Item C: Eugene Comprehensive Lands Assessment

Home Browse Search

ATTACHMENT D 5 AC:R PPENDIX EDEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGY The City of Eugene has a legal obligation to inventory the supply and estimate the capacity of buildable land within the UGB. The inventory must consider land that may be used for residential infill and redevelopment. It is our opinion that the City does 20 have an obligation to “create a map or document that may be used to verify and not identify specific lots or parcels that have been determined to be buildable lands” to 21 show residential infill and redevelopment. OAR 660-008-0005(6) defines redevelopable land as “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.” The administrative rule does not define what constitutes a “strong likelihood” for redevelopment. Moreover, neither Goal 10, OAR 660-008, nor ORS 197.296 define “infill.” Planners and Oregon land-use policy have seemed to define infill as either (1) development that occurs in areas that are already largely developed, or (2) development that occurs on “partially vacant” land. Both of those informal definitions have problems. The first one has no agreed upon, much less legally adopted, way of being measured. The second one requires a definition of partially vacant (generally agreed to mean taxlots that have some development, but less—perhaps substantially less—than plan and zone designations would allow, and some amount of vacant acreage—perhaps as little as a quarter acre that might be feasibly developed). To distinguish between infill and redevelopment, some studies have defined infill as new construction on a developed tax lot that occurs without demolition of existing development, and redevelopment as new construction on a developed tax lot that includes the demolition of some existing development (or perhaps the physical connection of new development to existing development). These definitions would require data that are not now collected to be operative, and have no basis in state statute. Given these problems, we recommend basing the definitions directly on OAR 660- 008-0005(6). The definition we propose is not only legally defensible; it is also logically consistent. Our conclusion is that the OAR definition of redevelopment subsumes infill: infill is one type of redevelopment. Redevelopment is development that happens on any land that has been classified as developed (i.e., not vacant). Infill is one way that redevelopment can occur. The legal requirements are described in ORS 197.296(3)(a) and (4)(a)(D). 20 Quoted from ORS 197. 296(4)(c). 21