Section 4 Land Need This section summarizes the residential and commercial land needs for Junction City. The commercial land needs are from the 2009 EOA with modifications to reflect the updated community vision. The park land needs are based on the City’s adopted plan: “Parks Master Plan (The Parks and Paths of Junction City: an Integrated Parks, Open Space and Trails Master Plan).” The residential land needs are based on an update to the City’s Comprehensive Plan Housing Element. This section addresses Goal 14 need factors 1 and 2 for commercial, park, and residential lands. 1: Goal 14 Need Factor 1 requires cities to demonstrate need to accommodate population growth: Factor 1: Demonstrated need to accommodate long range urban population growth, consistent with a 20-year population forecast coordinated with affected local governments; Goal 14, Factor 1 addresses the need for population growth and housing. Housing needs are a direct function of population growth, and are based on the Lane County population forecast. Moreover, the City must show some relationship between projected population growth and projected employment growth as it relates to employment land need. On June 17, 2009, the Lane County of Commissioners adopted a revised population forecast for Lane County and its cities. The coordinated 2029 population projection for Junction City is 12,922. Lane County contracted with Portland State University to prepare coordinated population projections for Lane County and each of its cities in 2008-09. The Center for Population Research recognized Junction City’s unique employment opportunities by projecting an average annual population growth rate of 3.5% for Junction City from 2010-2030. Employment growth is projected to increase most dramatically from 2010-2015, when the prison and hospital projects are scheduled for completion. As noted in the PSU Forecast (p. 33): “Junction City. The jobs that the new group quarters [the state prison and hospital] facilities will create are assumed to increase the demand for new housing. The expansion of infrastructure will support growth; planning housing development and additional employers will also contribute to higher growth than in the past.”
Section 6: Goal 14 Locational Factors The findings and analysis in Sections 1 and 2 of findings demonstrate that (1) insufficient land exists in the UGB to meet identified residential land needs, (2) there are no suitable sites within the existing UGB that will meet the parkland need, and (3) the city has insufficient land within the UGB to meet the 62-acre deficit of commercial land. Section 6 includes additional findings demonstrating compliance Goal 14 locational factors. As explained in OAR 660-024-0060(5): In determining need, local government may specify characteristics, such as parcel size, topography or proximity, necessary for land to be suitable for an identified need and limit its consideration to land that has the specified characteristics when it conducts the boundary location alternatives analysis and applies ORS 197.298. Evaluation of high-value commercial study areas for UGB expansion Section 5 concluded that Junction City could meet portions of the commercial land need through (1) land use efficiencies within the UGB; (2) including suitable exceptions areas within the UGB and achieving land use efficiencies on those lands; and (3) adding additional high-value agricultural land. Section 5 concluded that three sites might potentially meet the need for a 35-acre sub-regional commercial center (HV 2-D, HV 3, and HV 5). It also concluded: “..based on the preceding analysis, the City finds Area HV 3 to be a better alternative than Areas 2-D or HV 5. The next section provides further analysis of these three areas based on the Goal 14 criteria.” This section further evaluates these study areas against the Goal 14 criteria. Table 6-1. Evaluation of suitable high-value study areas against Goal 14 boundary location factors Factor HV 2-D HV 3 HV 5
Factor 1: Efficient accommodation of identified land needs At 24 this study area is not large enough to accommodate the identified need for a sub-regional commercial center. The City would need to identify additional lands elsewhere to accommodate the uses. Dispersing the proposed uses on multiple sites would be less efficient than a single site. Worst option under this criteria Based on its location at the Hwy 99/36 intersection, its proximity to markets, and the site size (34 suitable acres), this site is well suited to meet the need for a commercial center. Best option this criteria At 42.7 suitable acres, this site is large enough to accommodate the identified need for a sub-regional commercial center. Potential wetlands on the east portion of the site near Hwy 99 potentially require development to be inefficiently located in the western portions of the site. Second best option under this criteria Factor 2: Orderly and economic provision of public facilities and services This site has indirect access to the water and wastewater lines on the west side of Highway 99. Lines would need to be extended approximate 500’ to access the site. Transportation access would be from Highway 36, which would be adequate, but not as desirable as access from Hwy 99 and 36. Worst option for water/waste water; second best option for transportation This site has direct access to the and wastewater lines on the west side of Highway 99. Transportation access would be from Hwy 99 (right in/out) and Hwy 36. The Hwy 99/36 intersection is signalized. Best option under this criteria This site has direct access to the water and wastewater lines on the west side of Highway 99. Transportation access would be from Hwy 99 which would create potentially hazardous left turn movements. Second best option for water, worst option for transportation
Factor 3: Comparative environmental, energy, economic and social consequences Environmental: Minimal—no wetlands or floodplains in this area. Best option under this criteria Energy: Development of a commercial center would reduce trips to Eugene reducing energy consumption. Because the site is not large enough to accommodate all of the proposed uses, the energy benefits would not be as much as for a single site. Second best option under this criteria Economic: Development of a commercial center would have positive economic impacts by capturing sales leakage and creating jobs. Options equal under this criteria Social: Development of a commercial center would have positive social impacts by creating more community amenities and jobs. Options equal under this criteria Environmental: Some wetlands on this site, but they are located at the fringes and could largely be avoided. Second best option under this criteria Energy: Development of a commercial center reduce trips to Eugene reducing energy consumption. Best option this criteria Economic: Development of a commercial center would have positive economic impacts by capturing sales leakage and creating jobs. Options under this criteria Social: Development of a commercial center would have positive social impacts by creating more community amenities and jobs. Options equal under this criteria Environmental: Wetlands exist near Hwy 99 on this site and could not be avoided. Worst option under this criteria Energy: Development of a commercial center reduce trips to Eugene reducing energy consumption. Site is not as close to City core as other sites, thus energy benefits would not be as significant. Worst option under this criteria Economic: Development of a commercial center would have positive economic impacts by capturing sales leakage and creating jobs. Options equal under this criteria Social: Development of a commercial center would have positive social impacts by creating more community amenities and jobs. Options equal under this criteria Factor 4: Compatibility of the proposed urban uses with nearby agricultural and forest activities occurring on farm and forest land outside the urban growth boundary This site is bounded on two sides and a portion of a third side by active agricultural use. Second best option under this criteria The site is bounded one side (west) by ag use and a portion of the south side. The site borders existing businesses on the south, Hwy 99 on the east, and Hwy 36 on the north. Best option under this criteria This site is bounded on three sides by active agricultural use (grass seed farming). Commercial use would conflict with recreational uses at the Junction City Pond to the South. Worst option under this criteria