 -54 54 347 -293
Medium Density Residential 1,794 2,731 937 12 0 77 93 -15
High Density Residential 718 475 -243 20 12 -12 23 -35
Total 5,980 6,920 939 0 -42 119 463 -344
Page 68 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Context for Assessing
Appendix A Housing Needs
WHAT IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING?
The terms “affordable” and “low-income” housing are often used
interchangeably. These terms, however, have different meanings:
• Affordable housing refers to households’ ability to find housing within
their financial means. Households that spend more than 30% of their
income on housing and certain utilities are considered to experience cost
burden.28 As such, any household that pays more than 30% experiences
cost burden and does not have affordable housing. Thus, affordable
housing applies to all households in the community.
• Low-income housing refers to housing for “low-income” households.
HUD considers a household low-income if it earns 80% or less of median
family income. In short, low-income housing is targeted at households that
earn 80% or less of median family income.
These definitions mean that any household can experience cost burden and
that affordable housing applies to all households in an area. Low-income housing
targets low-income households. In other words, a community can have a housing
affordability problem that does not include only low-income households.
It is important to underscore the point that many households that experience
cost burden have jobs and are otherwise productive members of society. A
household earning 80% of median family income in Springfield earns about
$39,000 annually—or about $18.50 per hour for a full-time employee. The
maximum affordable purchase price for a household earning $39,000 annually is
about $120,000. Depending on household size, many of these households are
eligible for government housing assistance programs.
In summary, any household can face housing affordability problems. Because
they have more limited financial means, the incidence of cost burden is higher
among low-income households. Statewide planning Goal 10 requires cities to
adopt policies that encourage housing at price ranges commensurate with
incomes. In short, state land use policy does not distinguish between households
of different income levels and requires cities to adopt policies that encourage
housing for all households.
28 Cost burden is a concept used by HUD. Utilities included with housing cost include electricity, gas, and water, but do not include
telephone expenses.
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 69
WHAT OBJECTIVES DO HOUSING POLICIES TYPICALLY TRY TO
ACHIEVE?
The Practice of State and Local Planning29 classifies goals that most
government housing programs address into four categories:
• Community life. From a community perspective, housing policy is
intended to provide and maintain safe, sanitary, and satisfactory housing
with efficiently and economically organized community facilities to
service it. In other words, housing should be coordinated with other
community and public services. Although local policies do not always
articulate this, they are implicit in most local government operations.
Comprehensive plans, zoning, subdivision ordinances, building codes, and
capital improvement programs are techniques most cities use to manage
housing and its development. Local public facilities such as schools, fire
and police stations, parks, and roads are usually designed and coordinated
to meet demands created by housing development.
• Social and equity concerns. The key objective of social goals is to reduce
or eliminate housing inadequacies affecting the poor, those unable to find
suitable housing, and those discriminated against. In other words,
communities have an obligation to provide safe, satisfactory housing
opportunities to all households, at costs they can afford, without regard to
income, race, religion, national origin, family structure, or disability.
• Design and environmental quality. The location and design of housing
affect the natural environment, residents’ quality of life, and the nature of
community life. The objectives of policies that address design and
environmental quality include neighborhood and housing designs that
meet: household needs, maintain quality of life, provide efficient use of
land and resources, reduce environmental impacts, and allow for the
establishment of social and civic life and institutions. Most communities
address these issues through local building codes, comprehensive land use
plans, and development codes.
• Stability of production. Housing is a factor in every community’s
economy. The cyclical nature of housing markets, however, creates
uncertainties for investment, labor, and builders. The International City
Manager’s Association suggests that local government policies should
address this issue—most do not. Moreover, external factors (e.g. interest
rates, cost of building materials, etc.) that bear upon local housing markets
tend to undermine the effectiveness of such policies.
Despite the various federal and state policies regulating housing, most housing
in the U.S. is produced by private industry and is privately owned. While the land
29 The Practice of Local Government Planning, 2nd Edition, International City Managers Association, 1988.
Page 70 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
use powers of local government have been an important factor in the production
of housing, the role of local government has largely focused on regulation for
public health and safety and provision of infrastructure. More recently, awareness
has grown regarding the impact policies and regulations have had on the other
aspects of community life such as costs of transportation and other infrastructure,
access of residents to services and employment, and social interactions.
DEMAND VERSUS NEED
The language of Goal 10 and ORS 197.296 refers to housing need: it requires
communities to provide needed housing types for households at all income levels.
Goal 10's broad definition of need covers all households—from those with no
home to those with second homes. State policy, however, does not make a clear
distinction between need and demand. Following is our definition, which we
believe to be consistent with definitions in state policy:
• Housing need can be defined broadly or narrowly. The broad definition is
based on the mandate of Goal 10 that requires communities’ plan for
housing that meets the needs of households at all income levels. Thus,
Goal 10 implies that everyone has a housing need because everyone needs
housing. However, definition used by public agencies that provide housing
assistance (primarily the Department of Housing and Urban Development
– HUD, and the Oregon Housing and Community Services Department -
HCS) is more narrow. It does not include most of the households that can
purchase or rent housing consistent with the requirements of their
household size for a price that is affordable. Households that cannot find
and afford such housing have need: they are either unhoused, in housing
of substandard condition, overcrowded, or paying more than their income
and federal standards say they can afford.
• Housing market demand is what households demonstrate they are willing
to purchase in the market place. Growth in population leads to a growth in
households and implies an increase in demand for housing units that is
usually met primarily by the construction of new housing units by the
private sector based on developers' best judgments about the types of
housing that will be absorbed by the market. ORS 197.296 includes a
market demand component: buildable land needs analyses must consider
the density and mix of housing developed over the previous five years or
since their most recent periodic review, whichever is greater.
In short, a housing needs analysis should make a distinction between housing
that people might need (housing needs) and what the market will produce
(housing market demand).
Figure A-1 shows a schematic that distinguishes between housing needs that
are unmet and those that are met via market transactions. All housing need is the
total number of housing units required to shelter the population. In that sense, it is
approximately the number of households: every household needs a dwelling
place. But some of that need is met through market transactions without much
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 71
government intervention because households have the income to demand
(purchase) housing services (as owners or renters). That demand is shown in the
box on the right. Other households, however, have needs unmet, usually because
they lack the resources to purchase housing services (financial need), but because
of special needs as well (though, even here, the issue is still one of financial
resources).
Figure A-1. Relationship between housing need and housing demand
Most housing market analyses and housing elements of comprehensive plans
in Oregon make forecasts of new demand (what housing units will get built in
response to market forces). Work by housing authorities is more likely address
housing need for special classes, especially low-income. It is the role of cities
under Goal 10 to adopt and implement land use policies that will encourage
provision of housing units that meet the needs of all residents.
It is unlikely that housing markets in any metropolitan area in the US provide
housing to meet the needs of every household. Even many upper-income
households probably believe they "need" (want) more housing than their wealth
and income allows them to afford. Goal 10 does not require communities address
the housing “want” of residents.
More important, however, are more basic housing needs. At the extreme there
is homelessness: some people do not have any shelter at all. Close behind follows
substandard housing (with health and safety problems), space problems (the
structure is adequate but overcrowded), and economic and social problems (the
structure is adequate in quality and size, but a household has to devote so much of
its income to housing payments that other aspects of its quality of life suffer).
Location can also be a burden—households that live further from work and
shopping opportunities will have to spend more money on transportation.
Moreover, while some new housing is government-assisted housing, public
agencies do not have the financial resources to meet but a small fraction of that
need. New housing does not, and is not likely to, fully address all these needs
because housing developers, like any other business, typically try to maximize
their profits.
All HousingAll Housing
Demand for New Housing
(housing market)
Demand for New Housing
(housing market)Housing NeedHousing Need
Financial NeedFinancial Need Special NeedSpecial Need
Page 72 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
In fact, many of those needs are much more likely to be satisfied by existing
housing: the older, used stock of structures that is usually less expensive per
square foot than new housing. Thus, forecasting the type of new units that might
be built in a region (by type, size, and price) is unlikely to bear any relationship to
the type of housing to which most people with acute housing needs will turn to
solve their housing problems. One key reason for this is the dynamics associated
with housing construction. The cost of building new housing is largely prohibitive
for building dwelling units affordable to low-income households. This “trickle-
down” effect is well known among housing specialists. In most communities a
quick comparison of new home prices with income distributions will underscore
the fact that developers tend to focus on the move-up market and not on entry-
level housing.
Viewed in the light of those definitions (e.g., housing demand and housing
need), the requirements of Goal 10 need clarification. Goal 10 mandates that
communities plan for housing that meets the needs of households at all income
levels. Thus, Goal 10 implies that everyone has a housing need. As we have
noted, however, it is hard to justify spending public resources on the needs of
high-income households: they have the income to purchase (demand) adequate
housing services in the housing market. The housing they can afford may not be
everything they want, but most policymakers would agree that the difference does
not classify as the same kind of need that burdens very-low-income households.
This study is not the place to resolve debates about definitions of housing
need and the purposes of Goal 10. Here are our assumptions about the distinction
between demand and need in the rest of this study:
• Our analysis of need addresses the Goal 10 requirements regarding
financial need (ability to obtain housing) as they relate to future
households and to those households whose circumstances suggest that
they will have special problems in finding adequate and affordable
housing services. That analysis occurs after, and largely independent of,
the forecast of new housing that is likely to be built to supply effective
demand.
• Our forecast includes a comparison of demand for new housing: what kind
of housing of what type is likely to get built in the region over the next 20
years. The baseline forecast is the housing “demand” forecast, the
alternative forecast is the housing “need” forecast.
In summary, Goal 10 intends that cities identify housing need and develop a
land use policy framework that meets identified needs. One of the key issues that
gets addressed in a housing needs analysis is to determine how much land is
needed for different housing types, and therefore must be designated for different
housing types. Providing sufficient land in the proper designations is one of the
most fundamental land use tools local governments have to meet housing need.
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 73
Page 74 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Appendix B National Housing Trends
The overview of national, state, and local housing trends builds from previous
work by ECO and conclusions from The State of the Nation’s Housing, 2008
report from the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University. The
Harvard report summarizes the national housing outlook for the next decade as
follows:
“Housing markets contracted for a second straight year in 2007. The
national median single-family home price fell in nominal terms for the
first time in 40 years of recordkeeping, leaving several million
homeowners with properties worth less than their mortgages. With the
economy softening and many home loans resetting to higher rates, an
increasing number of owners had difficulty keeping current on their
payments. Mortgage performance—especially on subprime loans with
adjustable rates—eroded badly. Lenders responded by tightening
underwriting standards and demanding a higher risk premium,
accelerating the ongoing slide in sales and starts.
“It is still uncertain how far, and for how long, the housing crisis will
drive down household growth. Regardless, given the solid underpinnings
of long-term demand—including the recent strength of immigration and
the aging of the echo-boom generation into young adulthood—household
growth will pick up again once the economy recovers. But if the nation
suffers a prolonged economic downturn that results in lower immigration
and more doubling up, household growth in 2010-2020 may fall short of
the 14.4 million level currently projected.
This evaluation presents a bleak outlook for housing markets and for
homeownership in the short-term brought on by the subprime mortgage crisis.
However, the image painted of the future looks brighter, as the increase in
housing demand is naturally induced by the growth of the population in the
necessary age groups.
Long run trends in home ownership and demand
Last year (2007) was a continuation of the significant departure from the
recent housing boom that had lasted for 13 consecutive years (1992-2005). While
strength in early 2005 pushed most national housing indicators into record
territory, the market began to soften and sales slowed in many areas in the latter
half of 2005. By 2006, higher prices and rising interest rates had a negative
impact on market demand. Investor demand, home sales and single-family starts
dropped sharply. Growth in national sales prices also slowed. By 2007 and early
2008, housing market problems had reached the rest of the economy, resulting in
a nationwide economic slowdown and fear of recession. After 12 successive years
of increases, the national homeownership rate slipped in 2005, again in 2006 to
68.8%, and again in 2007 to 68.1%.
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 75
The Joint Center for Housing Studies concludes that the cooling housing
market in 2006 had an immediate impact on homeownership. Increasing interest
rates and decreasing housing affordability contributed to the recent market
correction. Homebuilders could not react quickly enough to changing market
conditions, resulting in an oversupply of housing and a rising inventory of unsold
homes. The Joint Center for Housing Studies predicts that once the corrections
made to work off the housing oversupply and prices start to recover, a return to
traditional mortgage products and the strength of natural demand will invigorate
the homeownership rate. The long-term market outlook shows that
homeownership is still the preferred tenure. Over the next decade, 88% of net
household growth is expected to come from gains in the number of homeowners.
While further homeownership gains are likely during this decade, they are not
assured. Additional increases depend, in part, on finding ways to ease the
difficulties faced by low and moderate income households in purchasing a home.
It also rests on whether the conditions that have led to homeownership growth can
be sustained.
From 2000 to 2005 housing starts and manufactured home placements
appeared to have been roughly in line with household demand. In 2005, with
demand for homes falling but construction coming off record levels, the surplus
of both new and existing homes was much higher than in recent years. In late
2007 and early 2008, the excess supply of new single-family homes retreated by
about 12%, though the simultaneous drop in sales left the supply at 11 months, a
figure not seen since the 1970s. This resulted in a strong buyer’s market, leaving
many homes lingering on the market and forcing many sellers to accept prices
lower than what they were expecting. The Joint Center for Housing Studies
predicts the oversupply will eventually balance as housing starts continue to fall,
lower prices motivate unforeseen buyers, and the rest of the economy begins to
recover.
The Joint Center for Housing Studies indicates that demand for new homes
could total as many as 14.4 million units nationally between 2010 and 2020.
Nationally, the vast majority of these homes will be built in lower-density areas
where cheaper land is in greater supply. People and jobs have been moving away
from central business districts (CBDs) for more than a century: the number of the
country’s largest metropolitan areas with more than half of their households living
at least 10 miles from the CBD has more than tripled from 13 in 1970 to 46 in
2000; in six metropolitan areas more than a fifth of households live at least 30
miles out. While people older than 45 years are generally continuing to move
away from CBDs, younger people have begun to move nearer to CBDs.
The Joint Center for Housing Studies also indicates that demand for higher
density housing types exists among certain demographics. They conclude that
because of persistent income disparities, as well as the movement of the echo
boomers into young adulthood, housing demand may shift away from single-
family detached homes toward more affordable multifamily apartments, town
homes, and manufactured homes. Supply-side considerations, however, outweigh
these demographic forces.
Page 76 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Recent trends in home ownership and demand
Conditions that had previously bolstered the housing market and promoted
homeownership weakened in 2005 and eroded further in 2006 and 2007.
Increasing interest rates and weakening housing prices combined to slow the
housing market. In 2007, new home sales were down 40% from the record 2005
level, and existing home sales were down 20%. Regionally, using housing permits
issued as a proxy for new home ownership, Lane County’s issued housing permits
fell between 25% and 50% between 2005 and 2007.
Figure B-1. Change in housing permits issued by county, U.S., 2005-2007
Source: Census Bureau, Construction Statistics, Building Permits by County. As cited in The State of The Nation’s
Housing, 2008, The Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University, p. 8
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 77
Figure B-2. Change in housing permits issued by county, Oregon,
2005-2007
Source: Census Bureau, Construction Statistics, Building Permits by County. As cited in The State
of The Nation’s Housing, 2008, The Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University, p. 8
Demographic trends in home ownership
According to the Joint Center for Housing Studies, immigration will play a
key role in accelerating household growth over the next 10 years. Between 2000
and 2006, immigrants contributed to over 60% of household growth. Minorities
will account for 68% of the 14.6 million projected growth in households for the
2005 to 2015 period. Immigrants now comprise a growing share of young adults
and children in the United States. Twenty percent of Americans ages 25-34 are
foreign born, and an additional 9% are second generation Americans. Members of
this generation will probably earn more than their parents becoming an even
greater source of housing demand in the coming decades.
The Joint Center for Housing Studies suggests that an aging population, and
of baby boomers in particular, will drive changes in the age distribution of
households in all age groups over 55 years. A recent survey of baby boomers
showed that more than a quarter plan to relocate into larger homes and 5% plan to
move to smaller homes. Second home demand among upper-income homebuyers
of all ages also continues to grow. Households aged 50 to 69 are expected to
account for the purchase of nearly half a million second homes between 2005 and
2015.
Page 78 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
People prefer to remain in their community as they age.30 The challenges that
seniors face as they age in continuing to live in their community include: changes
in healthcare needs, loss of mobility, the difficulty of home maintenance, financial
concerns, and increases in property taxes.31 Not all of these issues can be
addressed through housing or land-use policies. Communities can address some
of these issues through adopting policies that:
• Diversify housing stock to allow development of smaller,
comparatively easily maintained houses in single-family zones, such
as single story townhouses, condominiums, and apartments.
• Allow commercial uses in residential zones, such as neighborhood
markets.
• Allow a mixture of housing densities and structure types in single-
family zones, such as single-family detached, single-family attached,
condominiums, and apartments.
• Promote the development of group housing for seniors that are unable
or choose not to continue living in a private house. These facilities
could include retirement communities for active seniors, assisted
living facilities, or nursing homes.
• Design public facilities so that they can be used by seniors with limited
mobility. For example, design and maintain sidewalks so that they can
be used by people in wheel chairs or using walkers.
Home rental trends
Nationally, the rental market continues to experience growth, adding 2 million
rental households from 2004 to 2007. Demand strengthened in every region
except the Northeast. Vacancy rates in the West continue to decline, leading to
strong increases in rental rates. Over the longer term, the Joint Center for Housing
studies expects rental housing demand to grow by 1.8 million households over the
next decade. Minorities will be responsible for nearly all of this increased
demand. The minority share of renter households grew from 37% in 1995 to 43%
in 2005. The minority share is forecast to exceed 50% of renter households in
2015. Demographics will also play a role. Growth in young adult households will
increase demand for moderately priced rentals, in part because echo boomers will
reach their mid-20s after 2010. Meanwhile growth among those between the ages
of 45 and 64 will lift demand for higher-end rentals. Given current trends in home
prices and interest rates, conditions will become increasingly favorable for rental
markets in the coming years.
30 A survey conducted by the AARP indicates that 90% of people 50 years and older want to stay in their current home and community as
they age. See http://www.aarp.org/research.
31 “Aging in Place: A toolkit for Local Governments” by M. Scott Ball.
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 79
Despite only modest increases in rents in recent years, growing shares of low-
and moderate-wage workers, as well as seniors with fixed incomes, can no longer
afford to rent even a modest two-bedroom apartment anywhere in the country. In
2006, one in three American households spent more than 30% of income on
housing, and more than one in seven spent upwards of 50%. The national trend
towards increased rent to income ratios is mirrored regionally in that a salary of
two to three times the 2007 Federal minimum wage of $5.85 is needed to afford
rents in Lane County (see Figure B-3).
According to the Joint Center for Housing Studies, these statistics understate
the true magnitude of the affordability problem because they do not capture the
tradeoffs people make to hold down their housing costs. For example, these
figures exclude the 2.5 million households that live in crowded or structurally
inadequate housing units. They also exclude the growing number of households
that move to locations distant from work where they can afford to pay for
housing, but must spend more for transportation to work. Among households in
the lowest expenditure quartile, those living in affordable housing spend an
average of $100 more on transportation per month than those who are severely
housing cost-burdened. With total average monthly outlays of only $1,000, these
extra travel costs amount to 10 percent of the entire household budget.
Figure B-3. Hourly wages needed to afford rent by county, U.S., 2008
Source: HUD's Fair Market Rents for 2008, based on methodology developed by the National Low Income Housing
Coalition. As cited in The State of The Nation’s Housing, 2008, The Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard
University, p. 30
Note: Every county in Oregon had a housing wage between $11.70 and $17.54 in 2008.
Page 80 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Trends in housing affordability
Despite widespread falling house prices, affordability problems have not
improved significantly. A median-priced single-family home under conventional
terms in 2007 (10% downpayment and 30-year fixed rate loan) only costs $76 per
month and $1,000 downpayment less than a house bought in 2006, the year in
which the sales prices of single-family homes were at their highest real price in
history. Only 17 of the 138 National Association of Realtors-covered
metropolitan areas have lower costs in 2007 than they did in 2003 when interest
rates were bottomed out.
With low-wage jobs increasing and wages for those jobs stagnating,
affordability problems will persist even as strong fundamentals lift the trajectory
of residential investment. The number of severely cost-burdened households
(spending more than 50% of income on housing) increased by almost 4 million
households from 2001 to 2006, to a total of nearly 18 million households in 2005.
Nearly 40% of low-income households with one or more full-time workers are
severely cost burdened, and nearly 60% of low-income households with one part-
time worker are severely cost burdened. The Joint Center for Housing Studies
points to widening income disparities and decreasing federal assistance as two
factors exacerbating the lack of affordable housing. While the Harvard report
presents a relatively optimistic long-run outlook for housing markets and for
homeownership, it points to the significant difficulties low- and moderate-income
households face in finding affordable housing, and preserving the affordable units
that do exist.
Trends in Housing Characteristics
The U.S Bureau of Census Characteristics of New Housing Report presents
data that show trends in the characteristics of new housing for the nation, state,
and local areas. Several trends in the characteristics of housing are evident from
the New Housing Report:
• Larger single-family units on smaller lots. Between 1997 and 2007 the
median size of new single-family dwellings increased 15%, from
1,975 sq. ft. to 2,277 sq. ft. nationally and 18% in the western region
from 1,930 sq. ft. to 2,286 sq. ft. Moreover, the percentage of units
under 1,200 sq. ft. nationally decreased from 8% in 1997 to 4% in
2007. The percentage of units greater than 3,000 sq. ft. increased from
15% in 1997 to 26% of new one-family homes completed in 2007. In
addition to larger homes, a move towards smaller lot sizes is seen
nationally. Between 1994 and 2007 the percentage of lots under 7,000
sq. ft. increased by 13% from 29% of lots to 33% of lots. A
corresponding 4% decrease in lots over 11,000 sq. ft. is seen.
• Larger multifamily units. Between 1999 and 2007, the median size of
new multiple family dwelling units increased by 15%. The percentage
of multifamily units with more than 1,200 sq. ft. increased from 26%
to 47% in the western region and from 28% to 50% nationally. The
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 81
percentage of units with less than 600 sq. ft. stayed at 1% both
regionally and nationally.
• More household amenities. Between 1994 and 2007 the percentage of
single-family units built with amenities such as central air
conditioning, fireplaces, 2 or more car garages, or 2 or more baths all
increased. The same trend in increased amenities is seen in multiple
family units.
A clear linkage exists between demographic characteristics and housing
choice. This is more typically referred to as the linkage between life-cycle and
housing choice and is documented in detail in several publications. Analysis of
data from the Public Use Microsample (PUMS) in the 2000 Census to describe
the relationship between selected demographic characteristics and housing choice.
Key relationships identified through this data include:
• Homeownership rates increase as income increases;
• Homeownership rates increase as age increases;
• Choice of single-family detached housing types increases as income
increases;
• Renters are much more likely to choose multiple family housing types
than single-family; and
• Income is a stronger determinate of tenure and housing type choice for
all age categories.
Attachment 2-1
ISSUE: STATE MANDATE TO DETERMINE HOUSING NEEDS
In response to House Bill 3337— an action of the 2007 Oregon Legislature1—the City has
completed a Residential Lands Study (RLS) to evaluate the sufficiency of buildable land
available for residential uses. To make this determination, the draft Springfield Residential Land
and Housing Needs Analysis presents a housing needs analysis consistent with requirements of
HB 3337, Goal 14, ORS 197.296, and OAR 660-008. The study presents 1) a forecast of
Springfield’s residential growth based on the adopted Lane County coordinated population
projection; 2) an inventory of buildable residential land; and 3) a determination of the number
and type (e.g. single family and multi-family) of housing units that will need to be constructed to
house the projected population residing within Springfield's jurisdictional share of the area
subject to the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area, (e.g. the area east of Interstate 5) for the
plan period 2010-2030. The findings and conclusions of the study indicate that 5,980 housing
units and 145 group quarter dwellings will be needed to provide a 20-year supply of housing to
meet Springfield’s needs and that the housing mix (single family vs. multi-family dwellings) will
need to change to meet shifting population demographics.
DISCUSSION: RESIDENTIAL LAND CAPACITY AVAILABLE FOR GROWTH
The study also provides technical analysis to determine the amount of land that would be
required to provide for the needed dwelling units, based on the inventory of land available under
existing Metro Plan residential and mixed-use designations and Plan policies (e.g. densities),
adopted mixed-use nodal development master plans and specific plans (RiverBend, Glenwood
Riverfront Plan and Marcola Meadows), and utilizing existing Land Use Efficiency Measures
already embedded in Springfield Development Code Residential Zoning District ordinances.
The conclusions of the study indicate that the available capacity in the residential buildable
lands inventory will not provide a 20-year supply of land to meet Springfield’s housing needs,
density and mix under current plan designations and policies. Springfield will have a total deficit
of 344 acres of land in the plan period. The Springfield UGB has enough land for 6,920 new
dwelling units including redevelopment capacity without taking into account the need for 463
acres of this land for other uses.
Table S-4 shows the capacity for residential development by plan designation both before and
after subtracting acreage needed for other uses, such as parks, schools, churches, etc.). ECO
estimates Springfield will need 463 acres for other uses during the 2010-2030 period.
1 The 2007 Oregon legislature amended ORS 197 Comprehensive Land Use Planning Coordination by adding ORS
197.304(1) (a&b), (2) and (3) which state in part: “a city within Lane County that has a population of 50,000 or
more shall meet its obligation under ORS 197.295 to 197.314 separately from any other city within Lane County.
The city shall...establish an urban growth boundary, consistent with the jurisdictional area of responsibility
specified in the acknowledged comprehensive plan; and demonstrate... that its comprehensive plan provides
sufficient buildable lands within an urban growth boundary...to accommodate estimated housing needs for 20
years.”
M E M O R A N D U M City of Springfield
To: Springfield Planning Commission
From: Linda Pauly, Community Planning Supervisor
Date: October 20, 2009
Subject: Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis
Attachment 2-2
Table S-4. Residential capacity for needed dwelling units by plan designation, Springfield
UGB, 2010-2030
123456789
Plan Designation
Need
(DU)
Capacity
(DU)
Surplus/
Deficit
(DU)
Needed
Density
(DU/GRA)
Housing
Land
Need
(Gross
Acres)
Housing
Surplus/
Deficit
(Gross
Ac)
Other
Residential
Land Need
Total
Surplus/
Deficit
(Gross
Ac)
Low Density Residential 3,468 3,714 246 5 -54 54 347 -293
Medium Density Residential 1,794 2,731 937 12 0 77 93 -15
High Density Residential 718 475 -243 20 12 -12 23 -35
Total 5,980 6,920 939 0 -42 119 463 -344 Source: ECONorthwest
Adoption of the findings and conclusions of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs
Analysis by the City Council will fulfill the City’s obligation under HB3337’s mandate to make a
determination of housing need by December 31, 2009. The City is adopting the Springfield
Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis to achieve compliance with the statutory
obligations of the law. Adoption of the findings of the baseline RLS study is the City’s first step
towards planning for residential growth and needed housing for the plan period 2010-2030.
Adoption of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis establishes the
factual basis for subsequent amendments to the Metro Plan involving the creation of separate
UGBs and separate land inventories for Springfield and Eugene.
NEXT STEPS: SPRINGFIELD 2030 REFINEMENT PLAN AND LAND USE
EFFICIENCY MEASURES
The findings of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis combined with the
findings and policy recommendations of the Springfield Commercial and Industrial Buildable
Lands Study (CIBL) will provide the basis for significant updates to Springfield’s land use plans
in 2010. The next steps are to develop and adopt plan policies and designations for Springfield
that will guide changes in land use over the plan period 2010-2030.
Staff are currently preparing a draft policy document– the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan.
This plan is a refinement plan of the Metro Plan for the metro urban area east of I-5 that will
establish a separate Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) for Springfield as required by ORS
197.304. The Springfield UGB is required to provide a 20-year supply of land to meet the City’s
projected needs, consistent with all applicable planning goals, statutes and administrative rules.
The Springfield and Lane County Planning Commissions will conduct public hearings on the
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan beginning in early 2010, to be followed by hearings before
the Springfield City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners. The final decision to
adopt the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Metro Plan amendment will incorporate for
adoption the Springfield Residential Lands and Housing Needs Analysis, and will be an action
that requires co-adoption by both the City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners,
Deficiencies identified in the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis will be
addressed through subsequent adoption the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan.
This city-wide comprehensive planning document will include 1) a Springfield Residential Land
and Housing Element consisting of goals, policies, and implementation actions consistent with
state needed housing statutes and Statewide Planning Goals 10 Housing and Goal 14
Urbanization; and 2) a Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan diagram that will designate sufficient
Attachment 2-3
residential land to provide Springfield’s needed housing density and mix. The Springfield
Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis will eventually be incorporated into the
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan as an appendix to the plan’s Housing Element. The
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan will also include Urban Design, Economic, Urbanization, and
Environmental Elements.
A key land use challenge for the City of Springfield is how it will accommodate its projected
share of regional economic and population growth while also preserving and enhancing the
city’s quality of life and uniqueness. The City Council directed staff to work with the Planning
Commission to develop new plan policies and zoning ordinances to implement additional Land
Use Efficiency Measures in Springfield. Adoption of these measures — such as increasing
density along transit corridors and allowing small lot development — will provide a planning
framework to facilitate compact urban development consistent with state mandates while
supporting multiple community planning objectives and City Council Goals.
Planning staff and the City’s consultant ECONorthwest have gathered input across a broad
spectrum to identify and evaluate potential efficiency measures (Attachment 4). Options have
been presented to the community via online surveys, planning workshops and open houses;
and work sessions with stakeholder and focus groups, the Planning Commission and the City
Council. Staff will continue to seek public input on the proposed measures as we move forward
with public hearings to adopt the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis.
Some measures will result in new plan designations and/or density ranges adopted into the
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. Others will be implemented through amendments to the
Springfield Development Code.
It is the City’s intent to have the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan’s goals, objectives, policies
and recommendations outline a growth strategy with five broad components:
• Promote compact, orderly and efficient urban development by guiding future growth to
planned redevelopment areas within the established portions of the city, and to planned
new neighborhoods where future expansion may occur.
• Encourage a pattern of mixed land uses and development densities that will locate a
variety of different life activities, such as employment, housing, shopping and recreation,
in convenient proximity, to encourage and support multiple modes of transportation,
including walking, bicycling, and transit, in addition to motor vehicles both within and
between neighborhoods and districts.
• Balance the goals of accommodating growth and increasing average density within the
city with the goals to stabilize and preserve the established character of sound older
neighborhoods by clearly defining locations where redevelopment is encouraged, and by
requiring that redevelopment be guided by a detailed neighborhood refinement or
special district plan.
• Use selective, planned redevelopment at appropriate locations as one method of
providing additional land use diversity and choices within districts and neighborhoods
currently characterized by a limited range of land uses and activities.
Attachment 2-4
• In both redevelopment areas and new growth areas on the periphery, establish planning
and design standards that will promote economically viable development of attractive,
affordable and engaging districts and neighborhoods.
The Housing Element of the plan will include Springfield-specific policies to guide future
residential and residential mixed-use development and redevelopment in a manner that will
provide for the projected housing needs of our community. In some cases, the plan diagram will
propose redesignations and/or new designations for specific parcels in response to deficiencies
identified in the findings and conclusions of the Residential and Commercial and Industrial
Buildable Lands studies and to resolve existing plan-zone conflicts and/or inconsistencies.
Staff will be bringing draft Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan work products to the Planning
Commission in a series of work sessions beginning in December 2009. As directed by the City
Council, Springfield intends to implement additional Land Use Efficiency Measures identified
through the RLS planning process which may further reduce the projected residential acreage
deficit while addressing housing affordability and choice. If sufficient land cannot be provided
to meet demand after additional efficiency measures are applied, the City will need to expand its
Urban Growth Boundary to increase the inventory of buildable residential land, consistent with
Statewide Planning Goal 14 and Goal 10. The housing capacity analysis and Goal 14 UGB
Alternatives Analysis are iterative processes, so the exact amount of land needed for projected
residential growth is subject to adjustment throughout the public policy review process.
The Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis was prepared by the City’s
consultant ECONorthwest. Assumptions utilized in the inventory and analysis were prepared in
collaboration with the Residential Lands Stakeholder Committee, Planning Commission and City
Council. Earlier drafts and updates of the study were presented to the Planning Commission on
November 16th, 2007, March 18th, 2008, April 16, 2009 & June 2, 2009. Earlier drafts and
updates of the study were presented to the City Council on October 22, 2007
While the City cannot force the market to build housing units, the City is mandated by the state
to designate land for the needed housing types in its comprehensive plan. The City can also
provide development incentives – regulatory and monetary – to encourage the market to build
needed housing types.
CONCLUSION:
Adoption of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis is necessary to allow
Springfield to comply with part of its obligations under ORS 197.304 by the statutory deadline of
January 1, 2010. The Staff Report accompanying this memorandum includes findings
demonstrating conformance with ORS 197.296.
ALTERNATIVES/OPTIONS
There are several options available to the planning commission:
1. Close the record and deliberate.
2. Leave the record open for a specific period of time to allow additional testimony and
rebuttal and reconvene;
3. Continue the hearing to a date certain to allow additional testimony and/or respond to
questions from the commission(s) or public.
Attachment 2-5
Upon conclusion of deliberations, the planning commissions may choose to:
1. Forward a recommendation to adopt the Springfield Residential Land and Housing
Needs Analysis to the City Council;
2. Forward a recommendation to adopt a modified proposal to the City Council.
3. Forward a recommendation to not adopt the Springfield Residential Land and Housing
Needs Analysis to the City Council.
ATTACHMENTS:
Analysis and Findings of compliance with ORS 197.296, Statewide Planning Goals, Oregon
Revised Statutes and Oregon Administrative Rules.
Summary of the record of the process to date
Findings in Support of Resolution No. ______
Attachment 2-6
Staff report and findings of compliance with ORS 197.296, Statewide
Goals, Oregon Revised Statutes and Oregon Administrative Rules for
proposed adoption of Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs
Analysis
Applicant: The City of Springfield
File Number: LRP 2007-00030
Nature of the Application: Adopt the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs
Analysis to provide Springfield with a baseline inventory, analysis and housing needs
determination for the plan period 2010-2030. Springfield is adopting the Springfield Residential
Land and Housing Needs Analysis as an incremental step towards the City’s compliance with its
statutory obligations under ORS 197.304(1)(a)&(b),(2) and (3).
Background and Context of the Proposed Action
The 2007 Oregon legislature adopted HB3337 by amending ORS 197 to add ORS
197.304(1)(a)&(b),(2) and (3). The provisions of this law require Eugene and Springfield,
separately from any other city in Lane County, to perform the following:
(a)Establish an urban growth boundary, consistent with the jurisdictional area of
responsibility specified in the acknowledged comprehensive plan; and
(b) Demonstrate, as required by ORS 197.296 that its comprehensive plan
provides sufficient buildable lands within an urban growth boundary established
pursuant to statewide planning goals to accommodate estimated housing needs
for 20 years.
In addition to the two actions described above, the statute also requires the demonstration in (b)
to be completed by December 31, 2009.2 To complete our first step towards meeting the
requirements of ORS 197.304(1)(a)&(b),(2) and (3) Springfield has conducted a Residential
Lands Study (RLS). The Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis is the
primary work product of the RLS. The City proposes to adopt the Springfield Residential Land
and Housing Needs Analysis in response to the requirement of 197.304(b) to complete a
housing needs inventory, analysis and determination by December 31, 2009. We are
undertaking this action to achieve timely compliance with the statutory obligations of the law.
Timely compliance is a reference to the deadline imposed by our statutory obligations but also is
meant to convey that we recognize the extent of this obligation and are taking the required
steps.
The Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis is consistent with the relevant
statewide planning goals, Oregon Revised Statutes and Administrative Rules that govern the
2 “Sec.3 A local government that is subject to section 2 of this 2007 Act [197.304] shall complete the inventory,
analysis and determination required under ORS 197.296(3) to begin compliance with section 2 of this 2007 Act
within two years after the effective date of this 2007 Act [January 1, 2008]”
Attachment 2-7
requirements for the inventory and analysis necessary to make the needs determination. No
amendment to the Metro Plan is proposed in this action. Adoption of the Springfield Residential
Land and Housing Needs Analysis establishes the factual basis for subsequent amendments to
the Metro Plan involving the creation of separate UGBs and separate land inventories for
Springfield and Eugene. All of those changes cannot be predicted; they must be based on
compliance with the goals. That cannot occur in the absence of the facts necessary to support
the changes.
A housing needs analysis is governed by Statewide Planning Goal 10 (Housing), ORS 197.295–
197.314 (Needed Housing in Urban Growth Areas), and OAR 660, Division 8 (Interpretation of
Goal 10 Housing). ORS 197.296 (Factors to Establish Sufficiency of Buildable Lands within
Urban Growth Boundary) includes requirements for addressing residential land need.
Statewide Planning Goal 10, applicable statutes, and OAR 660, Division 8, require an analysis
of needed housing in the community over the planning period. Goal 10 and ORS 197.303
define “needed housing.”3 The housing needs analysis includes examination of the appropriate
housing mix and the number of units of each type of housing needed to accommodate future
demand, based on the population forecast, household size, and other demographics.
This analysis is translated into the number of acres of land required to accommodate future
residential growth. Anticipated future demographic characteristics that are part of the analysis
should be based on reliable data and explained. Projected housing density must be based on
the housing needs analysis, because lot size and housing type are such important factors in
housing affordability.
Adoption of the findings and conclusions contained in the Springfield Residential Land and
Housing Needs Analysis shall provide Springfield with the baseline technical analysis necessary
to develop the plan policies, plan designations, and zoning map ordinances necessary to
support the designation and zoning of sufficient residential land in the comprehensive plan to
meet Springfield’s projected housing needs for the plan period 2010-2030.
Sequencing of the Proposed Action and Next Steps
The conclusions of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis indicate that
the urban growth boundary under Springfield’s jurisdictional responsibility – given current Metro
Plan designations and Springfield Development Code zoning ordinances - does not contain
sufficient buildable land to meet the demand for needed residential development over the 20-
year plan period. Springfield will face deficiencies in all residential plan designation categories
(low, medium and high density residential). The Low Density Residential designation has a
deficit of 293 gross acres. The Medium Density Residential designation has a deficit of
approximately 15 gross acres. The High Density Residential designation has a deficit of
approximately 35 gross acres.
ORS 197.296(6) requires cities to take one or more of the following actions if the housing need
is greater than the housing capacity to accommodate the additional housing need:
(6) If the housing need determined pursuant to subsection (3)(b) of this section is greater
than the housing capacity determined pursuant to subsection (3)(a) of this section, the
3 “* * * ‘needed housing’ means housing types determined to meet the need shown for housing within an
urban growth boundary at particular price ranges and rent levels. * * *” Additional requirements apply to
cities larger than 2,500 population.
Attachment 2-8
local government shall take one or more of the following actions to accommodate the
additional housing need:
(a) Amend its urban growth boundary to include sufficient buildable lands to
accommodate housing needs for the next 20 years. As part of this process, the local
government shall consider the effects of measures taken pursuant to paragraph (b) of
this subsection. The amendment shall include sufficient land reasonably necessary to
accommodate the siting of new public school facilities. The need and inclusion of lands
for new public school facilities shall be a coordinated process between the affected
public school districts and the local government that has the authority to approve the
urban growth boundary;
(b) Amend its comprehensive plan, regional plan, functional plan or land use
regulations to include new measures that demonstrably increase the likelihood that
residential development will occur at densities sufficient to accommodate housing needs
for the next 20 years without expansion of the urban growth boundary. A local
government or metropolitan service district that takes this action shall monitor and record
the level of development activity and development density by housing type following the
date of the adoption of the new measures; or
(c) Adopt a combination of the actions described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this
subsection.
Springfield’s projected housing need is greater than the available housing capacity, thus the City
will be required to initiate subsequent amendments to the Metro Plan to take additional actions
to accommodate the housing need.
Land Use Efficiency Measures Implementation Actions
The next step in the process will be to consider and determine the effects of implementing new
Land Use Efficiency Measures that can “demonstrably increase the likelihood that residential
development will occur at densities sufficient to accommodate housing needs for the next 20
years without expansion of the urban growth boundary”. Springfield has taken several
significant steps to 1) document, consider and evaluate land use efficiency measures already
being implemented through existing land use regulations; 2) identify additional measures that
could be implemented; and 3) seek community involvement through a citizen involvement
process consisting of web-based community development surveys, public open houses, citizen
advisory committee meetings, and outreach to organizations and focus groups. Results and
recommendations from the citizen involvement activities were forwarded to the Planning
Commission and City Council for consideration and have been incorporated into the public
record of these proceedings.
The City Council directed staff to work with the Planning Commission to develop plan policies
and/or zoning ordinances to implement new Land Use Efficiency Measures. It is expected that
some of these measures have potential to “demonstrably increase the likelihood that residential
development will occur at densities sufficient to accommodate housing needs for the next 20
years.”
For example, the City has two significant specific area refinement planning efforts underway –
the Downtown District Plan and the Glenwood Refinement Plan Update. It is expected that
these two urban renewal districts will experience significant mixed-use redevelopment over the
plan period. Based on preliminary concept plans currently being developed in concert with the
Downtown and Glenwood Citizen Advisory Committees, both district plans are likely to be
updated to designate land to accommodate significant levels of new high density housing and
that such housing may develop at higher minimums than currently prescribed in the Metro Plan.
Attachment 2-9
It is also expected that redesignation of land to accommodate needed housing may also have
the effect of displacing other existing or planned uses from some areas over the plan period,
which could require adjustments to the inventory of commercial and industrial buildable land.
The City Council’s decision to initiate a Commercial and Industrial Buildable Lands Study (CIBL)
and to conduct both land studies simultaneously supports the coordination necessary to
evaluate and propose adjustments to land use designations and inventories. This process will
also allow for further consideration and implementation of optimal integration of land uses to
expand community livability, opportunity and choice.
The end product of this comprehensive planning effort will be an updated Springfield land
inventory and an updated plan that designates sufficient land to enable efficient
development/redevelopment for the next 20 years. A key land use challenge for the City of
Springfield is how it will accommodate its projected share of regional economic and population
growth while also preserving and enhancing the city’s quality of life and uniqueness.
Urban Growth Boundary Alternatives Analysis
No Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) expansion is proposed in this action. Goal 14 states that
only after demonstrating that part or all of the housing, economic development, or other land
need cannot reasonably be met within the existing UGB can Springfield look at lands outside
the UGB to meet its need. Generally, the city needs to inventory vacant, underdeveloped, and
redevelopable land to determine the number of housing units and jobs the existing UGB can
“reasonably accommodate.” This inquiry should also address whether other changes to the
plan, such as increasing allowed density or other efficiency measures, can reduce the number
of acres required in a boundary expansion, or eliminate the need for expansion entirely.
Springfield has conducted an Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) Alternatives Analysis process to
consider the deficiencies identified in the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs
Analysis alongside the deficiencies identified in the parallel Commercial and Industrial Buildable
Lands Study (CIBL). The City’s consultant ECONorthwest prepared three concepts for a
Springfield UGB. The concepts were prepared through the CIBL planning process with the
CIBL Stakeholders Citizen Advisory Committee and a Technical Advisory Committee (File #
LRP2007-00031). The concepts and supporting maps and documentation have been presented
to the public at a series of open meetings, open houses and presentations to business and civic
organizations. These concepts provide citizens, decision makers, public agency partners
(Willamalane, School District 19, Lane Transit District, Springfield Utility Board, ODOT) and city
staff with graphic depictions of: 1) the physical constraints of the land surrounding the UGB; 2)
geographic areas where UGB expansion is directed under Goal 14 rule priorities; 3) geographic
areas where UGB expansion is most desirable to provide for economic opportunities under Goal
9; and 4) approximate acreage of expansion areas that would be required to meet the identified
needs given the land constraints.
This important process has informed and will continue to inform the community’s discussion and
choices about growth, as population and employment projections are translated into mapped
acres and locations that can be visualized, discussed and debated as the public review process
unfolds. These future scenarios, along with the baseline analyses included in the Springfield
Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis and the Springfield Economic Opportunities
Analysis provide the foundation for the policy discussions that will follow as we develop a 20-
year comprehensive plan for Springfield. The current UGB was adopted by both the city and
the county, and amending it requires adoption by both as well. The process for review and
appeal after the city and county have adopted a UGB amendment depends on the population
inside the UGB and the size of the expansion.
Attachment 2-10
ORS 197.626 provides:
“…a city with a population of 2,500 or more within its urban growth boundary that
amends the urban growth boundary to include more than 50 acres…shall submit the
amendment or designation to the Land Conservation and Development Commission in
the manner provided for periodic review…”
Since Springfield’s population is greater than 2,500, this statute applies.
Upon adoption by the city and county, if the expansion adds more than 50 acres to the current
UGB on Springfield’s side of I-5, the City will submit amendments to DLCD (Department of Land
Conservation and Development) in accordance with ORS 197.626 and OAR 660-025-0130 and
0140.
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan
The city will be required to initiate amendments to the Metro Plan to incorporate and respond to
the land studies. This usually involves amendments to the population, housing and land use
elements of the plan, and possibly to the economic development chapter, public facilities
chapter, or both. Statewide Planning Goal 2 requires that all comprehensive plans include
“ultimate policy choices” and “implementing measures consistent with and adequate to carry out
the plans.” It is not sufficient to simply adopt a new UGB line on the map.
During the needs analysis process, the City has identified opportunities to implement new
policies and/or land designations to utilize land within the existing UGB more efficiently than the
existing plan permits. The City has discovered that it needs to adjust its housing mix or
densities during the planning period in order to accommodate the changing housing needs of
the community. For example, the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis
Springfield indicates that of the 5,980 new dwelling units needed to accommodate growth
between 2010 and 2030 about 3,767 dwelling units (63%) will be single-family types, which
includes single-family detached, manufactured dwellings, townhomes, and condos. About 2,213
units (37%) will be multi-family housing. The comprehensive plan will need to reflect the policy
choices responsive to these needs, and the implementing land use regulations will need to be
updated to ensure these policies can be utilized.
Deficiencies identified in the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis will be
addressed through subsequent adoption of a new planning document – the Springfield 2030
Refinement Plan. The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan will be a city-wide comprehensive
policy document that will include a Springfield Residential Land and Housing Element consisting
of goals, policies, and implementation actions and a Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan diagram
that depicts refined and updated land use designations. The Springfield Residential Land and
Housing Needs Analysis will eventually be incorporated into the Springfield 2030 Refinement
Plan as an appendix to the plan’s Housing Element.
The City and Lane County will be conduct public hearings on the Springfield 2030 Refinement
Plan beginning in early 2010. The final decision to adopt the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan
Metro plan amendment will also be the final decision on adoption of the Springfield Residential
Land and Housing Needs Analysis. The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan shall establish an
urban growth boundary, consistent with Springfield’s jurisdictional area of responsibility
specified in the acknowledged comprehensive plan; and shall demonstrate, as required by ORS
197.296, that its comprehensive plan provides sufficient buildable land within an urban growth
Attachment 2-11
boundary established pursuant to statewide planning goals to accommodate estimated housing
needs for 20 years.
Summary: The City is adopting the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis
to achieve compliance with the statutory obligations of the law. The final decision to adopt the
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Metro plan amendment will also be the final decision on
adoption of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis.
Residential Land Study Planning Process
The RLS was initiated in 2005. After HB3337 was adopted, the City Council directed staff to
conduct a Commercial and Industrial Buildable Lands Study concurrently. A full summary of the
Springfield Residential Land Study planning process is included as Attachment 4. The
summary and the public record for file # LRP2007-00030 demonstrate that Springfield has
conducted the Residential Land Study planning process in a manner consistent with Statewide
Planning Goal 1.
In order for Springfield to comply with the statutory provision, a new population forecast for the
city for the next 20 years has been adopted into the comprehensive plan (Metro Plan). On
October 19, 2009 the Joint Elected Officials of Lane County, City of Springfield and City of
Eugene adopted ordinances amending the Metro Plan to add text to the third paragraph of
Chapter I, Introduction Purpose Section on Page I-1 that established a separate, new 20-year
population forecasts for Springfield.
2030 2035
Springfield – City Only 74,814 78,413
Urban Transition Area East of I-5 6,794 6,415
Total 81,608 84,828
LCDC’s Urbanization Goal, also known as Goal 14, was amended in 2006 to require that Urban
Growth Boundaries be consistent with a “20-year forecast.” LCDC’s interpretive rules flesh this
requirement out. OAR 660-024-0040 states:
(1) The UGB must be based on the adopted 20-year population forecast for the
urban area described in OAR 660-024-0030, [or in ORS 197.036] and must
provide for needed housing, employment and other urban uses such as public
facilities, streets and roads, schools parks and open space over the 20-year
planning period consistent with the land need requirements of Goal 14 and this
rule. The 20-year need determinations are estimates which, although based on
the best available information and methodologies, should not be held to an
unreasonably high level of precision.
(4) The determination of 20-year residential land needs for an urban area must
be consistent with the adopted 20-year coordinated population forecast for the
urban area, and with the requirements for determining housing needs in Goal 10,
OAR 660, division 7 or 8, and applicable provisions of ORS 197.295 to 197.314
and 197.475 to 197.490.
The Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis has been revised several times
throughout the course of the RLS process to reflect adjustments to the population data. The
Attachment 2-12
final draft was completed in August 2009 and has been revised to be consistent with the
adopted 20-year (2030) coordinated Springfield population forecast of 81,608.
Pages 27-28 of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis provides a
discussion of the population projection used for the analysis.
Applicable Criteria
Oregon Housing Policy: Needed Housing in Urban Growth Areas
Chapter 2, pages 4-8 of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis
provides a discussion of the legal framework for the analysis. The passage of the Oregon
Land Use Planning Act of 1974 (ORS Chapter 197) established the Land Conservation and
Development Commission (LCDC), and the Department of Land Conservation and
Development (DLCD). The Act required the Commission to develop and adopt a set of
statewide planning goals. Goal 10 addresses housing in Oregon and provides guidelines for
local governments to follow in developing their local comprehensive land use plans and
implementing policies. At a minimum, local housing policies must meet the requirements of
Goal 10 (ORS 197.295 to 197.314, ORS 197.475 to 197.490, and OAR 600-008). Goal 10
requires incorporated cities to complete an inventory of buildable residential lands and to
encourage the availability of adequate numbers of housing units in price and rent ranges
commensurate with the financial capabilities of its households. The Springfield Residential Land
and Housing Needs Analysis provides the required inventory and a determination of the number
and type of housing units and the amount of land that will be necessary to accommodate
needed housing over the 20 year plan period.
Goal 10 defines needed housing types as “housing types determined to meet the need shown
for housing within an urban growth boundary at particular price ranges and rent levels.” ORS
197.303 defines needed housing types:
(a) Housing that includes, but is not limited to, attached and detached single-family
housing and multiple family housing for both owner and renter occupancy;
(b) Government assisted housing;4
(c) Mobile home or manufactured dwelling parks as provided in ORS 197.475 to
197.490; and
(d) Manufactured homes on individual lots planned and zoned for single-family
residential use that are in addition to lots within designated manufactured dwelling subdivisions.
ORS 197.296 defines factors to establish sufficiency of buildable lands within an urban growth
boundary and requires analysis and determination of residential housing patterns. It applies to
cities with populations of 25,000 or more and requires cities to:
Demonstrate that its comprehensive plan or regional plan provides sufficient buildable
lands within the urban growth boundary established pursuant to statewide planning
goals to accommodate estimated housing needs for 20 years (ORS 197.296(2));
Inventory the supply of buildable lands within the urban growth boundary and determine
the housing capacity of the buildable lands (ORS 197.296(3)(a)); and
Conduct an analysis of housing need by type and density range to determine the
number of units and amount of land needed for each needed housing type for the next
20 years (197.296(3)(b)).
4 Government assisted housing can be any housing type listed in ORS 197.303 (a), (c), or (d).
Attachment 2-13
ORS 197.296 is explicit about what must be considered in a housing needs analysis and the
buildable lands inventory. For the purpose of the inventory, “buildable lands” includes:
(A) Vacant lands planned or zoned for residential use;
(B) Partially vacant lands planned or zoned for residential use;
(C) Lands that may be used for a mix of residential and employment uses under the
existing planning or zoning; and
(D) Lands that may be used for residential infill or redevelopment.
Definitions, methods and assumptions are discussed and described in the Springfield
Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis, chapter 3, pages 9-12.
To visually display the buildable lands inventory, the inventory includes a map (Map 3-2 on page
14) that identifies lands that are vacant, partially vacant, or designated for mixed-use
development. The needs analysis includes an analysis of historical housing density and mix.
This analysis must include data from the last periodic review or five years, whichever is greater5
and must address:
(A) The number, density and average mix of housing types of urban residential
development that have actually occurred;
(B) Trends in density and average mix of housing types of urban residential
development;
(C) Demographic and population trends;
(D) Economic trends and cycles; and
(E) The number, density and average mix of housing types that have occurred on the
buildable lands.
Conclusion:
The Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis constitutes a housing needs
analysis as governed by Statewide Planning Goal 10 (Housing), ORS 197.295–197.314
(Needed Housing in Urban Growth Areas), and OAR 660, Division 8 (Interpretation of Goal 10
Housing) and ORS 197.296 (Factors to Establish Sufficiency of Buildable Lands within Urban
Growth Boundary). The City’s adoption of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs
Analysis will satisfy the requirement of ORS 197.304(b) to complete a housing needs inventory,
analysis and determination by December 31, 2009.
Figure 2-1 on the following page provides a graphic representation of the housing needs
analysis process as defined in ORS 197.296.
5 A local government can make a determination to use a shorter time period than the time period described if the
local government finds that the shorter time period will provide more accurate and reliable data related to housing
capacity and need. The shorter time period may not be less than three years.
Attachment 2-14
Figure 2-1. Process for determining the sufficiency of residential lands
Is needed density the same as or less than
actual density? Is needed mix the same as
actual mix? ORS 197.296(5)
Determine actual
density/mix of housing
ORS 197.296(3)(b)
Actions Related to UGBLand Supply/Demand AnalysisLand Supply Land Demand
Does UGB contain
enough buildable land
needed at actual residential densities?
ORS 197.296(4)
No UGB expansion
required.
Priority 1
Amend plan/regulations to include new measures that
increase likelihood that
residential densities will occur at
densities sufficient to
accommodate housing needs
for the next 20 years without
expansion of the UGB.
Priority 2Adopt a combination of Priorities
1 and 3.
Inventory supply of
buildable1 residential lands within the UGB:2
•Determine 20-year supply
of buildable lands for
housing.ORS 197.296(2) and
197.296(3)(a)
Conduct housing needs analysis.
ORS 197.296(3)(c) and ORS 197.296(7)
Use population forecast from
coordinating body. ORS
195.036
Yes
Identify and evaluate measures to increase
likelihood that needed
residential development
will occur.
ORS 197.296(6) and (7)
No measures
for housing
needed.
Do the measures for
needed housing forego
the need to expand the
UGB?
Yes to
both
No
No
Yes
Priority 3
Amend the UGB to include
sufficient buildable lands to
accommodate housing needs.6
1 Buildable lands means vacant and
redevelop-able lands in urban and urbanizable areas that are suitable,
available and necessary for
residential uses. ORS 197.295(2)
2 Goal 14 requires UGB
amendments to be adopted by City and County County.
OAR 660-015-0000(14)
Footnotes:
Take
one of several
actions:No
Source: ECONorthwest
Attachment 2-15
FINDINGS:
The staff report that follows provides references to the Springfield Residential Land and
Housing Needs Analysis necessary to demonstrate consistency with the requirements of
ORS 197.296.
ORS 197.295 (1) establishes the definition of “Buildable lands” and other terms used in
ORS 197.295 to 197.314 and 197.475 to 197.490:
(1) “Buildable lands” means lands in urban and urbanizable areas that are suitable,
available and necessary for residential uses. “Buildable lands” includes both vacant land
and developed land likely to be redeveloped.
(2) “Manufactured dwelling park” has the meaning given that term in ORS 446.003.
(3) “Government assisted housing” means housing that is financed in whole or
part by either a federal or state housing agency or a housing authority as defined in
ORS 456.005, or housing that is occupied by a tenant or tenants who benefit from rent
supplements or housing vouchers provided by either a federal or state housing agency
or a local housing authority.
(4) “Manufactured homes” has the meaning given that term in ORS 446.003.
(5) “Mobile home park” has the meaning given that term in ORS 446.003.
(6) “Periodic review” means the process and procedures as set forth in ORS 197.628 to
197.650.
(7) “Urban growth boundary” means an urban growth boundary included or referenced
in a comprehensive plan. [1981 c.884 §4; 1983 c.795 §1; 1987 c.785 §1; 1989 c.648
§51; 1991 c.226 §16; 1991 c.612 §12; 1995 c.79 §73; 1995 c.547 §2]
Definitions, methods and assumptions are discussed and described in the Springfield
Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis, chapter 3, pages 9-12.
ORS 197.296 establishes the “factors to establish sufficiency of buildable lands within urban
growth boundary; analysis and determination of residential housing patterns”.
(2) At periodic review pursuant to ORS 197.628 to 197.650 or at any other legislative
review of the comprehensive plan or regional plan that concerns the urban growth
boundary and requires the application of a statewide planning goal relating to buildable
lands for residential use, a local government shall demonstrate that its comprehensive
plan or regional plan provides sufficient buildable lands within the urban growth
boundary established pursuant to statewide planning goals to accommodate estimated
housing needs for 20 years. The 20-year period shall commence on the date initially
scheduled for completion of the periodic or legislative review.
The City is adopting the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis at this
time to achieve compliance with the statutory obligations of the law. The Springfield
Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis will be incorporated into the Springfield
2030 Refinement Plan Metro plan amendment. The final decision to adopt the Springfield
2030 Refinement Plan will also be the final decision on adoption of the Springfield
Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis.
Attachment 2-16
A map of the existing residential land base (Springfield’s jurisdictional portion of the
Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Plan east of Interstate Highway 5) is provided as Map 3-
1, page 11 in the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis.
(3) In performing the duties under subsection (2) of this section, a local
government shall:
(a) Inventory the supply of buildable lands within the urban growth boundary and
determine the housing capacity of the buildable lands; and
The inventory is discussed and described in the Springfield Residential Land and
Housing Needs Analysis, chapter 3, pages 9-20.
The housing capacity of buildable lands is described in the Springfield Residential Land
and Housing Needs Analysis, chapter 3, pages 18-20.
(b) Conduct an analysis of housing need by type and density range, in accordance
with ORS 197.303 and statewide planning goals and rules relating to housing, to
determine the number of units and amount of land needed for each needed housing type
for the next 20 years.
Housing need by type and density range is described in the Springfield Residential Land
and Housing Needs Analysis, chapter 4, pages 20-63. The step by step process used to
determine the number of needed units, the needed density range for each plan
designation and the average needed net density for all designations is described in
pages 27-63.
(4)(a) For the purpose of the inventory described in subsection (3)(a) of this
section, “buildable lands” includes:
(A) Vacant lands planned or zoned for residential use;
(B) Partially vacant lands planned or zoned for residential use;
Vacant buildable land is discussed and described in the Springfield Residential Land and
Housing Needs Analysis, chapter 3, pages 15-18, Tables 3-4 and 3-5., Map 3-2 .
Constraints are mapped (Map 3-4) are listed and accounted for. See pages 12-15.
(C) Lands that may be used for a mix of residential and employment uses under the
existing planning or zoning; and
Residential capacity of land designated for mixed use has been included in the
assumptions (pages 9-12). Land needed for housing is described in pages 63-73.
(D) Lands that may be used for residential infill or redevelopment.
Redevelopment and infill potential is described and accounted for in the inventory. See
page 18 and chapter 4. Springfield uses a capacity-based method to identify
redevelopment potential. The Springfield Development Code zones land and provides
development standards that allow residential infill: SDC 3.2-200 (Residential Districts)
permits attached single family, cluster subdivision, detached single family, duplexes,
multiple family dwellings, prefabricated dwellings, group care facilities, residential care
facilities, manufactured homes, panhandle lots as residential infill uses; SDC 3.2-600
(Mixed-use Districts) encourages infill development and redevelopment; SDC5.5-100
Attachment 2-17
permits Accessory Dwelling Units; SDC5.12-100 (Land Divisions and Partitions) allows
creation of 4,500 sq. ft. infill lots. Cluster subdivision standards permit small lot infill
development.
Residential redevelopment capacity has been supported by approval and redesignation
of Master Planned areas (RiverBend Node and Marcola Meadows Node), and mixed-use
district plans (Downtown Node and Mohawk Node).
(b) For the purpose of the inventory and determination of housing capacity described
in subsection (3)(a) of this section, the local government must demonstrate
consideration of:
(A) The extent that residential development is prohibited or restricted by local
regulation and ordinance, state law and rule or federal statute and regulation;
(B) A written long term contract or easement for radio, telecommunications or
electrical facilities, if the written contract or easement is provided to the local
government; and
(C) The presence of a single family dwelling or other structure on a lot or parcel.
Assumptions, methodology and land constraints are discussed and described in the
Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis, chapter 3, pages 9-12.
Redevelopment assumptions are discussed on page 18 and in chapter 4.
(c) Except for land that may be used for residential infill or redevelopment, a local
government shall create a map or document that may be used to verify and identify
specific lots or parcels that have been determined to be buildable lands.
Map 3-2 identifies buildable lands.
(5)(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this subsection, the
determination of housing capacity and need pursuant to subsection (3) of this section
must be based on data relating to land within the urban growth boundary that has been
collected since the last periodic review or five years, whichever is greater.
The determination was based on data related to land within the urban growth boundary.
The time period ECONorthwest used for the analysis (1999-July 2008) is discussed on
page 20.
The data shall include:
(A) The number, density and average mix of housing types of urban residential
development that have actually occurred;
The data on actual number, density and average mix are provided on pages 20-26.
(B) Trends in density and average mix of housing types of urban residential
development;
Trends on density and mix are provided on pages 23-26 and in Appendix B. Springfield’s
housing demand and need is discussed on pages pages 27-74.
(C) Demographic and population trends;
Attachment 2-18
Data on national, state and local demographic trends are discussed on pages 31-47.
(D) Economic trends and cycles; and
Data on economic trends are discussed on pages 31-57.
(E) The number, density and average mix of housing types that have occurred on the
buildable lands described in subsection (4)(a) of this section.
Data on number, density and average mix of housing that have occurred are discussed
on pages 20-26.
(b) A local government shall make the determination described in paragraph (a) of
this subsection using a shorter time period than the time period described in paragraph
(a) of this subsection if the local government finds that the shorter time period will
provide more accurate and reliable data related to housing capacity and need. The
shorter time period may not be less than three years.
(c) A local government shall use data from a wider geographic area or use a time
period for economic cycles and trends longer than the time period described in
paragraph (a) of this subsection if the analysis of a wider geographic area or the use of a
longer time period will provide more accurate, complete and reliable data relating to
trends affecting housing need than an analysis performed pursuant to paragraph (a) of
this subsection. The local government must clearly describe the geographic area, time
frame and source of data used in a determination performed under this paragraph.
The determination was based on data related to land within the Eugene-Springfield metro
urban area east of I-5. The time period ECONorthwest used for the analysis (1999-July
2008) and the rationale for using this period are discussed on page 20. Methods utilized
are described in pages 9-12. Data sources are listed beneath each data table in the study
or in footnotes at the bottom of the relevant pages.
(6) If the housing need determined pursuant to subsection (3)(b) of this section is
greater than the housing capacity determined pursuant to subsection (3)(a) of this
section, the local government shall take one or more of the following actions to
accommodate the additional housing need:
(a) Amend its urban growth boundary to include sufficient buildable lands to
accommodate housing needs for the next 20 years. As part of this process, the local
government shall consider the effects of measures taken pursuant to paragraph (b) of
this subsection. The amendment shall include sufficient land reasonably necessary to
accommodate the siting of new public school facilities. The need and inclusion of lands
for new public school facilities shall be a coordinated process between the affected
public school districts and the local government that has the authority to approve the
urban growth boundary;
(b) Amend its comprehensive plan, regional plan, functional plan or land use
regulations to include new measures that demonstrably increase the likelihood that
residential development will occur at densities sufficient to accommodate housing needs
for the next 20 years without expansion of the urban growth boundary. A local
government or metropolitan service district that takes this action shall monitor and record
Attachment 2-19
the level of development activity and development density by housing type following the
date of the adoption of the new measures; or
(c) Adopt a combination of the actions described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this
subsection.
The conclusions of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis
indicate that the urban growth boundary under Springfield’s jurisdictional responsibility
– given current Metro Plan designations and Springfield Development Code zoning
ordinances - does not contain sufficient buildable land to meet the demand for needed
residential development over the 20-year plan period. Springfield will face deficiencies in
all residential plan designation categories (low, medium and high density residential).
The Low Density Residential designation has a deficit of 293 gross acres. The Medium
Density Residential designation has a deficit of approximately 15 gross acres. The High
Density Residential designation has a deficit of approximately 35 gross acres. The city
will be required to initiate amendments to the Metro Plan to incorporate and respond to
the land studies.
The findings of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis combined
with the findings and policy recommendations of the Springfield Commercial and
Industrial Buildable Lands Study (CIBL) will provide the basis for significant updates to
Springfield’s land use plans in 2010. Staff are currently preparing a draft policy
document for Springfield – the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. This plan is a
refinement plan of the Metro Plan for the metro urban area east of I-5 that will establish a
separate Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) for Springfield as required by ORS 197.304.
(7) Using the analysis conducted under subsection (3)(b) of this section, the local
government shall determine the overall average density and overall mix of housing types
at which residential development of needed housing types must occur in order to meet
housing needs over the next 20 years. If that density is greater than the actual density of
development determined under subsection (5)(a)(A) of this section, or if that mix is
different from the actual mix of housing types determined under subsection (5)(a)(A) of
this section, the local government, as part of its periodic review, shall adopt measures
that demonstrably increase the likelihood that residential development will occur at the
housing types and density and at the mix of housing types required to meet housing
needs over the next 20 years.
The conclusions of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis
indicate that the overall needed housing mix is 60% single family (including
manufactured and single family attached units) and 40% multifamily (page 61).
Springfield needs to adopt new measures that demonstrably increase the likelihood that
residential development will occur at the housing types and density and at the mix of
housing types required to meet housing needs over the next 20 years. Staff are currently
preparing a draft policy document for Springfield – the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan
that will update policies, plan designations and densities to provide for the needed
housing mix. This plan will be a refinement plan of the Metro Plan for the metro urban
area east of I-5 that will establish a separate Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) for
Springfield as required by ORS 197.304.
(8)(a) A local government outside a metropolitan service district that takes any
actions under subsection (6) or (7) of this section shall demonstrate that the
Attachment 2-20
comprehensive plan and land use regulations comply with goals and rules adopted by
the commission and implement ORS 197.295 to 197.314.
Springfield’s next steps are to develop and adopt the refined plan designations and plan
policies that will guide changes in land use over the plan period 2010-2030. These
policies and designations will be included as principle elements of the Springfield 2030
Refinement Plan, a refinement plan of the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan. The plan will
include a Residential Land and Housing Element and a plan diagram that will designate
sufficient residential land to provide Springfield’s needed housing density and mix, as
required by Goal 10. A key land use challenge for the City of Springfield is how it will
accommodate its projected share of regional economic and population growth while also
preserving and enhancing the city’s quality of life and uniqueness. The City Council
directed staff to work with the Planning Commission to develop new plan policies and
zoning ordinances to implement additional Land Use Efficiency Measures in Springfield.
Adoption of these measures — such as increasing density along transit corridors and
allowing small lot development — will provide a planning framework to facilitate compact
urban development consistent with state mandates while supporting multiple community
planning objectives and City Council Goals.
(b) The local government shall determine the density and mix of housing types
anticipated as a result of actions taken under subsections (6) and (7) of this section and
monitor and record the actual density and mix of housing types achieved. The local
government shall compare actual and anticipated density and mix. The local government
shall submit its comparison to the commission at the next periodic review or at the next
legislative review of its urban growth boundary, whichever comes first.
Through the public policy review process and additional analysis, the City shall evaluate
potential effects resulting from adoption of new policies on the anticipated density and
mix of housing types. Post plan adoption, the City Development Services Department
will establish new tools to monitor and record the actual and anticipated density and mix
as an integral element of the City’s new Strategic Plan metrics.
(9) In establishing that actions and measures adopted under subsections (6) or (7) of
this section demonstrably increase the likelihood of higher density residential
development, the local government shall at a minimum ensure that land zoned for
needed housing is in locations appropriate for the housing types identified under
subsection (3) of this section and is zoned at density ranges that are likely to be
achieved by the housing market using the analysis in subsection (3) of this section.
Actions or measures, or both, may include but are not limited to:
(a) Increases in the permitted density on existing residential land;
Springfield is considering establishment of a density bonus program to facilitate planned
residential high density development areas in Glenwood and Downtown, and along
existing and proposed EmX bus rapid transit corridors (proposed TC Designation).
Springfield is considering raising the outright permitted density for high density
development along EmX bus rapid transit corridors. Springfield is considering
establishing high density residential plan designations within existing Mixed-use
districts to ensure that residential development occurs. Springfield is proposing to
adopt a new intermediate density plan designation to allow smaller lot development
(3,000 sq. ft.), cottages clusters and attached rowhouse development as outright
Attachment 2-21
permitted uses at 8-15 du/ac. Springfield is considering additional efficiency measures
(see Attachment 5).
(b) Financial incentives for higher density housing;
Springfield is considering establishment of a density bonus program to facilitate planned
residential high density development areas in Glenwood and Downtown and
establishment of a second Vertical Housing zone in Glenwood.
(c) Provisions permitting additional density beyond that generally allowed in the
zoning district in exchange for amenities and features provided by the developer;
Springfield is considering establishment of a density bonus program to facilitate planned
residential high density development areas in Glenwood and Downtown.
(d) Removal or easing of approval standards or procedures;
(e) Minimum density ranges;
Springfield is proposing to adopt a new intermediate density plan designation to allow
smaller lot development (3,000 sq. ft.), cottages clusters and attached rowhouse
development as outright permitted uses at 8-15 du/ac. Springfield is considering
adoption of higher minimum densities in the high density designation in Downtown and
Glenwood than currently permitted in the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan.
(f) Redevelopment and infill strategies;
Springfield is currently conducting focused planning studies to produce urban design
plans, code amendments and redevelopment implementation strategies for its Glenwood
and Downtown Urban Renewal districts. Infill development is currently permitted
throughout the City.
(g) Authorization of housing types not previously allowed by the plan or regulations;
Springfield is proposing to adopt a new intermediate density plan designation to allow
smaller lot development (3,000 sq. ft.), cottages clusters and attached rowhouse
development as outright permitted uses at 8-15 du/ac. Springfield is considering
adoption of higher minimum densities in the high density designation in Downtown and
Glenwood than currently permitted in the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan.
(h) Adoption of an average residential density standard; and
At this time the Springfield City Council has not discussed adoption of an average
density standard.
(i) Rezoning or redesignation of nonresidential land. [1995 c.547 §3; 2001 c.908 §1;
2003 c.177 §1]
Springfield is proposing to redesignate nonresidential land in Glenwood and Downtown
and possibly other areas for residential uses.
DISCUSSION:
Attachment 2-22
Additional potential criteria and staff responses fill the remaining pages of this report; however,
all of the following findings are made subject to the reservation that they may be wholly or
partially pre-empted by ORS 197.304(1) which says that “Notwithstanding an intergovernmental
agreement . . . or acknowledged comprehensive plan provisions to the contrary,” the cities of
Eugene and Springfield shall both:
(a) establish separate 20-year urban growth boundaries, and
(b) demonstrate that their separate boundaries provide sufficient buildable
residential lands for the next 20 years as required by ORS 196.296.
As a preface to this section of the staff report it is useful to provide some context to what is
being proposed by this action and how this action will establish part of the necessary basis for
future significant changes to the Metro Plan.
Both cities know they have considerable work ahead of them as they undertake compliance with
ORS 197.304. As the first seven pages in this report have already demonstrated, the new law
that is the cause of this work is a significant departure from the laws and agreements that have
bound the two cities and county together since the original acknowledgment process and two
subsequent periodic reviews. There is no case law that provides guidance or defines nuance;
there is no administrative rule that says how you interpret this law; and there is no precedent
elsewhere to use as a model for this action. Eugene and Springfield have a single metro-wide
UGB; they will soon have separate municipal UGBs. Eugene and Springfield have shared a
single metro-wide buildable lands inventory because of the single UGB; they will soon have
separate buildable lands inventories contained within their separate UGBs. Eugene and
Springfield have shared a single metro-wide population and employment forecast because
they’ve shared a single UGB and single buildable lands inventory. They have begun this
compliance process by adopting separate population forecasts into a comprehensive plan that
still recognizes the current single, shared UGB and a single, shared buildable lands inventory.
No amendment to the Metro Plan is proposed in this action. Adoption of the Springfield
Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis establishes the factual basis for subsequent
amendments to the Metro Plan involving the creation of separate UGBs and separate land
inventories for Springfield. All of those changes cannot be predicted; they must be based on
compliance with the goals. That cannot occur in the absence of the facts necessary to support
the changes.
The next step in that process (as explained previously) is adopting the residential inventory and
needs determination. We are undertaking this action to achieve timely compliance with the
statutory obligations of the law. Timely compliance is a reference to the deadline imposed by
our statutory obligations but also is meant to convey that we recognize the extent of this
obligation and are taking the required steps.
What might otherwise be seen as a conflict is resolved by the explicit requirements of the 2007
statute and by the context and language of the amendment. In short: Adoption of the
Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis is a step towards implementation of
that statute. The HNA addresses a new 20-year planning period. The Metro Plan will evolve
from its pre-HB3337 content and structure in phases as the cities complete their remaining
implementation obligations under the new law, based on the new forecasts.
Attachment 2-23
A demonstration of compliance with the state-wide goals for this amendment, if required at all, is
primarily related to Goals 1, 2 and 10 as the remaining goals either don’t apply within UGBs (3 &
4) or don’t apply here in the Willamette Valley (16-19); the other goals are not affected by
adoption of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis alone, but can have
applicability when subsequent actions that rely upon the findings of the Springfield Residential
Land and Housing Needs Analysis are proposed. In spite of the indirect nature of the
relationship between the proposed amendment and the goals, an explanation was provided
explaining why this action was not contrary to the goals.
DEFINITIONS
Definitions in ORS 197.015, 197.295, and 197.303 shall apply
660-008-0005
Definitions
For the purpose of this rule, the definitions in ORS 197.015, 197.295, and 197.303 shall apply.
In addition, the following definitions shall apply:
(1) “Attached Single Family Housing” means common-wall dwellings or rowhouses where each
dwelling unit occupies a separate lot.
(2) “Buildable Land” means residentially designated land within the urban growth boundary,
including both vacant and developed land likely to be redeveloped, that is suitable, available
and necessary for residential uses. Publicly owned land is generally not considered available for
residential uses. Land is generally considered “suitable and available” unless it:
(a) Is severely constrained by natural hazards as determined under Statewide Planning Goal 7;
(b) Is subject to natural resource protection measures determined under statewide Planning
Goals 5, 15, 16, 17, or 18;
(c) Has slopes of 25 percent or greater;
(d) Is within the 100-year flood plain; or
(e) Cannot be provided with public facilities.
(3) “Detached Single Family Housing” means a housing unit that is free standing and separate
from other housing units.
(4) “Housing Needs Projection” refers to a local determination, justified in the plan, of the mix of
housing types and densities that will be:
(a) Commensurate with the financial capabilities of present and future area residents of all
income levels during the planning period;
(b) Consistent with any adopted regional housing standards, state statutes and Land
Conservation and Development Commission administrative rules; and
(c) Consistent with Goal 14 requirements.
(5) “Multiple Family Housing” means attached housing where each dwelling unit is not located
on a separate lot.
(6) “Redevelopable Land” means land zoned for residential use on which development has
already occurred but on which, due to present or expected market forces, there exists the strong
likelihood that existing development will be converted to more intensive residential uses during
the planning period.
CONSISTENCY WITH THE RELEVANT STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS adopted by the
Land Conservation and Development Commission;
Goal 1 – Citizen Involvement
Attachment 2-24
To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be
involved in all phases of the planning process.
Requirements under Goal 1 are met by adherence to the citizen involvement processes
required by the Metro Plan and implemented by the Springfield Development Code, Chapter 5,
Section 5.14-135, Eugene Code Section 9.7735, and Lane Code Sections 12.025 and 12.240.
A full summary of the Springfield Residential Land Study planning process is included as
Attachment 4. The summary and record demonstrate that Springfield has conducted the
Residential Lands Study planning process to date in a manner consistent with Statewide
Planning Goal 1. Evidence of the public involvement process thus far is fully documented in the
public record: application file number LRP2007-00030.
A plan for citizen involvement was presented to the Committee for Citizen Involvement (a
function of the Planning Commission) on March 7, 2006. A Residential Lands Study
Stakeholder Committee composed of citizens, housing advocates, business professionals,
realtors, agencies and staff met five times from May 2006 to April 2007. Committee members
were also invited to participate in a Planning Commission work session on July 21, 2009. Public
open houses to present the revised findings of the RLS and preliminary determination of need
and to get input on proposed Land Use Efficiency Measures were held on April 2, May 14 & 20,
2009.
Notice to the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) was provide at least
45 days before the initial evidentiary hearing (planning commission), on September 4, 2009.
Notice of the Planning Commission hearing was sent by email to interested parties on October
1, 2009. Notice of the proposed action was published in the Register-Guard - a newspaper of
general circulation - on October 8, 2009. The Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs
Analysis and hearing dates were posted on the Springfield Planning Division web page:
http://www.ci.springfield.or.us/dsd/Planning/index.htm. A public hearing will be held before the
Planning Commission on October 20, 2009. All written comments received were incorporated
into the record.
Goal 2 – Land Use Planning
To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all
decisions and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for
such decisions and actions.
All land-use plans and implementation ordinances shall be adopted by the governing
body after public hearing and shall be reviewed and, as needed, revised on a periodic
cycle to take into account changing public policies and circumstances, in accord with a
schedule set forth in the plan. Opportunities shall be provided for review and comment
by citizens and affected governmental units during preparation, review and revision of
plans and implementation ordinances.
Implementation Measures – are the means used to carry out the plan. These are of two
general types: (1) management implementation measures such as ordinances,
regulations or project plans, and (2) site or area specific implementation measures such
as permits and grants for construction, construction of public facilities or provision of
services.
Attachment 2-25
The current version of the Metro Plan was last adopted in 2004 (Springfield (Ordinance No.
6087; Eugene Ordinance No. 20319; and Lane County Ordinance No. 1197) after numerous
public meetings, public workshops and joint hearings of the Springfield, Eugene and Lane
County Planning Commissions and Elected Officials.
Subsequent to these Metro Plan adoption proceedings, the 2007 Oregon Legislature adopted
new laws that applied specifically to Eugene, Springfield and Lane County. ORS 197.304
requires Eugene and Springfield to adopt separate urban growth boundaries based on the
jurisdictional responsibilities contained in the Metro Plan, make a determination based on the
provisions of ORS 197.296 that there is sufficient buildable lands within these UGBs to
accommodate projected growth for the next 20 years, and to make this determination by
December 31, 2009.
In response to this mandate, Springfield is undertaking two necessary interim steps in
compliance: 1) Initiation of a post-acknowledgement plan amendment of the Metro Plan to
establish a residential land and housing needs determination that will comply with the required
planning period of 20 years beginning at the date scheduled for completion of this action (2010);
and 2) City adoption of the findings and conclusions of the Springfield Residential Land and
Housing Needs Analysis as one of the baseline studies required for subsequent policy and plan
development. The sequencing of these steps is articulated more fully in Attachment 1 and
pages 1-7 of this report.
The Metro Plan is the land use or comprehensive plan required by this goal; the Springfield
Development Code, the Eugene Code and the Lane Code are the implementation measures
required by this goal. Comprehensive plans, as defined by ORS 197.015(5), must be
coordinated with affected governmental units. Coordination means that comments from affected
governmental units are solicited and considered. As previously explained, the Springfield
Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis will eventually be scheduled for joint adoption
hearings before the Springfield and Lane County elected officials under post-acknowledgement
plan amendment procedures. The baseline land studies analyses -- along with Springfield’s
proposed policies and plan designations to demonstrably increase the likelihood that needed
housing will be developed at density ranges that are likely to be achieved by the housing market
– will be incorporated into the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan policy package.
Goal 3 – Agricultural Lands
To preserve and maintain agricultural lands.
No Metro Plan Amendment is proposed. No other changes to the Metro Plan are included in
this proposal. The proposed action does not affect Metro Plan consistency with this goal and in
any case, this goal does not apply within adopted, acknowledged urban growth boundaries.
(See also OAR 660-024-0020)
Goal 4 – Forest Lands
To conserve forest lands by maintaining the forest land base and to protect the state’s
forest economy by making possible economically efficient forest practices that assure
the continuous growing and harvesting of forest tree species as the leading use on forest
land consistent with sound management of soil, air, water, and fish and wildlife
resources and to provide for recreational opportunities and agriculture.
Attachment 2-26
No Metro Plan Amendment is proposed. No other changes to the Metro Plan are included in
this proposal. The proposed action does not affect Metro Plan consistency with this goal and in
any case, this goal does not apply within adopted, acknowledged urban growth boundaries.
(See also OAR 660-024-0020)
Goal 5 – Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources
To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open spaces.
No Metro Plan Amendment is proposed. No other changes to the Metro Plan are included in
this proposal. The proposed action does not affect acknowledged Goal 5 inventories so this
proposal does not create an inconsistency with the goal. Adoption of a residential land and
housing needs baseline analysis alone does not impact Goal 5 resources; subsequent analysis
of the findings and conclusions of the baseline analysis and subsequent actions must observe
applicable goals, statutes and rules.
The Cities have finished all work required under Goal 5 during the most recent Periodic Review
(completed in 2007).
Future plan amendments to designate a 20-year supply of land for needed housing will need to
demonstrate consistency with Goal 5 and OAR 660-023-0070:
(1) If measures to protect significant resource sites inside urban growth boundaries
affect the inventory of buildable lands in acknowledged plans required by Goals 9, 10
and 14, a local government outside of the Metro UGB, and Metro inside the Metro UGB,
prior to or at the next periodic review, shall:
(a) Amend its urban growth boundary to provide additional buildable lands sufficient to
compensate for the loss of buildable lands caused by the application of Goal 5;
(b) Redesignate other land to replace identified land needs under Goals 9, 10, and 14
provided such action does not take the plan out of compliance with other statewide
goals; or
(c) Adopt a combination of the actions described in subsections (a) and (b) of this
section.
(2) If a local government redesignates land for higher density under subsections (1)(b) or
(c) of this rule in order to meet identified housing needs, the local government shall
ensure that the redesignated land is in locations appropriate for the housing types, and
is zoned at density ranges that are likely to be achieved by the housing market.
(3) Where applicable, the requirements of ORS 197.296 shall supersede the
requirements of sections (1) and (2) of this rule.
Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis assigns classifications to all tax lots in
Springfield’s residential lands inventory (page 10-17). Goal 5 resources have been accounted
for in the analysis. The “Unbuildable” category includes tax lots or areas within tax lots with
Goal 5 wetlands and riparian corridors and setbacks.
Goal 6 – Air, Water and Land Resources Quality
To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state.
Attachment 2-27
This goal is primarily concerned with compliance with federal and state environmental quality
statutes, and how this compliance is achieved as development proceeds in relationship to air
sheds, river basins and land resources. No Metro Plan Amendment is proposed. No other
changes to the Metro Plan are included in this proposal. Adoption of a residential land and
housing needs baseline analysis alone has no direct affect on or applicability to this goal. Any
actions affecting inventories or land use or development that occur as a result of the housing
needs determination will be subject to the applicable goals, statutes and rules at the time those
actions are undertaken.
Goal 7 – Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards
To protect people and property from natural hazards.
The Metro Plan and the City’s development code are acknowledged to be in compliance with all
applicable statewide land use goals, including Goal 7. No Metro Plan Amendment is proposed.
No other changes to the Metro Plan are included in this proposal. Adoption of new policies
and/or plan designations in response to a residential land and housing needs analysis affecting
inventories or land use or development that occur as a result of the housing needs
determination will be subject to the applicable goals, statutes and rules at the time those actions
are undertaken. Subsequent actions based upon the housing needs determination and that
may impact this goal are required to address this applicability during the public review and
hearings process.
Goal 8 – Recreational Needs
To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, where
appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including
destination resorts.
Willamalane and the City co-adopted the Park and Recreation Comprehensive Plan in 2004.
Park land needs are based on the level of service established in Willamalane’s plan. This plan
has a recommended standard of 14 acres of park land for each 1,000 persons. The 2004 plan
projects an increase of 25,000 citizens by the end of the adopted 20-year planning horizon
(2022).6 Willamalane is a special service taxing district with the authorization to purchase,
develop and maintain park facilities, but it has no authority or obligation for Goal 8 compliance;
that responsibility lies with the City of Springfield after coordinating with the Park District. The
Metro Plan has a horizon of 2015 therefore Willamalane’s standard of 14 acres per 1,000
residents is a valid standard to the year 2015; anything beyond 2015 is not applicable to the
Metro Plan even though Willamalane’s plan extends to 2022. Springfield will continue to
coordinate with Willamalane throughout these actions to ensure that land for parks and
recreation facilities is accounted and planned for in the updated land inventories to maintain
Goal 8 compliance through the new planning period of 2030. Land need for parks and
recreation facilities is addressed in the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs
Analysis on pages 63-67. Springfield has a need for 150 acres of park land to serve the City’s
population in 2008. This accounts for a population increase of 4,095 people between 2002 and
2008, which generated an additional need for 57 acres of park land.
Goal 9 – Economic Development
6 Page A-4, Willamalane Park and Recreation Comprehensive Plan
Attachment 2-28
To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic
activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon’s citizens.
The ORS 197.296 determination applies only to residential inventories and not require an
analysis of commercial and industrial lands inventories; and OAR 660-024-0040 allows a local
government to review and amend the UGB “in consideration of one category of land need (for
example, housing need) without a simultaneous review and amendment in consideration of
other categories of land need (for example, employment need).” (OAR 660-024-0040(3)). The
cities have chosen to expand the inventory analysis to include commercial and industrial land,
both of which rely upon the same population forecast required by OAR 660-024-0040(1). The
adoption of the housing needs determination does not directly affect this goal; however, the
activities subsequent to the adoption of the determination will rely on this determination as a
basis for actions pursuant to the applicable goals.
Goal 10 – Housing
To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state.
The cities are required by ORS 197.304 to undertake an ORS 197.296 determination within two
years of the effective date of the Act. The ORS 197.296 determination involves the inventory,
supply and demand analysis of residential land use needs for the forecast population of the 20-
year planning period. As previously discussed in this report, the proposed action will adopt the
required determination.
Adoption of the findings and conclusions contained in the Springfield Residential Land and
Housing Needs Analysis shall provide Springfield with the baseline technical analysis necessary
to develop the plan policies, plan designations, and zoning map ordinances necessary to
support the designation and zoning of sufficient residential land in the comprehensive plan to
meet Springfield’s projected housing needs for the plan period 2010-2030, consistent with all
other aspects of Goal 10. Future plan amendments to designate a 20-year supply of land for
needed housing and to adopt the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis as
a supporting element of the comprehensive plan will need to demonstrate consistency with Goal
10.
Goal 11 – Public Facilities and Services
To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and
services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development.
Adoption of a residential land and housing needs baseline analysis alone does not directly affect
the public facilities plan until the buildable lands inventories necessary to support that forecast
are adjusted through subsequent amendments to the comprehensive plan. The location and/or
density increases that will need to occur to provide for housing needs must be provided with
adequate levels of urban services. In the event Springfield makes adjustments to permitted
densities causing greater demand for public infrastructure, the City will evaluate these services
and where necessary, propose additional Metro Plan amendments in compliance with this goal.
Goal 12 - Transportation
To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system.
Attachment 2-29
The transportation system plan is similar to the public facilities and services plan in that the
transportation system is designed to accommodate future growth at densities prescribed in the
plan’s policies. Land development cannot occur in the absence of transportation infrastructure
capacity. The obligation in 197.296 to complete a needs determination is consistent with the
purpose and timing of transportation analysis required by Goal 12; OAR 660-12 Transportation
and OAR 660-024 Urban Growth Boundaries.
Goal 13 – Energy Conservation
To conserve energy.
3. Land use planning should, to the maximum extent possible, seek to recycle and re-
use vacant land and those uses which are not energy efficient.
There are no requirements in the rule or statute that require the energy element of the plan to
be amended to correspond with the housing needs analysis. Any subsequent changes to land
use designations, including adjustments to the UGB must comply with the applicable provisions
of this goal and interpretive rules.
Goal 14 – Urbanization
To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to
accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth boundaries,
to ensure efficient use of land, and to provide for livable communities.
A housing needs analysis does not affect the existing UGB but the establishment of, or change
to a UGB cannot be undertaken unless there are adopted analyses for the 20-year period upon
which the buildable lands inventories are based. Since this determination, and hence the
application of Goal 14, cannot occur without the housing needs determination, the city must
adopt a needs determination to comply with the provisions of ORS 197.296. Adoption of the
Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis is an interim step towards compliance
with Goal 14.
Goal 15 – Willamette River Greenway
To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural, scenic, historical, agricultural,
economic and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette River as the
Willamette River Greenway.
A housing needs determination has no direct affect on the implementation or continued
compliance with Goal 15. When the governing bodies take subsequent actions to amend the
Eugene-Springfield comprehensive plan in response to the needs identified in the Springfield
Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis ( e.g. changes to policies, designations,
development standards or densities) those changes must be evaluated against all applicable
goals, statutes and rules. Such evaluations will include Goal 15.
Goal 16 Estuarine Resources, Goal 17 Coastal Shorelands, Goal 18 Beaches and Dunes,
and Goal 19 Ocean Resources
These goals do not apply to the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area.
Attachment 2-30
Conclusion: The Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis is consistent with
the relevant statewide planning goals, Oregon Revised Statutes and Administrative Rules that
govern the requirements for the inventory and analysis necessary to make the needs
determination. Adoption of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis
allows Springfield to comply with part of its obligations under ORS 197.304 by the statutory
deadline of January 1, 2010.
Tasks Target
Dates
Task
Completed
Task 1: Residential Buildable Lands Inventory (Work conducted internally by City
Staff)
City Council directed DSD staff to begin an inventory
and analysis of Springfield’s residential land. (Goal
Setting Session)
December 5,
2005
PROJECT
INITIATION
Citizen Involvement Plan presented to CCI March 2, 2006 YES
Review work program with Planning Commission
and City Council March 6, 2006 YES
RLS Stakeholder Committee recruitment March 30, 2006 YES
Stakeholder Committee meetings #1-2 to review the
definitions/assumptions for “vacant, underutilized,
and redevelopable,” and to define constraints that
would make land “unbuildable.”
May 11th, 2006 YES
Review definitions and assumptions with Planning
Commission June , 2006 YES
Review definitions and assumptions with City
Council June 12, 2006 YES
Conduct initial inventory work:
Identify vacant, underutilized, and
redevelopable land
Identify environmentally constrained lands
Identify land with public facility constraints
May 2006 –
December 2006
YES
ECONorthwest hired in October 2006 to begin Phase 2 (see below) Housing Needs
Analysis
Task 2: Residential Land & Housing Needs Analysis (Work conducted by City’s
consultant ECONorthwest and City staff)
Coordinate with City Staff to determine the actual
density/mix of housing
October 2006 –
December 2006 YES
Stakeholder Committee meeting #3 to review the
population definitions/assumptions for population
projections and anticipated housing trends
January 18th,
2007 YES
Conduct a Housing Needs Analysis January 2007 –
August 2009 YES
Stakeholder Committee meeting #4 to review the
initial housing inventory & needs findings. March 8, 2007 YES
Compare the needed housing density and mix with
the actual density and mix.
January 2007 –
March 2007 YES
Stakeholders Committee Meeting #5 to review the
Draft Report. April 16, 2007 YES
Present RLS Draft Technical Memorandum to City
Council for review. Includes modifications made in
the draft report between April 07 and October 07 due
to project delay from HB 3337; and new spatially
adjusted GIS data which impacted the inventory
numbers.)
October 22, 2007 YES
Present RLS Draft Technical Memorandum to
Planning Commission for review
November 6,
2007 YES
Present Land Use Efficiency Measures work December 11, YES
Springfield Residential Lands Study
Summary of Process to Date
Attachment 3-1
program 2007
Send Land Use Efficiency Measures info packet to
Stakeholder Committee, conduct on-line survey and
post potential measures on planning website
January 7-21,
2008 YES
Stakeholder Committee meeting #6 to review survey
results January 31, 2008 YES
Review Land Use Efficiency Measures survey
results with Planning Commission
February 20,
2008 YES
Stakeholder Committee meeting #7 to review survey
results and finalize committee recommendations
February 28,
2008 YES
Identify and evaluate potential measures to increase
the likelihood that needed residential development
will occur (Land Use Efficiency Measures). Present
Stakeholder recommendation to Planning
Commission and City Council
March 18, 2008
(PC)
April 13, 2008
(CC)
YES
Task 3: Verification and Updating of Inventory (staff & ECO Northwest)
Inventory recalculation due to project hold
Two new inventory recalculations were
completed during this time as new inventory
maps were produced to verify accuracy of
spreadsheet information.
One additional inventory recalculation has
been completed to include steep slopes &
floodplain (per direction from DLCD)
Inventory was updated to July 2008
August 2007
August 2008 YES
Coordinate adoption of Springfield population
projection with Lane County 2007- October
2009
YES
Task 4: Revised Residential Land & Housing Needs Analysis, Integration of RLS
with CIBL / Goal 14 Analysis & Preliminary Policy Development
Public open houses to present the revised findings of
the RLS and preliminary determination of need and
to get input on proposed Land Use Efficiency
Measures
April 2, 2009
May 14 & 20,
2009
YES
Produce revised inventory map
April 2009
YES
Recalculate Needs Analysis in response to updated
inventory & population projection.
May-June 2009
YES
Present RLS findings to Planning Commission for
review and get input on proposed Land Use
Efficiency Measures
April 16 & June
2, 2009 YES
Present RLS findings to City Council for review and
get input on proposed Land Use Efficiency Measures April 13, 2009 YES
Incorporate RLS findings into Goal 14 Alternatives
Analysis
April – June
2009 YES
Present revised RLS findings and preliminary UGB
concepts at CIBL Stakeholder Meeting June 11, 2009 YES
Attachment 3-2
Planning Commission Work Session – Present
revised RLS findings and get input on Land Use
Efficiency Measures to provide needed housing
density & mix
June 2, 2009
YES
Present draft RLS findings, proposed Land Use
Efficiency Measures and preliminary UGB concepts
at public open houses
July 16, 2009
August 12, 2009 YES
Reconvene Stakeholder Committee and multifamily
housing developers at Planning Commission work
session to review the housing inventory & needs
findings and gather input on proposed Land Use
Efficiency Measures implementation actions
July 21, 2009 YES
Staff verified inventory to account for PAPAs not
documented in LCOG data August - October YES
Send RLS Report to DLCD for review (45-Day Notice
of Proposed Adoption)
September 3,
2009 YES
Prepare addendum to RLS report if necessary to
correct the inventory October 12, 2009 YES
Planning Commission Public Hearing for
review/adoption of Residential Land & Housing
Needs Analysis – first reading
October 20, 2009 NO
City Council Public Hearing for review/adoption –
second reading
November 16,
2009 NO
Complete Step One. Determine the number and type (e.g. single family and multi-
family) of housing units needed to house the projected population residing within
Springfield's jurisdictional share of the area subject to the Eugene-Springfield
Metropolitan Area, consistent with requirements of HB 3337, Goal 14, ORS
197.296, and OAR 660-008. Make the determination of buildable land sufficiency
by December 31, 2009.
Task 5: Prepare Metro Plan Amendment -
Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential
Land & Housing Element Policy Development
IN
PROGRESS
Prepare Draft Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan
Residential Element (plan policies) October 30, 2009 IN
PROGRESS
Prepare Draft Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan
Diagram (plan designations and overlays) October 30, 2009 IN
PROGRESS
Submit Draft Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan
Metro Plan amendment to DLCD December 2009 NO
Public open house and hearing(s) - Comment period
on Draft Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan
December -
February 2010
and ongoing
through public
review process
NO
Task 6: Refine Springfield 2030 Plan policies and
determine the effect of implementation of new
policies and designations on the land supply and
UGB Alternatives Analysis
December 2009
– ongoing
through public
review process
NO
Attachment 3-3
Conduct public hearings (Springfield and Lane
County Planning Commissions, City Council and
Board of Commissioners) on adoption of Springfield
2030 Refinement Plan including Residential Land &
Housing Needs Analysis, CIBL & Springfield Urban
Growth Boundary
February – April
2010 NO
Complete Step Two. Prepare Goal 14 report. Make final determination of whether a
UGB expansion is required to provide sufficient land to accommodate 20-year inventory
of buildable land to provide for housing needs.
Complete Step Three. Acknowledgement of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan
Attachment 3-4
PROPOSED LAND USE EFFICIENCY MEASURES The Residential Lands Study Stakeholder Committee and the Planning Commission reviewed and prioritized potential Land Use Efficiency measures and recommended that the City Council consider implementing these measures or consider changing existing policies to increase the land‐use efficiency derived from these measures. Two public open houses were conducted in April‐May 2009 to gather input on the proposed measures. At the 4‐13‐ 09 work session, the City Council directed staff to work with the Planning Commission to develop the planning tools necessary to implement new measures. Some implementation will be deferred due to the complexity of issues and limited staff resources. This chart provides a summary of proposed policies and implementing ordinances. The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Attachment 4-1 HIGH PRIORITY MEASURES PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS Land Use Efficiency Measure RLS Stakeholder Committee Recommendation 2‐28‐08 Planning Commission Recommendation 3‐18‐08 City Council Recommendation 4‐13‐09 Input from Public Open House Survey (11 respondents) 4‐2‐09 Draft Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Input from Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan public review process February‐March 2010 1. Maximum lot size Supports measure No consensus. PC directed staff to monitor lot sizes to inform future discussion. Some are concerned that continuing to allow partitions that create lots larger than 1/2 acre in the unincorporated areas is not efficient use of remaining land in the UGB. CC is reluctant to impose maximums but is interested in policies that provide variety and choice of lot sizes High priority Combine with #2: Minimum density in LDR District. 2. Minimum density in the Low Density Residential district Supports measure No recommendation. Acknowledged the relationship between small lots and affordable housing. Counci l is interested in providing options for higher density neighborhoods, lot sizes and housing types to further the goal of affordable home ownership. Medium priority Staff recommends: Consider adopting a minimum density of 6 dwelling units/acre net for new land divisions in the LDR to reflect the existing minimum lot sizes (4,500 and 5,000 sq. ft. and 6,000 sq. ft. for corner lots with duplexes), with exemption for non‐cluster subdivisions in Hillside Development Overlay District. Adopt code amendment to clarify the existing UF‐10 land division development standards that require future development plans (shadow plat requirements ). Adopt new low‐moderate density single family zoning district standards to encourage affordable small lot development (see #4). 3. Reduce street Supports measure Supports measure CC recognizes the complexity of this issue. Lower priority A future interdepartmental work program item will address land efficiency, potential cost savings, new ways to manage
Attachment 4-2 width standards Directed PW and DSD staff to put this on a future work program. PW to take the lead. stormwater , climate issues, emergency access and traffic concerns. PW staff will bring examples from communities where alternative street standards had been proven effective 4. Allow small lots Supports measure Supports measure Counci l is interested in providing options for higher density neighborhoods, lot sizes and housing types to further the goal of affordable home ownership. Supports measure Staff was directed to prepare code amendments to implement a new low‐moderate density single family zoning district plan designation and zoning that would allow 3,000 sq. ft. foot lots and require a density of 8‐15 du/ac and to identify additional opportunities where such a district could be applied. Staff believes the new district may be applicable to Low Density Residential neighborhoods in Glenwood and Jasper‐Natron area. Opportunities will be reviewed during the Glenwood Refinement Plan Update project and Jasper – Natron planning. Staff has identified additional opportunities where the new low‐moderate density single family zoning district may be useful in resolving existing plan zone conflicts. Staff will provide information to the Planning Commission at a future work session. 5. Cluster development: examine barriers that discourage the use of cluster development Supports measure Supports measure and asked staff for additional information to identify impediments. Supports measure. Supports measure Staff will prepare draft code amendments to remove/reduce regulatory impediments and identify incentives to encourage and reward cluster development. Staff will prepare draft code amendments to clarify how cluster development and density transfers standards may be applied in the Hillside Overlay District. Street design standards are currently an impediment. See # 3. 6. Increase allowed densities. Consider increasing (or eliminating) density maximums in high density zones The Planning Commission prioritized higher density development in the Glenwood and Downtown Urban Renewal Districts and in Gateway. Supports measure. Supports measure Staff proposes to increase density maximums in existing high density districts within ¼ mile of EmX transit stations (Transit Corridor Overlay District). Consider increasing density minimums in Glenwood Riverfront District and Downtown District, as guided by current planning efforts. Consider instituting a density bonus program to allow and encourage additional density/ building height increases in “receiving” areas identified in the Glenwood and Downtown District plans.
Attachment 4-3 7. Increase opportunities for development of duplexes, etc. Consider expanding where duplexes, tri‐plexes, or quad‐plexes are allowed, including allowing more of these housing types in LDR if appropriate. This includes considering elimination of the restriction that allows duplexes on corner lots only in LDR to allow more duplexes in subdivisions. Supports measure with added language: “Consider design standards in developing such housing” to the measure. Supports measure Supports measure Adopt new low‐moderate density single family zoning district standards to encourage affordable small lot development Staff proposes to work with the Planning Commission to develop “Universal Design Standards” for residential development that are equitable, clear and objective to replace current standards which require a more complex and less certain land use review process for attached housing, cluster development and multifamily housing. Staff proposes consideration of a simplified and expedient Type I design/development review process (Ministerial decision) for review of residential permit applications for uses permitted outright in the zone. MEDIUM PRIORITY MEASURES PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS 8. Nodal development Consider additional areas for nodal development Supports measure Supports measure Supports measure Consider expansion of the Glenwood node through the Glenwood Refinement Plan process Consider expansion of the Downtown node through the Downtown District Plan process Consider future work program project: Downtown to Gateway EmX Corridor Plan to identify and evaluate nodal development opportunities along the new transit corridor Consider future work program project: Main Street Corridor plan Apply TC Overlay District to existing high density housing areas within ¼ mile of transit stations. Implement Jasper‐Natron Specific Plan ND 9. Allow mixed‐use development Consider additional areas to allow mixed‐use in conjunction with the CIBL study. Supports measure Supports measure Supports measure UGB Alternatives Analysis to consider locations for mixed use areas Consider future work program project: Main Street Corridor plan Update Glenwood Refinement Plan to expand mixed use concept beyond the Glenwood Riverfront Plan site. Consider future work program project: Downtown to Gateway EmX Corridor Plan to identify and
Attachment 4-4 evaluate mixed use development concepts along the new transit corridor. Consider creation of an “ Employment Campus/Employment Center” mixed use employment plan designation and consider applying the designation to existing and new Campus Industrial areas located along transit corridors 10. Transit Oriented Development Consider increasing densities allowed along transit corridors. Supports measure Supports measure Supports measure Downtown District Plan Glenwood Refinement Plan Update Consider Transit Corridor Overlay Plan Designation (see #6) 11. Allow Co‐Housing Explore barriers to allowing co‐housing development in LDR. Supports measure and added “Consider co‐housing with design standards in high‐density zones” Supports measure Supports measure No proposal has been developed at this time LOW PRIORITY MEASURES PROPOSED IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS 12. Density bonus Supports measure Supports measure Supports measure Lower priority Staff proposes consideration of exception to building height limit and/or additional density in designated density receiving areas (Glenwood Riverfront District and Downtown District) when developer provides specified community benefits such as construction of affordable housing units or dedication of public open space ‐ to encourage high density development and to achieve community development objectives. Such a program would require add’l staff time to develop, implement and administer. 13. Transfer of Development Rights Supports measure Supports measure Supports measure Lower priority No proposal has been developed at this time 14. Expedited Project Review Supports measure Supports measure Supports measure 50/50 Supports measure/ Lower priority Staff proposes consideration of a simplified and expedient Type I design/development review process (Ministerial decision) for review of residential permit applications for residential uses permitted outright in the zone. 15. Accessory Dwelling Units Supports measure Supports measure Supports measure Med‐low priority Staff consideration of a simplified and expedient Type I design/development review process (Ministerial decision) for review of residential permit applications for residential uses permitted outright in the zone. Staff proposes to work with the Planning Commission to develop “Universal Design Standards” for residential
Attachment 4-5 development that are equitable, clear and objective to replace current standards which single out attached housing, cluster development and multifamily housing. 16. Multifamily Tax Credit Consider modifying the code to give more flexibility for accessory dwelling units Supports measure Supports measure Low priority Staff proposes consideration of a simplified and expedient Type I design/development review process (Ministerial decision) for review of residential permit applications for residential uses permitted outright in the zone, including Accessory Dwelling Units. Staff proposes consideration of establishing another Vertical Housing Tax Credit District in the Glenwood Riverfront District (we currently have this tool in Downtown only).
ADDENDUM TO THE SPRINGFIELD RESIDENTIAL LAND AND NEEDS ANALYSIS
In its report to the city, ECONorthwest stated that Springfield has 2,485 acres in tax lots that are designated for
residential uses. Of these, about 935 acres within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) are considered vacant and
buildable. Table S‐2 is an excerpt from pg. ii of the ECONorthwest report that shows vacant land by plan designation.
Table S‐2. Vacant residential land by plan designation, Springfield UGB, 2008
Plan Designation Tax Lots
Total Acres
in Tax Lots
Developed
Acres
Constrained
Acres
Buildable
Acres
Low Density Residential 981 2,137 72 1,241 824
Medium Density Residential 126 329 132 102 95
High Density Residential 8 19 1 2 16
Total 1,115 2,485 205 1,345 935
Source: City of Springfield GIS data; analysis by ECONorthwest
Subsequent to the release of the ECO Northwest report, staff found instances where adopted Metro Plan and
Refinement Plan amendments did not find their way into the regional database which ECONorthwest used for its
analysis. Between August and October, staff reviewed each of the adopted plan amendments passed since 1982 to
identify amendments that were not entered into the regional database. Staff then totaled the impact of the uncounted
amendments on the residential inventory.
The uncounted amendments, when figured into the inventory, resulted in a net loss of .27 acres of residential land. This
includes an increase of 2.66 acres of Low Density Residential and a loss of 2.93 acres of Medium Density Residential
land.
The table below list those Metro Plan and Refinement Plan Amendments which were not counted.
Uncounted Metro Plan and Refinement Plan Amendments Impacting the
Residential Land Study
Old
Designation
New
Designation Ordinance # Map/Tax Lot Acreage
LDR CC 6058 1702333107400 0.55
LMI LDR 6135 1702312103800 1.55
LMI LDR 6135 1702312103900 0.40
LMI LDR 6135 1702312104000 0.37
LMI LDR 6135 1702312104100 0.38
MDR C 5516 1702314106600 0.11
MDR C 5516 1702314106700 0.13
MDR C 5784 1702313106702 0.46
MDR C 6024 1702324202100 0.36
MDR GO 6193 1703252403600* 0.19
MDR GO 6193 1703252404700 0.33
MDR GO 6193 1703252404800 0.33
MDR GO 6193 1703252404900* 0.32
MDR GO 6193 1703252405000 0.19
MDR LDR 5653 1702323304300 0.17
MDR LDR 5653 1702323304400 0.17
MDR LDR 5653 1702323304700 0.17
*buildable
Attachment 5-1
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE
CITY OF SPRINGFIELD
REQUEST TO ADOPT THE SPRINGFIELD ] RECOMMENDATION TO
RESIDENTIAL LAND AND HOUSING ] THE CITY COUNCIL
NEEDS ANALYSIS ]
Case Number LRP 2007-00030
NATURE OF THE APPLICATION
1. House Bill 3337 requires that Springfield demonstrate as required by ORS 197.296 that its
Comprehensive Plan provide sufficient buildable lands within an urban growth boundary to
accommodate estimated housing needs for 20 years on or before January 1, 2010. To
accomplish this requirement, the City of Springfield has commissioned a Residential Land and
Housing Needs Analysis outlining Springfield’s housing needs for the next 20 years.
2. In 2007 the Oregon Legislature passed House Bill 3337 which mandates the City of Springfield
to complete the 20 year buildable residential land inventory analysis and determination on or
before January 1, 2010. The city reads HB 3337 to require the city to complete the initial
stage of the ORS 197.296 process by the end of the year. That initial stage does not include
adoption or amendment of an urban growth boundary or amendment to any comprehensive
plan policies or designations.
3. Local adoption of the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis is an interim
step necessary to comply with the law. The final decision on adoption of the Springfield
Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis shall be made by the Springfield City Council
and the Lane County Board of Commissioners as the Springfield Residential Land and
Housing Needs Analysis is incorporated into the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan, a
refinement plan of the Eugene-Springfield Metro Plan. Subsequent action in compliance with
HB3337 to establish a separate urban growth boundary for Springfield may rely in part on this
document, a variation of this document, or entirely new documentation. The adoption of a UGB
is an iterative process, and depending on how the record develops, the background
assumptions, analysis and determinations in the attached Springfield Residential Land and
Housing Needs Analysis may change.
4. The Springfield City Council directed staff to begin the above referenced study on December
5, 2005.
5. Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing, pursuant to Springfield Development Code
Section 5.2-115, has been provided.
6. The Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis is consistent with ORS 197.296
as described in the attached staff report.
7. On October 20, 2009, a public hearing on the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs
Analysis was held before the City of Springfield Planning Commission. The Development
Services Department staff report, the oral testimony, letters received, written submittals of the
persons testifying at the hearing, and the public record for file # LRP2007-00030 have been
considered and hereby are incorporated into the record for this proceeding.
Attachment 6-1
Attachment 6-2
CONCLUSION
On the basis of this record, the proposed Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis
as submitted is consistent with the criteria of House Bill 3337, ORS 197.296, ORS 197.303, ORS
197.304, the Statewide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules pertaining to housing – OAR 660-
008-0000 - 0040. This general finding is supported by the specific findings of fact and conclusions in
the attached Staff Report and Findings.
RECOMMENDATION
The Planning Commission, at its October 20, 2009 meeting, hereby recommends that the City Council
approve the determination set forth in the Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis,
as presented herein at Case No. LRP2007-00030.
______________________________
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
AYES: _____
NOES: _____
ABSENT: _____
ABSTAIN: _____
Mia Nelson
975 West 5th Avenue #5
Eugene, OR 97402
(541) 520-3763
October 9, 2009
Springfield Planning Commission
City of Springfield
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97477
Re: Draft Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
Dear Planning Commissioners:
Please place these comments in the record of Springfield’s Housing Needs
Analysis adoption process. These comments are made on behalf of both
LandWatch Lane County and myself as an individual. I have reviewed the draft
Analysis dated August 2009, and have four main areas of concern:
1) The assumption that large amounts of already developed and developable land
provide no capacity for additional housing due to the presence of slopes over 25
percent grade.
2) The assumption that constraints such as slope, wetlands, floodplains, riparian
areas and easements preclude use of land for non-residential needs such as
parks.
3) The assumption that non-residential uses such as parks and schools will be
provided for using residentially designated lands, instead of land designated
specifically for those uses.
4) The planned unilateral adoption of the Analysis by Springfield without a
guarantee of a later opportunity for the Lane County Board of Commissioners to
question the validity of the Analysis when the corresponding UGB expansion is
initiated in 2010.
According to Table 6-4 of the Analysis, the situation with Springfield’s 20-year
land supply is as follows:
Housing: 119 acre surplus within UGB
Parks, Government, Schools, Churches, etc: 463 acre deficit
NET EFFECT: 344 acres of new land needed
Table 6-3 says that Springfield’s vacant land supply is only 956 acres. However,
Table 3-3 (attached) shows that there is another 1,345 acres of land with
development capacity that is nevertheless deemed “not available for housing”
because it is “constrained”. Map 3-4 (attached) shows vast areas of
Springfield’s vacant lands as “constrained” due to slope and deemed unavailable
Springfield Planning Commission
October 9, 2009
Page 2 of 3
to meet any part of Springfield’s land need. A cursory look at what has actually
happened in the Thurston Hills shows that just because land has constraints, this
does not mean that it cannot or will not be developed. Much of this vacant land is
either already developed (such as MountainGate) or likely will be developed in the
future.
While your staff may argue that OAR 660-008-0005(2)(c) permits exclusion of
land over 25% from residential inventories, this OAR does not require you to do
that. It is not realistic to exclude building lots in developed subdivisions, claiming
that they are unbuildable simply due to slope, while continuing to issue building
permits for those lots. It is not realistic to pretend that absolutely no
development will occur on these hillside sites, while Springfield’s code allows such
development. Neither the Springfield Planning Commission nor the Lane County
Board of Commissioners is under any obligation to go along with this approach. If
your staff truly believes that all this land is completely undevelopable, then why
haven’t they proposed banning all development on slopes over 25%?
Even if constraints such as steep slopes, riparian areas, wetlands, utility
easements and floodplains can properly be considered a barrier to residential
development, that does not mean these constraints are a barrier for use as
parklands. In fact, many of these features are desirable qualities for parklands,
and OAR 660-008-0005(2) does not permit the exclusion of these lands for non-
residential uses. Again, there are real life examples demonstrating Springfield’s
willingness to use steep lands for parks. Yet the three parks planned for
MountainGate, which together comprise almost 100 acres, are not recognized
as such since this land was zeroed out of the calculations due to being
considered “constrained” because of slope. This can easily be seen in the
attached annotated portion of Map 3-4 alongside a sales brochure from
MountainGate.
The upper portion of Table 3-3 also shows an additional 43 acres of
“constrained” park/school land and 62 acres of “constrained” public land.
Whether or not the constraints present on this land (which are not specified in
the table) really do render the land unusable for parks, schools or other public
needs is not a foregone conclusion. Therefore the true amount of “constrained”
land available for parks, schools or other public uses may be even higher than the
1,345 acres listed in the lower section of Table 3-3.
Another problem is that while land needs other than residential are being
provided for in this Analysis (government, schools, utilities, parks, churches,
charities, etc.), the only land considered available for these non-residential needs
is residentially designated land. Per page 9: “The land base includes all lands in
the Springfield portion of the Metro UGB that are either fully or partially within a
residential plan designation.” This approach is confirmed in Tables 3-2 and 3-3,
and on Map 3-1 (attached); only residentially designated lands are tallied. A
review of Springfield’s Metro Plan diagram (attached) reveals large areas
designated “Government and Education” and “Public Land & Open Space”; if they
Springfield Planning Commission
October 9, 2009
Page 3 of 3
have any additional capacity, these lands should be considered fully available to
meet Springfield’s future park, school and government land needs. Yet there is
no analysis of these lands.
These three assumptions are not trivial; indeed they appear to form the entire
basis for the proposed 344-acre residential UGB expansion. Table 6-2 states that
357 acres of land are needed to meet park needs; this is a bit more than the
344 total acres the Analysis recommends adding to the UGB. That means that if
344 acres of new parks can be sited on constrained lands and/or on existing
park-designated lands, Springfield’s existing vacant residential lands would be
enough to fully meet the 20-year demand.
Finally, I am concerned by your staff’s intention to unilaterally adopt this Analysis
without obtaining co-adoption from the Lane County Board of Commissioners. My
understanding is that Springfield staff are not sure whether the Board will have
the ability, legally, to question this Analysis when Springfield initiates the
corresponding UGB expansion proposal sometime next year. I am also unsure
about this, and my understanding is that at least some at DLCD are unsure as
well. The effects of HB3337 are a bit murky, and it appears that it may well be
impossible for any of us to determine what the Board’s legal rights are in this
situation.
In the absence of certain assurance that the Board of Commissioners will retain
full review authority, it appears the Board’s only option is to jump into this process
as a regular participant, and then appeal Springfield’s decision if its concerns are
not addressed. If the proposed draft is adopted unchanged by Springfield, then
without the ability to question this Analysis down the road, the Board would have
little choice but to approve the proposed 344-acre UGB expansion. This
segmented adoption process therefore could function as an end run around the
Board’s authority to regulate UGB expansions. A better plan would be to submit
this Analysis for Board co-adoption as part of the ongoing process.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment.
Sincerely,
Mia Nelson
Attachments: Table 3-3 from the Analysis
Map 3-4 from the Analysis
Annotated Map 3-4 with MountainGate sales brochure
Map of Springfield’s Metro Plan designations
Map 3-1 from the Analysis
Table 6-2 from the Analysis
Cc: Lane County Board of Commissioners
DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis ECONorthwest August 2009 Page 13
Table 3-2. Lands designated for residential uses, Springfield UGB, 2008 Source: analysis by ECONorthwest Table 3-3 shows residential acres by classification and constraint status for the Springfield UGB in 2009. Analysis by constraint status (the table columns) shows that about 4,585 acres are classified as built or committed (e.g., unavailable for
development), 1,962 acres were classified as constrained, and 935 were classified
as vacant buildable.
Table 3-3. Residential acres by classification, Springfield UGB, 2009
Source: City of Springfield data; analysis by ECONorthwest
Note: No buildable acres are shown for master planned areas because the master plan identifies the number of
dwelling units. This capacity is reflected in Table 3-7.
Area ValueSpringfield UGB Number of Tax Lots 22,627 Acres in Tax Lots 12,139Springfield CIBL Tax Lots in Residential Designations 20,159 Acres in Land Base in Residential Designations 7,483
Land available
for housing
Classification Tax Lots Total Ac
Developed
Ac
Constrained
Ac Buildable Ac
Land with no development capacity
Developed 18,745 4,408 3,944 464 0
Park/School 96 335 292 43 0
Public 58 79 17 62 0
Right of Way 145 175 127 48 0
Subtotal 19,044 4,997 4,380 617 0
Land with development capacity
Master Planned 18 151 128 23 See notes
Partially Vacant 234 841 77 308 456
Vacant 863 1,493 0 1,014 479
Subtotal 1,115 2,485 205 1,345 935
Total 20,159 7,482 4,585 1,962 935
Land not avialable for
housing
(The interpretation and purpose of the Plan Diagram, and descriptions
of the land uses and symbols shown, are contained in Chapter II-G.)
4/08/04
The information on this map was derived from digital
databases on Lane Council of Governments’ regional
geographic information system. Care was taken in
the creation of this map, but it is provided "as is".
LCOG cannot accept any responsibility for errors,
omissions, or positional accuracy in the digital data
or the underlying records. Current plan designation,
zoning, etc., for specific parcels should be confirmed
with the appropriate governmental entity - Eugene,
Springfield, or Lane County - with responsibility for
planning and development of the parcel. There are no
warranties, express or implied, accompanying this product.
However, notification of any errors will be appreciated.
VALID AT 11X17 SCALE ONLY
A MAIN
Q
BI-5D
I-105
JASPER5TH28TH42ND MARCOLACAMP CREEK
E
THURSTON
G
CENTENNIAL
MI
LL7TH2ND58TH21STOLYMPIC
10TH69THMCKENZIEGATEWAY
32NDMCVAY31ST70THHARLOW
67THDAISY14TH19TH 66TH30THASPENBELTLINE
FRANKLIN36TH48TH35THHWY 58
FAIRVIEW
HAYDEN BRIDGE
YOLANDA
57THLAURAPI
ONEER PARKWAY EAST52ND18THHIGH BANKS
COMMERCIAL
INTERNATIONAL
HWY 9
9
SGONYEARAINBOWPA R K W A Y
I-5 ONRAMP
PRIVATE
BOB STRAUBME NL O
GAME FARM
I
-5 OFFRAMPOLD COBURGBRACKENFERNGAME FARMDAISY
30TH
A
FRANKLIN
JASPERPRIVATEG
I-5 OFFRAMPI-5HWY 58
MAIN
E
City of Springfield
O r e g o n
Map 3-1.
Residential Land by
Plan Designation
ECONorthwest, April 2009
0 1,900 3,800950
Feet¯
Legend
PUBLICPUBLIC
City Limits
Urban Growth Boundary
Plan Designation
High Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Res Mixed
Medium Density Residential
Page 64 ECONorthwest August 2009 DRAFT: Springfield Housing Needs Analysis
additional facilities. All of these uses will potentially require additional land as a city grows. This section considers other uses that consume land and must be included in land demand estimates. Demand for these lands largely occurs independent of market forces. Many can be directly correlated to population growth. For the purpose of estimating land needed for other uses, these lands are classified into three categories: ! Lands needed for public operations and facilities. This includes lands for city offices and maintenance facilities, schools, state facilities, substations, and other related public facilities. Land needs are estimated using acres per 1,000 persons for all lands of these types. ! Lands needed for parks and open space. The estimates use a parkland standard of 14 acres per 1,000 persons based on the level of service standard established in the Willamalane Park and Recreation Comprehensive Plan, which projected need for parkland in Springfield between 2002 and 2022. ! Lands needed for semi-public uses. This includes hospitals, churches, non-profit organizations, and related semi-public uses. The analysis includes land need assumptions using acres per 1,000 persons for all lands of these types.
Table 6-2 shows land in public and semi-public uses by type. The data show a
total of 1,636 acres in public and semi public uses in the Springfield UGB in
2009. This equates to 24.8 acres per 1,000 persons.
Table 6-2. Summary of public and semi-public land need by type,
Springfield UGB, 2010-2030
Source: City of Springfield GIS data; analysis by ECONorthwest
Table 6-2 shows that there will be an additional need of about 463 acres of
land for all new public and semi-public uses or 21.1 acres per 1,000 people
between 2010 and 2030. The information in Table 6-1 is based on the following
assumptions:
Type of Use Acres
Acres /
1000
Persons
Assumed
Need
(Ac/1000
Persons)
Estimated
Acres 2010-
2030
Government 581 8.8 3.0 44
Utilities 134 2.0 2.0 30
Parks 563 8.5 14.0 357
Schools 277 4.2 0.9 14
Church/Charities/Other 81 1.2 1.2 18
Total 1,636 24.7 21.1 463
From: Moore, Ed W [ed.w.moore@state.or.us]
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2009 10:12 AM
To: PAULY Linda
Cc: MOTT Gregory
Subject: RE LRP2009‐00011 (DLCD File Code Springfield PAPA 0007‐09)
Linda,
Thank you for giving us an opportunity to review the proposed plan amendment to adopt a baseline
determination of 20-year residential land capacity for Springfield as part of your on-going HB 3337 work.
We are working on concluding our review of the attached document entitled "Springfield Residential Land
and Housing Needs Analysis," dated August 2009, and may make some specific comments on elements
of your analysis shortly for the record; if so you will have those comments by the end of this week. But
before we submit any other comments, we have a general questions and possibly a concern regarding
your 'adoption' of this report.
On your PAPA Form 1, you checked "Other" for the type of amendment and state "Springfield's ORS
197.296(3) residential lands inventory, analysis, and determination required 2007 Or Laws Chapter 650
(HB 3337)." Here I am assuming you are referencing ORS 197.304. Our question and possible concern
come down to this:
How is Springfield intending to adopt the "Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis"?
We note that on Form 1 you gave a local file number (LRP2009-00011) which we infer to represent an
amendment to a long range plan; yet the comprehensive plan text amendment box was not checked.
Are you adopting this as an amendment to an acknowledged long range (comprehensive) plan? The
Metro Plan is the acknowledged comprehensive plan for Springfield, and Eugene.
Since you did not identify this PAPA as a Metro Plan Amendment when you submit it (as you have
before),
Are we to assume you are not since it was not filed as such?
How are you adopting the study?
Will Lane County be co-adopting your analysis?
Depending on how you are adopting the study, we may have a concern.
As I am sure you are aware, a number of LUBA and Court of Appeals decisions have determined
that local jurisdiction cannot adopt an analysis required under ORS 197.296 which show an unmet
residential land need without concurrently either amending its UGB to accommodate that need, or
adopting amendments to its land use regulation that will address that unmet residential land need, or
both.
The “Madras” court of appeals case was clear that a city subject to ORS 197.296 cannot adopt a housing
need analysis separately from amending the plan (i.e., moving the UGB or doing other up zoning) as
necessary to actually provide sufficient land zoned (under clear and objective standards) to meet the
Attachment 7-10
Attachment 7-11
newly identified housing needs. Consequently, we believe no “segmented housing need analysis”
adoption is allowed for Springfield, and the Court of Appeals backed that up solidly with the Madras case.
Depending on the nature of the "adoption" you propose, you may be at significant risk of appeal and
remand by LUBA and/or the Court of Appeals.
Please place this e-mail comment into the public record of this proceeding. Should we have additional
comments on LRP2009-00011, I will transmit them in time for consideration by the Springfield Planning
Commission and City Council.
Regards,
Ed
Ed Moore, AICP | SWV Regional Representative
Community Services Division
Dept. Land Conservation and Development
644 A Street | Springfield, OR 97478
Cell: 971.239.9453 | Fax: 541.744.8088
ed.w.moore@state.or.us | www.oregon.gov/LCD/