CC Minutes - 09/28/11 Work Session

Home Browse Search

Ms. O'Donnell shared that the staff believed the information just discussed was leading Eugene toward planning for a 55:45 housing mix ratio, reporting that this mix would result in 8,250 single - family units and 6,750 multi - family units, shifting the mix of new housing by about six percent, and shifting the overall housing mix by about one percent. Ms. Gardner emphasized that Eugene's current housing mix had been the same for last 20 years and was not meeting the needs of many residents. Eugene's high housing costs and low incomes were a significant factor in the recommendation. She anticipated that given existing trends, the gap in housing affordability could grow even wider without action. Ms. Gardner believed the 55:45 mix was reasonable given it shifted the overall mix by only one percent. While the change might move development patterns toward higher densities, she did not think those higher densities would be felt in existing neighborhoods. Speaking to suggestions staff's heard that a more aggressive approach was needed, Ms. Gardner did not think a more substantial shift was justified by the market, and pointed out the City's incremental approach gave it the opportunity to revisit the issue and adjust the ratio if needed. Ms. Gardner reviewed next steps, which included contact with property owners of the areas required to study first if we need even one acre of expansion, public outreach, and work continuing to refine the housing need with a City Council work session in November. Mr. Clark determined from Ms. O'Donnell that the housing ratio of 61:39 reflected the ratio in 2007 and served as the baseline for the Eugene Comprehensive Lands Assessment (ECLA). Mr. Clark suggested that 2001 -2007 represented a "boom time" for housing construction and had resulted in a single - family housing ratio that was closer to 68 percent. He asked why the ratio was not more current. Ms. O'Donnell said that the ECLA technical advisory committee examined that issue because the State required Eugene to consider the years 2001 -2008 and consider the average, which was about 69 percent single- family. The technical advisory committee had decided to use 2007 housing mix as the baseline year because the ratio for 2007 more closely mirrored the housing ratio of the last 20 years. Mr. Clark expressed interest in knowing if the impact of Eugene's decision regarding its housing ratio would result in a higher percentage of single- family housing in nearby communities such as Veneta and Junction City and if it had an impact on their demographic mix, particularly as it related to the percentage of families. He also questioned why the basis for the decision did not include an economic impact analysis. Ms. O'Donnell indicated that staff's efforts were focused on planning for Eugene and the State did not require the City to take into account what was occurring in other communities. Mr. Clark agreed about the need for more affordable housing but suggested that required a land surplus rather than a small land supply. Responding to a concern raised by Mr. Farr about the fact that Eugene's housing costs were among the highest in the country, Ms. Gardner emphasized the importance of a mix of strategies based on the Seven Pillars to accomplish the goals of the process. Speaking to Mr. Clark's remarks about the land supply, Ms. Gardner said her research indicated that there was currently a surplus of development lots in the community. Mr. Farr emphasized the importance of a continuing focus on job creation. He believed the City needed to consider all the factors that made housing in Eugene more expensive because he did not think merely aging the housing stock was going to make it affordable. He suggested that making housing more MINUTES— Eugene City Council September 28, 2011 Page 2 Work Session