Laserfiche WebLink
<br />685 acres have an impro ment to land value ratio of less than 1: 1 (not including <br />areas that have 0).4 <br /> <br />As stated above, a 10 improvement to land value ratio does not necessarily <br />suggest redevelopment. the context of a buildable lands inventory, jurisdictions <br />are only interested in re e elopment that results in higher densities. <br /> <br /> <br />nd value ratio, lands classified as built, Metro <br /> <br />Table 3-10. Improvement t <br />UGB <br /> <br /> Improvement to Land Value Ratio <br />Zoning 0 5-0.49 0.50-0.74 0.75-0.99 1.00-1.99 2.00-2.99 3.00+ No Data Total <br /> development Potential Less Redevelopment Potential <br />Eugene City Limits 370.8 115.2 75.1 67.3 47.4 512.8 937.7 768.5 78.0 2,972.7 <br />Springfield City Limits 179.4 41.0 29.9 30.3 37.0 336.5 791.3 501.0 39.8 1,986.2 <br />Metro UGB 432.7 102.2 66.6 31.4 41.5 100.9 115.0 126.7 38.8 1,055.8 <br />Total Acres 982.9 258.4 171.6 129.0 125.9 950.3 1,843.9 1,396.2 156.5 6,014.7 <br /> <br />Source: analysis by ECONorthwest <br /> <br />Note: analysis does not include surface par i 9 <br />I <br />Table 3-10 shows i p ovement to land value ratio for developed lands by <br />plan designation. The re Its show that about two-thirds of the land with <br />redevelopment potential ( s measured by improvement to land value ratio) are in <br />industrial plan designati s. <br /> <br /> Improvement to Land Value Ratio <br />Zoning 0.25-0.49 0.50-0.74 0.75-0.99 1.00-1.99 2.00-2.99 3.00+ No Data Total <br /> Redevelopment Potential Less Redevelopment Potential <br />Campus Industrial 46.7 5.9 6.9 7.5 41.7 68.9 89.9 14.3 289.3 <br />Commercial 159.3 45.3 42.2 31.5 234.6 465.0 381.2 54.9 1,459.3 <br />Commercial Mixed Use 15.5 3.4 3.9 5.3 45.6 40.9 49.8 13.4 183.7 <br />Heavy Industrial 197.6 57.6 28.8 31.9 268.4 659.7 463.2 30.4 1,835.8 <br />Light Medium Industrial 266.3 50.4 38.6 29.5 259.8 405.0 258.2 37.1 1,436.9 <br />Light Medium Industrial M 4.7 0.4 0.3 0.8 15.1 47.2 28.3 2.3 99.2 <br />Major Retail Center 34.9 6.0 5.0 7.7 50.2 93.5 85.1 1.2 288.3 <br />Medium Density Res Mixed 12.8 0.7 0.8 11.4 13.6 15.1 17.5 2.7 75.9 <br />Mixed Use 9.6 1.9 2.4 0.4 11.5 20.0 17.4 0.2 66.7 <br />Special Heavy Industrial 221.9 5.2 0.0 227.2 <br />University Research 13.6 0.0 0.0 4.4 28.7 5.7 52.5 <br />Total 982.9 171.6 129.0 125.9 950.3 1,843.9 1,396.2 156.5 6,014.7 <br />Source: analysis by ECONorthwest <br />Note: analysis does not include surface par i. 9 <br /> <br /> <br />Table 3-11. Improvement t :and value ratio, lands classified as built, by <br />plan designation, Metro U <br /> <br />4 It is common for county assessment data to not have assess e. t information on improvements. Key examples include mobile homes and <br />other improvements that are assessed as personal property. In e instances, data is missing. <br /> <br />Commercial and Industrial Lands Database <br /> <br />ECONorthwest <br /> <br />September 2006 <br /> <br />Page 18 <br />