My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Item C: Eugene Comprehensive Lands Assessment
COE
>
City of Eugene
>
Council Agendas 2009
>
CC Agenda - 07/22/09 Work Session
>
Item C: Eugene Comprehensive Lands Assessment
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/9/2010 1:18:49 PM
Creation date
7/17/2009 11:16:06 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council
City_Council_Document_Type
Agenda Item Summary
CMO_Meeting_Date
7/22/2009
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
ECLA: Baseline Assumptions ECONorthwest July 2009 Page 37 <br />There is a practical reason for fussing about these definitions: we have a way to <br />measure redevelopment (including infill), but no good way to measure infill itself, <br />total <br />and no legal definition of infill to give clarity about what we should be trying to <br />measure. <br />For the purposes of this study, we define residential redevelopment as development <br />that (1) occurs on land with existing development, (2) results in a net increase in <br />and <br />dwelling units. The second condition means that the replacement of one dwelling unit <br />with one other dwelling unit would not be counted. This definition includes infill on <br />partially vacant land where there is no demolition, as well as redevelopment that <br />requires demolition of existing structures. Examples of residential redevelopment <br />include: (1) demolition of a single-family dwelling and development of a duplex or <br />apartment building, and (2) partitioning a lot with a single-family house and building a <br />new single-family dwelling on the newly created lot. <br />22 <br />Two CAC meetings have focused on redevelopment. The CAC members are divided <br />about the assumption that the City should make about future redevelopment. Some <br />CAC members are concerned about the amount of redevelopment that has already <br />occurred in established neighborhoods and would like to see policies to limit future <br />infill and redevelopment in some areas. Other CAC members are concerned about the <br />amount of residential land need that Eugene will have over the 20-year period and want <br />policies that increase the efficiency of residential land use (i.e., increase density) within <br />the City’s UGB—one way to reduce need for a UGB expansion is to make and defend <br />the assumption that a larger amount of growth will be accommodated by <br />redevelopment (thus, reducing the need for vacant land). <br />M <br />ETHODS <br />In previous studies conducted by ECONorthwest and other organizations, <br />redevelopment has been addressed by assuming that a certain percentage of residential <br />growth will be addressed through redevelopment, generally from 5% to 20% of new <br />residential development. Metro assumed that “refill” (its term for the combination of <br />23 <br />infill and redevelopment) would account for 26% of new residential development in its <br />2002 study and is currently developing a refill rate assumption for their on-going <br />24 <br />residential land needs study. <br /> <br /> <br /> Subdividing a lot and building an additional dwelling is sometimes referred to as infill. For the purposes of this <br />22 <br />study, we have categorized this type of development as redevelopment. <br /> ECONorthwest used this method in studies for the following cities: Redmond, Madras, Ontario, Lebanon, <br />23 <br />Coburg, Ashland, and McMinnville. <br /> The Metro study is accessible from: http://library.oregonmetro.gov/files/ugr-residentialland.pdf <br />24 <br /> <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.