Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem B: Coordinated Population Projections ECC UGENE ITY OUNCIL AIS GENDA TEM UMMARY Work Session: Coordinated Population Projections Meeting Date: May 28, 2008 Agenda Item Number: B Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Lisa Gardner www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-5208 ISSUE STATEMENT The council received a memo in the May 15 Council packet (Attachment A) that provided an update on the implementation of House Bill 3337 and previewed an upcoming decision point for the council. The council is requested to direct staff to begin the process of establishing a population forecast for Eugene. The establishment of the population forecast is necessary to make progress on the City’s compliance with House Bill 3337 through the Eugene Comprehensive Lands Assessment study. This work session will provide additional detail as the basis for the requested council action. BACKGROUND Lane County is statutorily required to prepare population forecasts for the county as a whole and for each urban area within the county. Some time ago, Lane County delegated its authority to do so to the Lane Council of Governments (LCOG). In 2007, LCOG prepared a coordinated Lane County population forecast at the request of several cities. However, on April 30, 2008, the Board of County Commissioners passed a resolution rejecting LCOG’s forecast, resuming County responsibility for forecasting and stating that the County would wait to conduct the population forecast until its next periodic review. The studies required by House Bill 3337 require that a 20-year population forecast be established for both Eugene and Springfield much sooner than the County’s next periodic review. In the resolution described above, the County acknowledged that state statutes provide an alternate population forecasting method that cities may pursue prior to the County Board’s adoption of a coordinated, county-wide forecast. This alternate method is commonly referred to as the “safe harbor” method. The safe harbor approach allows for the establishment of a population forecast for only those urban areas of the County that request its use. The safe harbor approach has minimal impact on Lane County and simply extends the existing population projection for the area, as determined by the State Office of Economic Analysis, to the later date and assumes that the growth will remain constant to the later date. The safe harbor approach allows cities to lawfully establish a population figure for analysis purposes in situations such as currently exists, where a new figure is not otherwise being adopted. The City of Springfield is moving forward with the initiation of a Metro Plan amendment to begin the process for establishing a safe harbor forecast for its urban area. City of Eugene staff has been coordinating closely with the City of Springfield and Lane County, and believe that, unless the Board of Commissioners changes its course, the safe harbor approach will also be necessary for Eugene to proceed with the analysis required for compliance with HB 3337 in the mandated time-frame. Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080528\S080528B.DOC At a May 19, 2008, Springfield City Council work session, the Springfield City Council approved a staff recommendation to initiate a Metro Plan amendment process to establish a population forecast using the safe harbor approach. If the Eugene City Council chooses to do the same, City of Eugene staff believes that a joint process for amending the Metro Plan (which must include approval by the Board of County Commissioners) with the City of Springfield provides an opportunity to achieve efficiencies in the HB 3337 process, in terms of both time and staff resources required. Included as Attachment B is a City of Springfield work session agenda packet that details the history and approach for determining a population projection. RELATED CITY POLICIES This item is presented in response to State law/compliance with House Bill 3337. COUNCIL OPTIONS 1.Initiate a Metro Plan amendment to adopt a Eugene population forecast based on safe harbor provisions in state law. 2.Direct staff to work with Lane County to encourage the County’s adoption of a different population forecast to make the safe harbor forecast unnecessary. 3.Both options 1 and 2, with direction to staff to abandon the safe harbor process if the County establishes a final forecast that eliminates the need for the safe harbor forecast. 4.Take no action. CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION The City Manager recommends Option 1. SUGGESTED MOTION Move to initiate a Metro Plan amendment to adopt a safe harbor population forecast for Eugene. ATTACHMENTS A. May 14, 2008, Eugene City Council Memo from Lisa Gardner - House Bill 3337 Update B. City of Springfield work session agenda packet B.1 City of Springfield Council Briefing Memorandum B.2 Oregon Revised Statute 197.304 Lane County Accommodation of Needed Housing B.3 April 2, 2008, Letter from Springfield Mayor Leiken to BCC Chair Faye Stewart B.4 April 28, 2008, Letter from Rob Hallyburton to BCC Chair Faye Steward B.5 May 6, 2008, Letter from Jeff Spartz to Springfield Mayor and Council B.6 Lane County Board of County Commissioners Resolution 08-4-3-12 Adopting a New Population Forecast for Lane County B.7 Oregon Revised Statute 195.034 Alternate Population Forecast B.8 Lane County Coordinated Population Projections Adopted February 24, 2005 B.9 Population Forecasts for Urban Growth Boundary Areas in Lane County B.10 Oregon Office of Economic Analysis 2004 Population Forecast B.11 October 15, 2007 Memorandum to Springfield City Council from Bob Parker and Beth Goodman, ECONorthwest Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080528\S080528B.DOC FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Lisa Gardner Telephone: 682-5208 Staff E-Mail: lisa.a.gardner@ci.eugene.or.us Z:\CMO\2008 Council Agendas\M080528\S080528B.DOC ATTACHMENT A Planning & Development Planning City of Eugene th 99 West 10 Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 (541) 682-5377 (541) 682-5572 FAX M www.eugene-or.gov EMORANDUM Date: May 14, 2008 To: Mayor Piercy and City Council From: Lisa Gardner, 682-5208 Planning Division Manager Subject: House Bill 3337 Update Background At the January 2008 follow up work session on the Planning Division Work Plan, staff committed to providing updates to council on the progress of the implementation of House Bill 3337 (HB 3337), as well as seeking additional council input and policy direction as decision points were identified through the project scoping and implementation. The purpose of this memo is to provide an update on progress made in the implementation of HB 3337, as well as to highlight an upcoming council decision point regarding a coordinated population projection. Consultant Selection Process In January 2008, council approved the Planning Division Work Plan, which included a work task for buildable lands, including compliance with HB 3337. As approved in the work plan, the Planning Division will soon begin work on the Eugene Comprehensive Lands Assessment, including analysis of supply and demand for residential and housing (as required by HB 3337). The comprehensive lands assessment will include developing a database for residential, commercial, industrial, and natural resources land inventories, including redevelopment potential of the major land types. Staff has been moving forward with this work plan item, including issuance of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the comprehensive lands assessment. Staff have completed evaluation of proposals, and are in the process of working with the city’s purchasing staff to finalize the consultant selection and move forward with contract execution with the successful proposal. Staff anticipate being able to award the contract by May 20, 2008. A proposed timeline for completion of HB 3337 is included as Attachment A. As the scope and timeline are further refined following the contract execution with the consultant, staff will provide updates to the council. Regional Partnership Opportunities On May 13th, 2008, the Joint Elected Officials (JEO) discussed Regional Planning Coordination issues, including compliance with HB 3337. As part of a regional planning coordination effort, staff from Eugene, Springfield and Lane County have been working diligently to identify individual work plan elements and timelines, as well as seeking opportunities for efficiency in partnering when possible. While Eugene and Springfield are working on different timelines, the processes are parallel, and opportunities may exist to jointly pursue Metro Plan amendments for conforming language recognizing the establishment of two separate Urban Growth Boundaries (UGBs) within the Metro Plan. While regional staff are working together to coordinate separate work tasks within a regional planning framework, Eugene Planning staff will be moving forward expeditiously to meet the statutory requirements and deadlines of HB 3337. The coordinated planning efforts will be included, as directed, for discussion at the next JEO meeting. Staff will continue to provide updates and communicate the progress of HB 3337 as that work plan task moves forward, independent of the communication of the regional planning coordination. Coordinated Population Projection Staff has identified tasks necessary to fulfill the requirements of HB 3337, in anticipation of the consultant work beginning. Section 1 of the new law requires establishment of separate urban growth boundaries for Eugene and Springfield. One step in the process leading to the adoption of the new urban growth boundary is the preparation of a coordinated population forecast as provided in OAR 660-024-0030. During 2007 LCOG (at the request of several cities) processed a coordinated Lane County population forecast that slightly increased the total for several of the 12 cities in Lane County. Towards the end of 2007, the Board of County Commissioners began considering the option of having the County assume the responsibility of coordinated population projections in lieu of LCOG. At a proceeding before the Board of County Commissioners to consider these issues, the Mayor of Springfield informed the Board of County Commissioners of the requirements of HB 3337, and of the Safe Harbor approach (ORS 195.034) to determining population forecasts. This approach was outlined as having minimal impact on Lane County, and simply extends the existing projection to the new later date or projects the urban share of the county, as determined by the State Office of Economic Analysis, will remain constant to the new later date. The City of Springfield is moving forward in the initiation of a Post Acknowledgement Plan Amendment (PAPA) City of Eugene staff have been coordinating closely with the City of Springfield and Lane County, and believe that the Safe Harbor approach is this approach is the correct approach for establishing a coordinated population number so that we can proceed with the analysis required for compliance with HB 3337. Included as Attachment B is a City of Springfield work session agenda item summary that details the history and approach for determining a population projection. Next Steps Staff will continue coordinating with the City of Springfield and Lane County on the coordinated population projection, and will return to council with more detail on the process of the PAPA and the population projection. It is anticipated that staff will seek council approval to co-initiate the PAPA with the City of Springfield at that time. If you have further questions or need additional information, please call me at 682-5208 or contact me by email at lisa.a.gardner@ci.eugene.or.us. Attachments: Attachment A, Eugene Time Line for Addressing HB 3337 Attachment B, City of Springfield Agenda Item Summary on population projections M E M O R A N D U M City of Springfield Date:May 23, 2008 To:Gino Grimaldi COUNCIL From:Bill Van Vactor/Greg Mott BRIEFING Subject:Population Forecast MEMORANDUM ISSUE: Authorize staff to pursue Safe Harbor procedure for required new population projection and subsequent adoption into the Metro Plan. BACKGROUND: During 2007 LCOG (at the request of several cities) processed a coordinated Lane County population forecast that slightly increased the total for several of the 12 cities in Lane County. At the same time, towards the end of 2007, the Board of County Commissioners began considering the option of having the County assume the responsibility of coordinated population projections in lieu of LCOG. At a proceeding before the Board of County Commissioners to consider these issues the Mayor of Springfield informed the Board of County Commissioners of the requirements of HB 3337, and of the Safe Harbor approach (ORS 195.034). The Mayor pointed out this approach would have minimal impact or cost to Lane County (Attachment 3). Safe harbor simply extends the existing projection to the new later date or projects the urban share of the county, as determined by the State Office of Economic Analysis, will remain constant to the new later date. On April 28th the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) sent a letter to the Board of County Commissioners encouraging them to adopt LCOG’s coordinated forecast (Attachment 4). However, on April 30, 2008 the Board of County Commissioners rejected LCOG’s population forecast and indicated that it would assume responsibility for preparation of coordinated population forecasts and would do so as part of the next periodic review process (Attachment 5). At this point in time Springfield staff is aware that the periodic review process is not yet scheduled; that new rules may eliminate the requirement for counties to undergo periodic review; and in either case, is not sure that waiting for the county to undertake periodic review would comply with the City’s required schedule for implementation of HB 3337. Fortunately, there are alternative methods to develop a coordinated population forecast and the most direct method is “Safe Harbor.” Under ORS 195.034 (Attachment 2) there are several predicates to the successful use of the Safe Harbor approach. First, the existing coordinated forecast must be more than 10 years old when the City initiates an evaluation or amendment of its urban growth boundary. In our particular circumstance the forecast used by Lane County and Springfield was prepared by LCOG in 1995, and therefore that requirement is met. Additionally, this 1995 forecast was for a single metropolitan UGB and not for the respective UGB’s mandated by HB 3337. The city has contracted with ECONorthwest to prepare our residential, commercial and industrial buildable lands analysis. This analysis requires a population projection for at least a 20 year period beginning with the initiation of the analysis. Consistent with this need, and with the provisions of ORS 195.034, ECONorthwest has performed the calculations described in the statute. A copy of the adopted LCOG population, proposed LCOG projections and the Safe Harbor calculation is attached (Attachments 7, 8 & 9 respectively). The statute also provides that if Lane County does not take action on the City’s proposed forecast within 6 months, the City may adopt the coordinated forecast with notice to the other local governments in the County. The City needs to include the adopted forecast in the Comprehensive Plan as part of the post acknowledgment plan amendment (PAPA) process. If all of those predicates are met, then the forecast is deemed to satisfy the requirements of statewide land use planning goal 14 relating to urbanization to establish a coordinated 20 year population forecast for Springfield’s urban area. The City may then rely on its forecast as the appropriate basis upon which the City and County will conduct the evaluation of the City’s urban growth boundary. Attachment 1, Page 1 MEMORANDUM 5/23/2008 Page 2 It is therefore our request that the City Council provide direction to staff to follow the process in ORS 195.034 (Safe Harbor) to determine the coordinated population forecast and initiate the subsequent and necessary amendment to the Metro Plan. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize staff to pursue the Safe Harbor approach (ORS 195.034) to comply with City’s coordinated population forecast obligations under House Bill 3337; and, initiate a post acknowledgment plan amendment of the Metro Plan to adopt these new figures. Attachment 1, Page 2 M E M O R A N D U M City of Springfield Date:May 23, 2008 To:Gino Grimaldi COUNCIL From:Bill Van Vactor/Greg Mott BRIEFING Subject:Population Forecast MEMORANDUM ISSUE: Authorize staff to pursue Safe Harbor procedure for required new population projection and subsequent adoption into the Metro Plan. BACKGROUND: During 2007 LCOG (at the request of several cities) processed a coordinated Lane County population forecast that slightly increased the total for several of the 12 cities in Lane County. At the same time, towards the end of 2007, the Board of County Commissioners began considering the option of having the County assume the responsibility of coordinated population projections in lieu of LCOG. At a proceeding before the Board of County Commissioners to consider these issues the Mayor of Springfield informed the Board of County Commissioners of the requirements of HB 3337, and of the Safe Harbor approach (ORS 195.034). The Mayor pointed out this approach would have minimal impact or cost to Lane County (Attachment 3). Safe harbor simply extends the existing projection to the new later date or projects the urban share of the county, as determined by the State Office of Economic Analysis, will remain constant to the new later date. On April 28th the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) sent a letter to the Board of County Commissioners encouraging them to adopt LCOG’s coordinated forecast (Attachment 4). However, on April 30, 2008 the Board of County Commissioners rejected LCOG’s population forecast and indicated that it would assume responsibility for preparation of coordinated population forecasts and would do so as part of the next periodic review process (Attachment 5). At this point in time Springfield staff is aware that the periodic review process is not yet scheduled; that new rules may eliminate the requirement for counties to undergo periodic review; and in either case, is not sure that waiting for the county to undertake periodic review would comply with the City’s required schedule for implementation of HB 3337. Fortunately, there are alternative methods to develop a coordinated population forecast and the most direct method is “Safe Harbor.” Under ORS 195.034 (Attachment 2) there are several predicates to the successful use of the Safe Harbor approach. First, the existing coordinated forecast must be more than 10 years old when the City initiates an evaluation or amendment of its urban growth boundary. In our particular circumstance the forecast used by Lane County and Springfield was prepared by LCOG in 1995, and therefore that requirement is met. Additionally, this 1995 forecast was for a single metropolitan UGB and not for the respective UGB’s mandated by HB 3337. The city has contracted with ECONorthwest to prepare our residential, commercial and industrial buildable lands analysis. This analysis requires a population projection for at least a 20 year period beginning with the initiation of the analysis. Consistent with this need, and with the provisions of ORS 195.034, ECONorthwest has performed the calculations described in the statute. A copy of the adopted LCOG population, proposed LCOG projections and the Safe Harbor calculation is attached (Attachments 7, 8 & 9 respectively). The statute also provides that if Lane County does not take action on the City’s proposed forecast within 6 months, the City may adopt the coordinated forecast with notice to the other local governments in the County. The City needs to include the adopted forecast in the Comprehensive Plan as part of the post acknowledgment plan amendment (PAPA) process. If all of those predicates are met, then the forecast is deemed to satisfy the requirements of statewide land use planning goal 14 relating to urbanization to establish a coordinated 20 year population forecast for Springfield’s urban area. The City may then rely on its forecast as the appropriate basis upon which the City and County will conduct the evaluation of the City’s urban growth boundary. Attachment 1, Page 1 MEMORANDUM 5/23/2008 Page 2 It is therefore our request that the City Council provide direction to staff to follow the process in ORS 195.034 (Safe Harbor) to determine the coordinated population forecast and initiate the subsequent and necessary amendment to the Metro Plan. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Authorize staff to pursue the Safe Harbor approach (ORS 195.034) to comply with City’s coordinated population forecast obligations under House Bill 3337; and, initiate a post acknowledgment plan amendment of the Metro Plan to adopt these new figures. Attachment 1, Page 2