Item B: Ordinance Concerning Goal 5 Natural Resources Study

Home Browse Search

entitled LCOG Data Request, Homebuilders of Lane County, Undeveloped Residential Land in Eugene and Springfield by Slope Classification). While in Eugene it is assumed that 25% slopes will carry the same density capacity as flat ground (6.9 units per net acre - an assumption that is not borne out in the real world), it is also assumed that all slopes greater than 25% will meet density needs of 3 units per net acre. To the extent that more of the residential acreage impacted by Goal 5 is located on slopes greater than 25%, a correspondingly greater amount of acreage will be required to satisfy the demand assumed in the Residential Land Supply. A hypothetical example will demonstrate the point. The Goal 5 analysis concludes that the buildable supply of low density residential land could be reduced by 404.56 acres with adoption of the Goal 5 provisions. At the time of the 1999 Residential Land Study, 91 % ofthe acreage within the Eugene UGB was assumed to be developed at a density of 6.9 units per net acre and 9% of the acreage was assumed to be developed at 3 units per net acre. It is easy to calculate the amount of demand that could be satisfied on 404.56 acres: 404.56 acres x 91 % = 368.15 x 6.9 units per net acre = 2540 units 404.56 acres x 09% = 36.41 x 3 units per net acre = 109 units Therefore, at the densities assumed under the 1999 Residential Land Supply, the 404.56 low density residential acres lost through Goal 5 would have satisfied 2,649 units oflow density demand. However, if we hypothetically assume that 60% of the vacant residential land impacted by Goal 5 is on slopes equal to or less than 25% slope, and the remaining 40% on slopes greater than 25%, we arrive at a very different result. 404.56 acres x 60% = 242.74 x 6.9 units per net acre = 1,675 units 404.56 acres x 40% = 161.82 x 3 units per net acre = 485 units Under that hypothetical, the land lost through Goal 5 would satisfy only 2,160 units of future demand - 489 units less than assumed under the 1999 Residential Lands Study. Under the best case scenario, assuming 6.9 units per acre, it would take an additional 71 acres from the surplus to make up the difference. Under the worst case scenario - 3 units per net acre - it would take an additional 163 acres from the surplus. We don't know what the actual numbers are because the Goal 5 analysis on the impact on the land supply did not take slope into consideration. We do know that the proportion of slopes greater than 25% to the total acreage is significantly greater today than in the 1999 Residential Lands Study. LCOG data shows that 20% of the current buildable low density residential land is on slopes greater than 25% versus the 9% proportion in 1995. Given that change in ratio, it is possible that the lands impacted by Goal 5 have similar proportions of slopes. The Goal 5 background information provides a table entitled Residential Lands that analyzes the impact on the residential buildable land supply. That table is duplicated