Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinances 2030 ORDINANCE NO. ah?Nib AN ORDINANCE UPDATING AND ADOPTING THE CENTRAL POINT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POPULATION AND DEMOGRAPHICS ELEMENT (2016-2036) Recitals: A. The City of Central Point(City) is authorized under Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) Chapter 197 to prepare, adopt and revise comprehensive plans and implementing ordinances consistent with the Statewide Land Use Planning Goals. B. The City has coordinated its planning efforts with the State in accordance with ORS 197.040(2)(e) and OAR 660-030-0060 to assure compliance with goals and compatibility with City and County Comprehensive Plans. C. Pursuant to authority granted by the City Charter and the ORS, the City has determined to update its Population and Demographics Element to be consistent with the Coordinated Population Forecast, 2015 through 2065, Jackson County dated June 2015 prepared by the Portland State University's Population Research Center. D. Pursuant to the requirements set forth in CPMC Chapter 17.10.100 Amendments— Purpose and Chapter 17.96.010, Procedure, the City has initiated the amendments and conducted the following duly advertised public hearings to consider the proposed amendments: a) Planning Commission hearing on November 1, 2016 b) City Council hearing on November 10, 2016. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Based upon all the information received, the City Council accepts the Staff Report dated November 1, 2016 as Findings of Fact and incorporated herein by reference; determines that changing community conditions, needs and desires justify the amendments and hereby adopts the changes entirely. Section 2. The City Comprehensive Plan Population and Demographics Element is hereby updated and adopted as set forth in Exhibit A —Comprehensive Plan Population and Demographics Element, 2016-2036 which is attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. Section 3. The City Manager is directed to conduct post acknowledgement procedures defined in ORS 197.610 et seq. upon adoption of the Population and Demographics Element. Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this 8th day of December, 2016. ,Zed Mayor Hank Williams ATTO City Recorder Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law Aro' 41I1 Q Planning Department STAFF REPORT CENTRAL Tom Humphrey,AICP, POINTCommunity Development Director STAFF REPORT November 1, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: File No. 15029 City of Central Point 2016-2036 Population& Demographic Element; Applicant: City of Central Point. STAFF SOURCE: Don Burt, Planning Manager BACKGROUND: Population forecasts are an important comprehensive planning tool. They are the basis for identifying a community's long-term land and infrastructure needs. Their availability and accuracy are important. Prior to July 1, 2013 Oregon law required each county to adopt a ( "coordinated population forecast" for its urban and rural areas. As ( 't) I "itisl Point ( part of the Regional Planning Process,Jackson County updated N`"' 1ti-"'nal Plan 1�a iu c,:�lorll.(56 their Population Element in 2007. In 2008 the Cityof Central '-��10 17,736 17.169 (567) Point updated its Population Element using the County's forecast 2011 18,050 17 275 (815) as required. On July 1, 2013 HB 2253 was signed into law and 2012 18,411 17.275 (1,136) 2013 18,77817.315 (1,463) became immediately effective. HB 2253 re-assigns the 7 2014 19,152 17,375 (1,777) responsibility for the preparation of population forecasts from all 2015 19,541 18.329 (1,212) counties to the Population Forecasting Center at Portland State 2020 21,491 19,332 (2,159) University (PRC). Population forecasts will now be updated under 2025 23,483 20.484 (2,999) a continuing four-year cycle. For Jackson County that cycle was 2030 25,880 21.638 (4,242) completed in 2015 and is referred to as the Coordinated 2035 28,469 22,680 (5.789) Population Forecast 2015 through 2065, Jackson County(PRC 2040 31,237 23,706 (7,531) Forecast). The forecast produced by PRC estimates 50-year 2050 34,155 25,416 (8,739) population growth, but also provides shorter-term incremental 2060 3 l 32 26,836 (12.315) forecasts(for example, 1-, 10-and 20-year forecasts). By law the son>a:Jackson County Comprehensive Ilan,2007Population Element PRC Forecast must be updated under a continuing four-year cycle. Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan,2010 PSU Proposed Population Forecast,2015 As a pre-requisite to updating the urban growth boundary it is necessary for the City to amend its 2008 Population Element to reflect the PRC Forecast. The most significant change is the difference between the 2008 population forecast(higher)and the PRC Forecast(lower). The table identifies the divergence between each forecast from 2010 to 2060. In all other respects(average household size, age cohorts, etc.)the two population forecasts are consistent. ISSUES: The PRC Forecast reduces the prior population forecast by 21%. If, over time, the PRC Forecast holds the City will need less land to service its projected growth needs. However, the PRC Forecast is required to be updated every 4-years. Future updates may result in increases in the population forecasts. EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS: Attachment"A—City of Central Point 2016-2036 Population&Demographics Element" Page 1 of 2 ACTION: Consideration of Resolution No. 835 recommending to the City Council approval of the City of Central Point 2016-2036 Population&Demographics Element. RECOMMENDATION: Approve Resolution No. 835 recommending to the City Council approval of the City of Central Point 2016-20136 Population&Demographics Element of the Comprehensive Plan. Page 2 of 2 Exhibit A Population mis Demographics Element • • JJ ri g 2016-2036 • City of Central Point •yi ' Comprehensive Plan 6 i' Adopted Central Point City Council Ordinance No.abD 1i — DLCD Acknowledged City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION 2 2. SUMMARY 3 3. POPULATION HISTORY&CHARACTERISTICS 3 3.1. Historic Growth Rate 4 3.2. Percentage Share of the County Population 4 3.3. Race and Ethnicity 5 3.4.Components of Population Growth 5 3.5.Natural Increase 5 3.6.Net Migration 6 3.7.Age Characteristics 7 3.8.Household Types 8 3.8.1.Family Households 8 3.8.2.Non-Family Households. 9 3.8.3.Group Quarters 9 3.9.Average Household Size; 10 3.10.Median Household Income 10 4. ASSUMPTIONS FOR FUTURE POPULATION CHANGE 12 5. POPULATION PROJECTIONS 2016 to 2036 12 6. PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH CHARACTERISTICS 13 6.1.Age Characteristics 13 6.2.Growth Rate 13 6.3.Percentage Share of County. 13 6.4.Race&Ethnicity. 14 6.5.Source of Growth. 14 6.6.Household Characteristics. 14 6.7.Median Household Income 14 7.Population&Demographic Goals&Policies 14 APPENDIX A 16 Element I -Population and Demographics Page I City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan 1. INTRODUCTION The purpose of the Population Element is to track the historic characteristics and growth of the City's population, and based on that information develop a 20-year forecast of the population. Based on the 20-year population forecast the City can plan for land and urban service needs to accommodate the population growth. The City's Population& Demographics Element(Population Element)was last updated in 2008. Since 2008 two events have occurred,each of which has significantly affected the results of the City's 2008 Population Element. The first event was the Great Recession;the second was HB 2253 designating the Portland State University Population Research Center(PRC)as the sole and official provider of population forecasts for cities and counties throughout the state'.Together these two events necessitate an update of the City's Population Element. The Great Recession Within a year of completion of the Jackson County 2007 Population Element(Feb. 2007)2,which was the basis for the City's 2008 Population Element,the national economy was hit hard by the Great Recession(December 2007 to June 2009). The economic impacts of the Great Recession were severe and the recovery period extremely sluggish and tenuous. Because job losses were deep across all sectors of the economy and the recovery in job creation slow, the reliance on net migration as a key component to population growth had a significant impact on the City's 2008 population forecasts. HB 2253 Prior to 2013 Oregon law required that counties prepare coordinated population forecasts according to "generally accepted" demographic methods. The result was population projections throughout the state that were based on highly diverse methods of forecasting that varied from county to county,both in terms of frequency of completion and outcome. Recognizing that population forecasting is the foundation for long-term planning the Oregon legislature in 2013 approved House Bill 2253 assigning Portland State Population Research Center(PRC)the responsibility for preparing coordinated population forecasts for all counties and cities. The population forecasting requirements of HB 2253 were later adopted as ORS 195.033. The population forecasts presented in this Population Element are from the Coordinated Population Forecast 2015 through 2065 for Jackson County dated June 2015 prepared by PRC ("PRC Population Forecast') in accordance with ORS 195.033 and is attached to this Population Element as Appendix A. Typically,the City's Population Element is based on a 20-year planning period. The PRC Population Forecast uses a fifty(50)year forecasting period3 with a four(4) year update cycle4,allowing for consideration of both short and long term population change variables, and the re-evaluation of demographic trends and economic events used in prior forecasts. Consequently, every four years the City's Population Element will be updated using the latest PRC Jackson County forecast. The Portland Metro is exempt from this requirement. 2 Basis for determining the City's 2008 population projections. 3 ORS 195.003(6) ORS 195.033(4) Element 1 -Population and Demographics Page 2 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan The first update for the PRC Population Forecast for Jackson County is tentatively scheduled to occur in 2019. PRC's population forecasts are not considered land use decisions and as such are not subject to review or appeal other than as provided in ORS 195.033. However,the City's Population Element, because it contains policies based on assumptions beyond the PRC Population Forecasts, is considered a land use action and therefore subject to the procedural requirements of Section 17.96,Comprehensive Plan and Urban Growth Boundary Amendments, City of Central Point Municipal Code. With the completion of each 4-year cycle the Population Element will be reviewed for changes in forecasted population and any needed policy changes. If no policy changes are required then the Population Element will be re-certified by resolution of the City Council, including incorporation of the up-dated PRC Population Forecast as an appendix to the Population Element. If, for any reason,the policies of the Population Element need to be modified,then the Population Element shall be updated by ordinance in accordance with ORS 195.033. 2. SUMMARY When factors such as the economy, fertility, social trends, etc. are factored into the latest population forecast for the planning period 2016-2036 the result was a 27%reduction in the City's initial 2008 population forecast figuress(29,006 vs 22,882). When measured in terms of the population's average annual growth rate(AAGR)the forecasted AAGR for the planning period dropped from 4.3%to 1.1%. Based on the forecasted growth rate it is projected that between 2016 and 2036 the City of Central Point is expected to realize a net increase in population of 4,357. Based on a projected average household size of 2.5 persons6 the population increase will result in the formation of 1,743 new households by 2036. The City's population is aging and is expected to continue to do so over the course of the planning period.Net in-migration will be the primary source of population growth(97%),while natural increases will continue to decline (3%). The City's population will also become racially and ethnically more diverse, a trend which is expected to continue throughout the planning period. 3. POPULATION HISTORY&CHARACTERISTICS The Town of Central Point was founded on February 26, 1889 and by 18907 had a population of 543. With the exception of the decade between 1910 and 1920 the City has steadily grown (Figure 1),and today is the third largest city in Jackson County. 5 Extended to 2036 from the Jackson County 2007 Population Element. 6 City of Central Point Regional Plan Element ' 1890 U.S.Census Element 1 -Population and Demographics Page 3 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan FIGURE 1. HISTORIC & FORECAST POPULATION, CITY OF CENTRAL POINT, 1900-2036 35,000 - 30,000 •- 25.000 z 20.000 1 ��' 2. 15.000 `is 10,000 I I -Forecasts 5.000 a� q� q,�0q�Oc�0gb0q^Oq�OgdJp` ,19/ Source: \ ♦ <4 \ ♦ ♦ 1 �, '. '1. Source:U.S.Census and PRC Coordinated Population Forecast,Jackson County 3.1. Historic Growth Rate Between 2000 and 2007 the City of Central Point's average annual growth rate (AAGR) was 4.5%, three times Jackson County's AAGR of 1.5% (Figure 2). Since the Great Recession the City and County have experienced a significant slowdown in population growth, particularly from net in-migration. For the period 2010-2015 the City's AAGR dropped below 1%, while the County's AAGR dropped to .6%. As Figure 2 illustrates the decline in AAGR is not an unusual event following recessions, but does bounce back as the economy improves. FIGURE 2. CITY OF CENTRAL POINT HISTORIC AVERAGE ANNUAL GROWTH RATE 1910-2015 14% III11E1 — -- 12% 41 10% r. „„IL1' 8% 6°0 ' E 4/0 2% MIP - • 0% 0 _Z%1910 ' i 1•,0.1'•4 1•,•0 1 1 -1990 2000 2010 2C15 -4% City AAGR ---•County AAGR Source:U.S.Census&U.S.Census Bureau American Fact Finder 3.2. Percentage Share of the County Population. The City's percentage of the county population has consistently increased (Figure 3). In 1900 Central Point's population accounted for 2.4%of the County's population. and remained fairly constant until 1970 when the City's percentage participation jumped Element I -Population and Demographics Page 4 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan from 3.1%to 4.2%. By 2015, the City accounted for 8.7%of the County's population. 3.3. Race and Ethnicity Since the 2000 Census the City's racial diversity has continued to increase,particularly within the Hispanic Community, which more than doubled in size from 4%in 2000 to 9% in 2014 (Figure 4). During this same period the County's Hispanic population increased from 7%to 11%(Figure 5). FIGURE 4.CITY OF CENTRAL POINT RACIAL POPULATION DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENTAGE, 2000- 2014 100% 92% ---- •— -- — 86% 80% 60% 40% 20% y�o 4% 4% 5% 0% I 2000 2014 ■White •Hispanic ❑Other Source:2000 U.S Census&U S Census Bureau American Fact Finder FIGURE 5.JACKSON COUNTY RACIAL POPULATION DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENTAGE, 2000- 2014 100% 597b 83% 80% 60% 40% 20% 7% ----- imm::% 6% 6% 0% - ■White •Hispanic DOther Source.2000 U S.Census&U.S.Census Bureau American Fact Finder 3.4. Components of Population Growth. There are two basic sources of population growth: natural increase(births minus deaths) and net migration (in-migration minus out-migration). 3.5. Natural Increase Growth occurring as a result of natural increase typically represents a very small Element I -Population and Demographics Page 5 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan percentage of a community's population growth. Since 2000 the City's net natural increase rate (Figure 6) went from 7.6 to 8.0 per thousand population, representing 3% of the City's total population increase during that period. During the same period the County's rate of natural increase dropped from 1.0 to 0.8 (Figure 7). 3.6. Net Migration. By far the most significant contributor to a community's population growth is net migration. Based on the 2010 U.S. Census, the predominant source of growth for Jackson County was due to net migration, which was responsible for over 80% of the county's population growths . FIGURE 6. CITY OF CENTRAL POINT NATURAL POPULATION RATE*, 2000 and 2010 18.0 16.0 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 9.0 0.0 Birth Rate Death Rate Net Change ■2000 ■2010 Source: PRC Coordinated Population Forecast,Jackson County 8 U.S. Census Bureau,Census 2010 Element 1 -Population and Demographics Page 6 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan FIGURE 7.JACKSON COUNTY NATURAL POPULATION RATE*, 2000 and 2010 14.0 12.0 10.0 8.0 6.0 11.: 10.4 4.0 2.0 1.0 0.8 Birth Rate Death Rate Net Change ■2000 ■2010 Source PRC Coordinated Population Forecast,Jackson County 3.7. Age Characteristics. Between 2000 and 2014 the City's median age increased from 34.4 to 37.5 reflecting the continued aging of the Baby Boom generation. For the County the median age changed from 39.2 to 42.7 during the same period. Figures 8 and 9 illustrate the changes in the three major age cohort categories as a percentage of the City's and County's total population. Element 1 -Population and Demographics Page 7 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan FIGURE 8. CITY OF CENTRAL POINT AGE STRUCTURE OF POPULATION, 2000 through 2014 100% 90% 14.b°o 1-.9°o — 80% 70% 60% — 50% 61.9% 63.3% 60.6% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2000 2010 2014 0-14 ❑1S.64 ■65+ U.S.Census&U.S.Census Bureau American Fact Fm er FIGURE 9.COUNTY AGE STRUCTURE OF THE POPULATION,2000 through 2014 100% ],. ME_ 80% 60% - 64.0% 64.5% 63.6% 40% - 20% 0% - - - 2000 2010 2014 IN 0-14 ❑15-64 ■65+ U.S.Census&U.S.Census Bureau American Fact Finder 3.8. Household Types. A by-product of population growth is household formation. The U.S. Census allocates the population to one of two household types; family and non-family. By definition a household consists of all the people occupying a housing unit9,which is the basic unit for residential land use planning. Since the early 1900's(Figure 10)these two household types (family and non-family) have been gradually changing in response to socio-economic conditions. The following is a brief overview of these characteristics as they relate to the City. In addition to the decline in average household size,the distribution of households by type has been gradually shifting from family to non-family households. 3.8.1. Family Households. 9 U.S.Census,Current Population Survey(CPS)-Definitions and Explanations Element 1 -Population and Demographics Page 8 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Family households are comprised of two or more people who are related by marriage,birth, or adoption. Family households are most commonly represented by married-couples. Family households have, and continue to, dominate household types. Although the formation of family households continues to increase, it is doing so at a decreasing rate. In 1990, family households in the City accounted for 77%of all households. By the 2010 Census, and through 20141°, family households represented 71%of total households. 3.8.2. Non-Family Households: Non-family households are comprised of single persons, or two or more people who are not related. In 1990, non-family households represented 23%of all households within the City. By 2010 non-family households represented 29%of all households. As the City's population grows older,the number of non-family households is expected to increase as the elderly lose spouses and the young postpone marriage, or get divorced. FIGURE 10. CITY OF CENTRAL POINT FAMILY vs.NON-FAMILY HOUSEHOLDS, 1990- 2010 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% — 10% 23% 1 25% 29% 0% 1990 2000 2010 ■Familyp DN -Family U.S.Census&U.S.Census Bureau AmerlcanFact Finder 3.8.3. Group Quarters. To a much lesser extent there is a third, and smaller segment of the population that is housed in what is referred to as group quarters. Group quarters are defined as non-institutional living arrangements for groups not living in conventional housing units or groups living in housing units containing ten or more unrelated people or nine or more people unrelated to the person in charge. Examples of people in group quarters include a person residing in a rooming house, staff quarters at a hospital, college dormitories, or in a halfway house. The City's Group Housing population has historically accounted for a very small percentage of the population. Based on the 2000 Census City's Group Housing population accounted for 0.8%(106)of the City's total population and by 2010 had dropped to 0.4%(70) of the total population. 10American Fact Finder,2014 Element I -Population and Demographics Page 9 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan 3.9. Average Household Size; Historically, the City's average household size has been gradually declining from 3.42 average persons per households in 1960 to 2.61 in 2010 (Figure 11). At 2.61 the Cities average household size exceeded the County's average of 2.40, and by 2010 is slightly higher than the U.S. average of 2.58. FIGURE 11.AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD SIZE, 1950- 2010,CITY OF CENTRAL POINT & JACKSON COUNTY 3.5 3 2.5 , 2 M1 ✓l !r cc O1 ' 1.5 0 0 ,� c r! m r .a o . ONco en .a o M 1 SO tV N III 0. . — 0 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 Source:U.S.Census City •County 3.10. Median Household Income. Figure 13 compares the median household income for the City of Central Point and the County from 2000 to 2014. As illustrated in Figure 12 the City's median household income over the past 15 years peaked in 2010 and by 2014 declined to $46,765. FIGURE 12.AVERAGE HOUSEHOLD INCOME, 2000-2014,CITY OF CENTRAL POINT & JACKSON COUNTY $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 $30,000 et. co co o $20,000 0 $10,000 +� $- 2000 2010 2014 ■City County U.S.Census&U.S.Census Bureau American Fact Finder In Figure 13 the median household income for 2010 and 2014 has been adjusted to 2000 dollars. The Great Recession's impact on median household income has not yet recovered from 2000 median income level, which is consistent with Element t -Population and Demographics Page 10 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan national and state changes in median household income. Figure 14 compares the changes in income distributions from 2000, 2010, and 2014. FIGURE 13. CITY OF CENTRAL POINT MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME MEASURED TO 2000 DOLLARS $60,000 $50,000 $40,000 —4 Lel $30,000 N - N Ch NN 00 n N. LO tiD$20,000 0 o vti al v o c Tr m N Tr $10,000 in 2000 2010 2014 ■Median Household Income 02000 Dollars Source:2000 U.S.Census&U.S.Census Bureau American Fact Finder FIGURE 14. HOUSEHOLD INCOME DISTRIBUTION, CITY OF CENTRAL POINT 2010- 2014 100% 90% — 5% 11% 12% 80% — 34% 70% -- 40% 34% 0$100,000 or More 60% ❑$50,000 to$99,000 50% — ■$25,000 to$49,999 40% 30% ❑$10,000 to$24,999 20% — ■Less than$10,000 10% — 20% 15% 15% 0% —111/1 2000 2010 2014 Source:2000 U.S.Census&U.S Census Bureau American Fact Finder As of 2014 The City of Central Point had the second highest median income of all cities in Jackson County (Figure 15). Element 1 -Population and Demographics Page 11 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan FIGURE 15. 2014 MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME $60,000 $50,000 $40,000Lri n cn $30,000 0 rn n COCO Lri .-t ao o $20,000 m r`t `" to u1 ry . ko p v Lei fro at $10,000 171 03 m V} . trj} S- 6 *1/4. Ny • \� °va e, c,1aQ° e<4 \a � a) t Q` J eQcac CP 0J <a° \ate Q°� �ra Source:U.S Census Bureau American Fact Finder 4. ASSUMPTIONS FOR FUTURE POPULATION CHANGE The City's future population projections are from the Coordinated Population Forecast 2015 through 2065 Jackson County (Appendix A). These projections are based on the Cohort- Component method of population forecasting, which essentially relies on trends in age, fertility/births, mortality, and net migration. As the population of Jackson County continues to age the fertility rate will continue to decline. The decline in the fertility rate will be minimal, dropping from 1.9 in 2015 to 1.8 by 206511. Historically changes in fertility rates have not had a significant impact on the City's population growth. Similarly, the death rate, although increasing is expected to have a minimal impact on population growth over the next twenty years. When these two components are combined the net difference does not yield any significant increases in the population. As previously discussed of all the components of population change migration is the greatest contributor to population growth throughout the planning period. Migration is also the most volatile component and is very sensitive to changes in the economy, both positive and negative. 5. POPULATION PROJECTIONS 2016 to 2036 Over the course of the next twenty (20) years the City of Central Point's population is expected to increase at an average annual rate of 1.1%, taking the population from 17,485 in 2015 to 2,882 in 2036 (Table 1). During this same period the City's percentage of the County population is expected to increase from 8.7% to 8.9%. By 2065 Central Point will be the second largest City in Jackson County 12. 11 Coordinated Population Forecast 2015 through 2065 Jackson County 12 ibid Element I -Population and Demographics Page 12 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan TABLE 1. POPULATION GROWTH PROJECTIONS CITY OF CENTRAL POINT AND JACKSON Year ( eniral Point .Jackson Count 2016 18,525 213,286 2020 19,332 222,583 2025 20,484 234,561 2030 21,638 245,963 2035 22,680 255,840 2036 23,255 257,741 ( hinge 4,730 44.455 Source: PRC Coordinated Population Forecast,Jackson County 6. PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH CHARACTERISTICS The following represents a general overview of the City's and County's population characteristics throughout the 2016-36 planning period. The information is taken from PRC's Coordinated Population Forecast 2015 through 2065, Jackson County. 6.1. Age Characteristics. Based on the projected County age cohorts (Figure 16)the City's population will continue to get older with the 65+ cohort claiming a larger percentage of the population. Although the City has a younger overall population it will experience a similar increase in the 65+ cohort over the next 20-years. The aging of the population will also have an effect on the demand for housing services, ranging from reductions in household size to changing demand for housing types (i.e. senior housing). FIGURE 16. COUNTY AGE STRUCTURE OF THE POPULATION, 2016 vs.2036 120.0% 100.0% 20.8% 80.0% ,"-). 60.0% 62A% 40.0% 56.5% 20.0% 0.0% 2016 2036 ■0-14 1-115-64 ■65+ 6.2. Growth Rate. The City's population will continue to grow, but at a decreasing average annual growth rate of 1.1% vs. the 2.9% experienced between 2000 and 2010. Similarly, the County's average annual growth rate is expected to decline to 1.0% vs. 1.1%. 6.3. Percentage Share of County. Element 1 -Population and Demographics Page 13 City of Central Point Comprehensive Nan As illustrated in Table 2 the City's percentage of the County's population will continue to increase from 8.7%in 2016 to 8.9%by 2036. 6.4. Race& Ethnicity. The race and ethnicity of both Jackson County and the City of Central Point are expected to continue to diversify. However,over the 20-year planning period the White, non-Hispanic population will remain the dominant race. 6.5. Source of Growth. The City's primary source of growth will come from net migration(90%+),which is heavily dependent on the economy. 6.6. Household Characteristics. As illustrated in Figure 11 the average household size has been declining since 1960. For the City of Central Point,the average household size has dropped from 3.42 in 1960,to 2.61 in 2010. It is expected that during the term of the planning period (2016-2036)the average household size will continue to decrease, but at a decreasing rate. The City of Central Point Regional Plan Element uses an average household size of 2.5. 6.7. Median Household Income. Changes in median household income will be a function of the strength of the general economy and the rate of inflation. Time will tell. 7. Population & Demographic Goals &Policies Goal- To maintain population and demographic forecasts as the primary data source for developing and implementing plans and programs for management of the City's growth. Policy 1-Population Forecast: The population data presented in Table 1 is the acknowledged population forecast for the period 2016 through 2036 and is to be used in maintaining and updating the City's Comprehensive Plan. It shall be the responsibility of the City to update the data presented in Table 1 based on the decennial U.S. Census. During the interim census periods adjustments to Table 1 will be based on the latest PRC Forecast(4-year cycle). Policy 2-Average Household Size. For purposes of calculating household formation, the City will use an average household size of 2.5 for lands within the urban growth boundary. This figure will serve as the basis for determining the number of households expected to be formed throughout the planning period. It shall be the responsibility of the City to periodically monitor and, if necessary, update the average household size through data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau. Policy 3-Household Distribution. For purposes of calculating household formation, the City will use 70%as the percentage of households that are family households and 30%as Non- Family Households. These figures shall be used in maintaining and updating the City's Comprehensive Plan. It shall be the responsibility of the City to periodically monitor and, if necessary, update the percentage offamily households through data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau. Policy 4—Racial and Ethnic Diversity. Racial and Ethnic Diversity. The City acknowledges the changing racial and ethnic diversity of the community and will continue to develop the strategies and tools necessary to ensure that the benefits of growth meet the needs of all people within the Element I -Population and Demographics Page 14 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan community regardless of race or ethnicity. Element 1 -Population and Demographics Page 15 City of Central Paint Compnheasive Nam APPENDIX A-Coordinated Population Forecast, 2015 Through 2065, Jackson County Element 1-Population and Demographics Page 16 Coordinated Fo o u at • ion Forecast r - _,ice raw _., „..400. 11111111.411111 2015 _. __ _ _ . ., .. a Through rr .w r .:c.' Arr 1' 2065 11 w Jackson County Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB) & Area Outside UGBs 4 Population Research Center PORTLAND STATE UNIVERSITY Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2015-2065 Prepared by Population Research Center College of Urban and Public Affairs Portland State University June, 2015 This project is funded by the State of Oregon through the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the State of Oregon. 1 Project Staff: Xiaomin Ruan, Population Forecast Program Coordinator Risa S. Proehl, Population Estimates Program Manager Jason R. Jurjevich, PhD. Assistant Director, Population Research Center Kevin Rancik, GIS Analyst Janai Kessi, Research Analyst Carson Gorecki, Graduate Research Assistant David Tetrick, Graduate Research Assistant The Population Research Center and project staff wish to acknowledge and express gratitude for support from the Forecast Advisory Committee (DLCD), the hard work of our staff Deborah Loftus and Emily Renfrow, data reviewers, and many people who contributed to the development of these forecasts by answering questions, lending insight, providing data, or giving feedback. 2 How to Read this Report This report should be read with reference to the documents listed below—downloadable on the Forecast Program website(http://www.odx.edu/prc/opfp). Specifically,the reader should refer to the following documents: • Methods and Data for Developing Coordinated Population Forecasts—Provides a detailed description and discussion of the forecast methods employed.This document also describes the assumptions that feed into these methods and determine the forecast output. • Forecast Tables—Provides complete tables of population forecast numbers by county and all sub- areas within each county for each five-year interval of the forecast period (i.e.,2015-2065).These tables are also located in Appendix C of this report. 3 Table of Contents Executive Summary 6 Historical Trends 8 Population 8 Age Structure of the Population 9 Race and Ethnicity 10 Births 11 Deaths 13 Migration 14 Historical Trends in Components of Population Change 14 Housing and Households 15 Assumptions for Future Population Change 18 Assumptions for the County and Larger Sub-Areas 18 Assumptions for Smaller Sub-Areas 19 Supporting Information and Specific Assumptions 19 Forecast Trends 20 Forecast Trends in Components of Population Change 23 Glossary of Key Terms 25 Appendix A:Supporting Information 26 Appendix B:Specific Assumptions 49 Appendix C: Detailed Population Forecast Results 52 4 Table of Figures Figure 1.Jackson County and Sub-Areas—Historical and Forecast Populations,and Average Annual Growth Rates(AAGR) 7 Figure 2.Jackson County—Total Population by Five-year Intervals(1975-2010 and 2010-2014) 8 Figure 3.Jackson County and Sub-Areas—Total Population and Average Annual Growth Rate(AAGR) (2000 to 2010) 9 Figure 4.Jackson County—Age Structure of the Population(2000 and 2010) 10 Figure 5.Jackson County—Hispanic or Latino and Race(2000 and 2010) 11 Figure 6.Jackson County and Oregon—Total Fertility Rates(2000 and 2010) 11 Figure 7.Jackson County—Age Specific Fertility Rate(2000 and 2010) 12 Figure 8.Jackson County and Oregon—Age Specific Fertility Rate(2000 and 2010) 12 Figure 9.Jackson County and Sub-Areas—Total Births(2000 and 2010) 13 Figure 10.Jackson County and Sub-Areas—Total Deaths(2000 and 2010) 13 Figure 11.Jackson County and Oregon—Five-year Migration Rates(2000-2010) 14 Figure 12.Jackson County—Components of Population Change (2000-2014) 15 Figure 13.Jackson County and Sub-Areas—Total Housing Units(2000 and 2010) 16 Figure 14.Jackson County and Sub-Areas—Persons per Household (PPH)and Occupancy Rate 17 Figure 15.Jackson County—Total Forecast Population by Five-year Intervals(2015-2065) 20 Figure 16.Jackson County and Larger Sub-Areas—Forecast Population and AAGR 21 Figure 17.Jackson County and Larger Sub-Areas—Share of Countywide Population Growth 21 Figure 18.Jackson County and Smaller Sub-Areas—Forecast Population and AAGR 22 Figure 19.Jackson County and Smaller Sub-Areas—Share of Countywide Population Growth 22 Figure 20.Jackson County—Age Structure of the Population (2015, 2035,and 2065) 23 Figure 21.Jackson County—Components of Population Change, 2015-2065 24 Figure 22.Jackson County—Population by Five-Year Age Group 52 Figure 23.Jackson County's Sub-Areas—Total Population 53 5 Executive Summary Historical Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county and these local trends within the UGBs and the area outside UGBs collectively influence population growth rates for the county as a whole. Jackson County's total population has grown steadily since 2000,with an average annual growth rate of above one percent between 2000 and 2010(Figure 1); however some of its sub-areas experienced more rapid population growth during the 2000s. Eagle Point and Central Point UGBs posted the highest average annual growth rates at 5.6 and 2.9 percent, respectively, during the 2000 to 2010 period. Jackson County's positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of substantial net in-migration and natural increase. Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years.This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to slower growth in births.The more rapid growth in deaths relative to that of births caused natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to decline to almost nothing by 2014.While net in-migration outweighed declining natural increase during the early and middle years of the last decade,the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—slowing population growth by 2010.Since 2010 net in-migration has driven rising population growth rates,while natural increase continues to shrink. Forecast Total population in Jackson County as a whole as well as within its sub-areas will likely grow at a slightly faster pace in the first 20 years of the forecast period (2015 to 2035), relative to the last 30 years(Figure 1).The tapering of growth rates is largely driven by an aging population—a demographic trend which is expected to lead to natural decrease (more deaths than births).As natural decrease occurs, population growth will become increasingly reliant on net in-migration. Even so,Jackson County's total population is forecast to increase by nearly 44,600 over the next 20 years(2015-2035)and by nearly 95,600 over the entire 50-year forecast period(2015-2065).Sub-areas that showed strong population growth in the 2000s are expected to experience similar rates of population growth during the forecast period. 6 N e A * (p .IED FO IQ N N N a A N C 0 0 0 0 A A O .i A A A O A .UQ Q In TV N N co co A n Min n no- * Q Q G v-i O O A pi O epi A A A .-i A O co .N.. .c 4S co �i �n N IIpp �3ppd `�� 1p7mpS o I°�� ° iF p 10 N N .-i N b H fT V1 l0 .a-1 IDD U. 1N�1 N 5 C C {off Mnsr W00 .�I Q ID M W W M O ucl R IKft N N N rl s ID n fT I!1 CI N ID Q cc c p L 10 N iinn .I m I/Pt N n a In CO so .+ M .62 C N al a fen 10 N ON1 0 001 CMO N Q N c N O N N .L-I` O1 a-I N O V� N tff t0 O y CO 10 c N O O. C E Q�Q n m viD a .�-I N D a o a Q .•i O Q r`7 vi O f i .-I 0 0 .-i O O a C kE to a E m o c (_(pp t9� I��nnn App Ignp ^ {Q/pt r O Y N END r. I(t N 1� IIA 1-. n A § `�• ,-` I-I g (9- R 00 rl N n V� N pi t0 CO ; y j Y fRV in O I ul i E d o n cif ptO1 M O N .-I �Ip� �up1 pp pMp pp a s .0 N O fell 0N1 N a0 M N tD .O-I o O 8p a N N d' N Nto 'a N N N N 0 ,yip IC >I N ~ O b�` N C @ o 0W ta O Li C YI C u Y .E io C N W U E _ �_ 7 to Li l/ C To a0 — C X OC V fO n Y o o c ar > «• '0 u E CI O M N V pW .0 N CI J y C N V N N 0 S Y Q in7 a/ IVa 2 d CC V1 I- O N 4 an m V W C7 LL 1 Historical Trends Different growth patterns occur in different parts of the county. Each of Jackson County's sub-areas was examined for any significant demographic characteristics or changes in population or housing growth that might influence their individual forecasts. Factors that were analyzed include age composition of the population, ethnicity and race, births,deaths, migration, and number of housina units as well as the occupancy rate and persons oer household(PPH). It should be noted that population trends of individual sub-areas often differ from those of the county as a whole. However, in general, population growth rates for the county are collectively influenced by local trends within its sub-areas. Population Jackson County's total population grew by about 83 percent between 1975 and 2014—from roughly 114,000 in 1975 to more than 208,000 in 2014(Figure 2). During this approximately 40-year period,the county realized the highest growth rates during the 1970s,which coincided with a period of relative economic prosperity. During the early 1980s,challenging economic conditions, both nationally and within the county,yielded a sharp decline in population growth.Since 1985,the county has experienced steady population growth averaging just over one percent per year. During the 2000s, population growth remained positive and averaged more than one percent per year,in spite of the Great Recession. Figure 2.Jackson County—Total Population by Five-year Intervals(1975-2010 and 2010-2014) 250,000 - 4.0% 3.5% ca 200,000 --- -- ad 3.0% , `0os re 150,000 2.5% r 0. a 2.0% 7 100,000 — --- - --- -- --- --- --- 1.5% 0 u Q ,5 1.0% 4,5 50,000 -- -- - - --- -- --- --- - - - 0.5% ° 0.0% 1975 1930 1955 1990 1995 0D 2085 2010 2014 70 Population 113,550 133,000 136,445 146,389 167,930 181,269 192,054 203,206 208,375 �AAGR 3.8% 3.2% 0.5% 1.4% 2.7% 1.6% 1.2% 1.1% 0,6% Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,1980,1990,2000,and 2010Censuses;Population Research Center(PRC),July 1st Annual Estimates 1975, 1985,1995,2005,and 2014. Jackson County's population change is the sum of its parts, in the sense that countywide population change is the combined population growth or decline within each UGB and the area outside UGBs. During the 2000s,Jackson County's average annual population growth rate stood at 1.1 percent, but the growth rate varied to a large degree in sub-areas across the county.Some UGBs, such as Central Point, Eagle Point,Jacksonville, and Shady Cove, realized average annual growth rates that were well above 8 the countywide rate of one percent(Figure 3).At the same time the remaining UGBs recorded growth rates near or below one percent,or even population decline as was the case for Butte Falls. Most UGBs increased as a share of total county population, but some decreased.The most notable decrease was Ashland.The area outside UGBs experienced an average annual growth rate below that of the county as a whole and declined as a share of total county population between 2000 and 2010. Figure 3.Jackson County and Sub-Areas-Total Population and Average Annual Growth Rate(AAGR)(2000 to 2010) AAGR Share of Share of 2000 2010 (2000-2010) County 2000 County 2010 Jackson County 181,268 203,206 1.1% 100.0% 1020% Ashlandt 20,023 20,626 0.3% 11.0% 10.2% Butte Falls 440 423 -0.4% 0.2% 0.2% Central Point 13,310 17,736 2.9% 7.3% 8.7% Eagle Point 4,952 8,508 5.6% 2.7% 4.2% Gold Hill 1,181 1,228 0.4% 0.7% 0.6% Jacksonville 2,256 2,785 2.1% 1.2% 1.4% Medford 67,865 76,581 1.2% 37.4% 37.7% Phoenix 4,379 4,774 0.9% 2.4% 2.3% Rogue River 2,544 2,714 0.6% 1.4% 1.3% Shady Cove 2,528 3,050 1.9% 1.4% 1.5% Talent 5,683 6,123 0.7% 3.1% 3.0% Outside UGBs 56,108 58,658 0.4% 31.0% 28.9% Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2000 and 2010 Censuses 'For simplicity each UGB is referred to by its primary city's name. Age Structure of the Population Similar to most areas across Oregon,Jackson County's population is aging. An aging population significantly influences the number of deaths, but also yields a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years,which may result in a decline in births.This demographic trend underlies some of the population change that has occurred in recent years. From 2000 to 2010 the proportion of county population 65 or older grew from about 16 percent to approximately 18 percent(Figure 4).1 Further underscoring the countywide trend in aging,the median age went from about 39 in 2000 to 42 in 2010.2 'The population over the age of 65 calculated as a proportion of the working age population is known as the elderly dependency ratio.In general this dependency ratio has been growing more rapidly in recent years. 2 Median age is sourced from the U.S.Census Bureau's 2000 and 2010 Censuses 9 Figure 4.Jackson County—Age Structure of the Population(2000 and 2010) 100% 16.0% 17.6% c 80% 0 ca o 60% 0. 0 40% au 20% 0% 2000 2010 Older than 65 years old •Ages 15 to 64 years old •Younger than 14 years old Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2000 and 2010 Censuses Race and Ethnicity While the statewide population is aging, another demographic shift is occurring across Oregon— minority populations are growing as a share of total population. A growing minority population affects both the number of births and average household size.The Hispanic population within Curry County increased substantially from 2000 to 2010 (Figure 5),while the White, non-Hispanic population increased by a smaller amount (in relative terms)over the same time period. This increase in the Hispanic population and other minority populations brings with it several implications for future population change. First, both nationally and at the state level,fertility rates among Hispanic and minority women have tended to be higher than among White, non-Hispanic women. Second, Hispanic and minority households tend to be larger relative to White, non-Hispanic households. 10 Figure 5.Jackson County-Hispanic or Latino and Race(2000 and 2010) Absolute Relative Hispanic or Latino and Race 2000 2010 Change Change Total population 181,269 1000% 203,206 100.0% 21,937 12.1% Hispanic or Latino 12,126 6.7% 21,745 10.7% 9,619 79.3% Not Hispanic or Latino 169,143 93.3% 181,461 89.3% 12,318 7.3% White alone 160,795 88.7% 170,023 83.7% 9,228 5.7% Black or African American alone 674 0.4% 1,227 0.6% 553 82.0% American Indian and Alaska Native alone 1,782 1.0% 1,874 0.9% 92 5.2% Asian alone 1,583 0.9% 2,304 1.1% 721 45.5% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone 291 0.2% 562 0.3% 271 93.1% Some Other Race alone 198 0.1% 229 0.1% 31 15.7% Two or More Races 3,820 2.1% 5,242 2.6%l 1,422 37.2% Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2000 and 2010 Censuses Births Historical fertility rates for Jackson County don't mirror the decline in total fertility observed for Oregon overall (Figure 6). Furthermore fertility for younger women in Jackson County has remained at a much higher level than for younger women statewide(Figure 7 and Figure 8).As Figure 7 demonstrates, fertility rates for younger women in Jackson County are lower in 2000 compared to 2010,and women are choosing to have children at older ages. While the decrease in fertility among younger women largely mirrors statewide changes,county fertility changes are distinct from those of the state in two ways. First,while fertility among younger women did decrease within the county,the drop was less pronounced than for younger women statewide.Second,the increase in total fertility in Jackson County during the 2000s runs contrary to the statewide decline during this same period.At the same time Jackson County's total fertility remains below replacement fertility. Figure 6.Jackson County and Oregon-Total Fertility Rates(2000 and 2010) 2000 2010 Jackson County 1.87 1.97 Oregon 1.98 1.79 Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2000 and 2010 Censuses.Oregon Health Authority,Center for Health Statistics.Calculations by Population Research 11 Figure 7.Jackson County—Age Specific Fertility Rate(2000 and 2010) 0.14 2000 0.12 a I% — eis 2010 a, 0.10 ...S.. .! N E / % a) o 0.06 ‘ u af I ‘ o. in 0.04 11/4 af i / 0.02 I 0.00 . , . . , , , 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 Five-year age groups Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2000 and 2010 Censuses.Oregon Health Authority,Center for Health Statistics Calculated by Population Research Center(PRC). Figure 8.Jackson County and Oregon—Age Specific Fertility Rate(2000 and 2010) 0.14 --2000 [-- 0.12 — —2010 -- ,, 0.10 ,,„, a aso I N. 0.08 / N E / t a, / S. 0- 0.04 v. / 41) S..0.02 I I N. de O(X) . . • , . 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40-44 45-49 Five-year age groups Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2000 and 2010 Censuses.Oregon Health Authority,Center for Health Statistics.Calculated by Population Research Center(PRC). Figure 9 shows the number of births by the area in which the mother resides. Please note that the number of births fluctuates from year to year. For example a sub-area with an increase in births 12 between two years could easily show a decrease for a different time period; however for the 10-year period from 2000 to 2010 the county as a whole saw an increase in births(Figure 9). Figure 9.Jackson County and Sub-Areas-Total Births(2000 and 2010) Absolute Relative Share of Share of 2000 2010 Change Change County 2000 County 2010 Jackson County 2,050 2,341 291 14.2% 100.0% 100.0% Ashland' 162 123 -39 -24.0% 7.9% 5.3% Central Point 180 270 90 50.1% 8.8% 11.5% Eagle Point 93 103 10 10.8% 4.5% 4.4% Medford 920 1,111 191 20.8% 44.9% 47.5% Smaller UGBs2 234 230 -4 -1.7% 11.4% 9.8% Outside UGBs 462 504 42 9.1% 22.5% 21.5% Sources:Oregon Health Authority,Center for Health Statistics.Aggregated by Population Research Center(PRC). For simplicity each UGB is referred to by its primary city's name. 2 Smaller UGBs are those with populations less than 8,000 in forecast launch year. Deaths While the population in the county as a whole is aging, more people are living longer. For Jackson County in 2000, life expectancy for males was 76 years and for females was 80 years. By 2010, life expectancy had increased to 77 for males and 82 for females. For both Jackson County and Oregon,the survival rates changed little between 2000 and 2010-underscoring the fact that mortality is the most stable component of population change. Even so,the total number of countywide deaths increased (Figure 10). Figure 10.Jackson County and Sub-Areas-Total Deaths(2000 and 2010) Absolute Relative Share of Share of 2000 2010 Change Change County 2000 County 2010 Jackson County 1,877 2,172 295 15.7% 100.0% 100.0% Ashland' 164 190 26 15.8% 8.7% 8.8% Central Point 114 135 21 18.4% 6.1% 6.2% Medford 796 904 108 13.6% 42.4% 41.6% All other areas2 803 943 140 17.4% 42.8% 43.4% Sources:Oregon Health Authority,Center for Health Statistics.Aggregated by Population Research Center(PRC). For simplicity each UGB is referred to by its primary city's name. 2 All other areas includes some larger UGBs(those with populations greater than 8,000),all smaller UGBs(those with populations less than 8,000),and the area outside UGBs.Detailed,point level death data were unavailable for2000,thus PRC was unable to assign deaths to some UGBs. 13 Migration The propensity to migrate is strongly linked to age and stage of life.As such,age-specific migration rates are critically important for assessing these patterns across five-year age cohorts. Figure 11 shows the historical age-specific migration rates by five-year age group, both for Jackson County and Oregon as a whole.The migration rate is shown as the number of net migrants per person by age group. From 2000 to 2010,younger individuals(ages with the highest mobility levels)moved out of the county in search of employment and education opportunities, as well as military service.At the same time the county attracted a large number of middle-aged to older migrants who likely moved into the county for work-related reasons,to retire,or to be closer family members. Figure 11.Jackson County and Oregon—Five-year Migration Rates(2000-2010) 0.10 0.08 0.06 <+c to - 0.02 - /2\e#/ /C:esIe :: .a ---. m m 0.00 f o c -0.02 Jadtson County -0.04 - - - - - ----Oregon - -0.06 3.1 N ti N N A m °41 A Ui ID n �' A Ao tth a J, 6 Jt 6 Jt 6 J1 6 00 - - N N rn en O O In to to to N N CO Five-year age groups Sources;US.Census Bureau,2000 and 2010 Censuses.Calculated by Population Research Center(PRC). Historical Trends in Components of Population Change In summary,Jackson County's positive population growth in the 2000s was the result of substantial net in-migration and natural increase (Figure 12). Meanwhile an aging population not only led to an increase in deaths, but also resulted in a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years.This along with more women choosing to have fewer children and have them at older ages has led to slower growth in births.The more rapid growth in deaths relative to that of births caused natural increase—the difference between births and deaths—to decline to almost nothing by 2014.While net in-migration outweighed declining natural increase during the early and middle years of the last decade,the gap between these two numbers shrank during the later years—slowing population growth by 2010.Since 2010 net in-migration has driven rising population growth rates,while natural increase continues to shrink. 14 Figure 12.Jackson County—Components of Population Change(2000-2014) 4,000 2.5% a, 3,500 2.0% a G .E 3,000 o '�, f4 L ra c 2,500 1.5% o G LID Q--0 2,000 - - G 1.0% .o v C 1500 o fn ` a u dA ,000 C 0.5% 10 500 c 2000 2001 2002 2008 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 201 2012 2013 2014 0.0.0 a a Not Nig. 1,9142,013 2,240 975 1,461 2,540 3,496 2,952 2,092 881 280 388 626 1,660 2,085 aaaa�Nat.Inc. 271 174 224 89 203 339 168 307 467 388 253 222 54 30 30 —AGR 1.2% 1.2% 1.3% 0.6% 0.9% 1.5% 1.9% 1.7% 1.3% 0.6% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% 0.8% 1.0% Sources:Population Research Center,July 1st Annual Estimates 2000-2014.Oregon Health Authority,Center for Health Statistics. Calculated by Population Research Center(PRC). Housing and Households The total number of housing units in Jackson County increased rapidly during the middle years of this last decade (2000 to 2010), but this growth slowed with the onset of the national recession in 2007. Over the entire 2000 to 2010 period,the total number of housing units increased by 20 percent countywide;this equaled more than 15,000 new housing units (Figure 13). Medford captured the largest share of growth in total housing units, with the area outside UGBs, Central Point, Eagle Point, and Ashland also seeing large shares of the countywide housing growth. In terms of relative housing growth Eagle Point grew the most during the 2000s; its total housing units increased nearly 93 percent (1,746 housing units) by 2010. The rates of increase in the number of total housing units in the county, UGBs, and area outside UGBs are similar to the growth rates of their corresponding populations.The growth rates for housing may slightly differ than the rates for population because the numbers of total housing units are smaller than the numbers of persons, or the UGB has experienced changes in the average number of persons per household or in occupancy rates. However, the pattern of population and housing change in the county is relatively similar. 15 Figure 13.Jackson County and Sub-Areas-Total Housing Units(2000 and 2010) AAGR Share of Share of 2000 2010 (2000-2010) County 2000 County 2010 Jackson County 75,737 90,937 1.8% 100.0% 100.0% Ashlandl 9,289 10,735 1.5% 12.3% 11.8% Butte Falls 170 188 1.0% 0.2% 0.2% Central Point 5,072 7,202 3.6% 6.7% 7.9% Eagle Point 1,882 3,628 6.8% 2.5% 4.0% Gold Hill 523 557 0.6% 0.7% 0.6% Jacksonville 1,116 1,548 3.3% 1.5% 1.7% Medford 28,215 33,166 1.6% 37.3% 36.5% Phoenix 2,017 2,251 1.1% 2.7% 2.5% Rogue River 1,309 1,462 1.1% 1.7% 1.6% Shady Cove 1,200 1,533 2.5% 1.6% 1.7% Talent 2,453 2,853 1.5% 3.2% 3.1% Outside UGBs 22,491 25,814 1.4% 29.7% 28.4% Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2000 and 2010 Censuses 1 For simplicity each UGB is referred to by its primary city's name. Occupancy rates tend to fluctuate more than PPH.This is particularly true in smaller UGB areas where fewer housing units allow for larger changes-in relative terms-in occupancy rates. From 2000 to 2010 the occupancy rate in Jackson County declined slightly;this was most likely due to slack in demand for housing as individuals experienced the effects of the Great Recession.A slight drop in occupancy rates was mostly uniform across all sub-areas. Average household size,or PPH, in Jackson County was 2.4 in 2010,down from 2.5 in 2000(Figure 14). Jackson County's PPH in 2010 was slightly lower than for Oregon as a whole,which had a PPH of 2.5. PPH varied across the sub-areas,with all of them falling between 2.0 and 2.6 persons per household. In 2010 Central Point and Eagle Point had the highest PPH of 2.6.Ashland and Jacksonville had the lowest PPH of 2.0. 16 Figure 14.Jackson County and Sub-Areas-Persons per Household(PPH)and Occupancy Rate Persons Per Household(PPH) I Occupancy Rate Change I Change 2000 2010 2000-2010 2000 2010 2000-2010 Jackson County 2.5 2.4 -3.2% 94.4% 91.4% -3.1% Ashlandl 2.2 2.0 -5.4% 94.2% 90.0% -4.1% Butte Falls 2.8 2.5 -7.3% 94.1% 88.3% -5.8% Central Point 2.7 2.6 -2.8% 96.8% 93.8% -3.0% Eagle Point 2.8 2.6 -6.9% 93.5% 89.5% -4.0% Gold Hill 2.5 2.4 -4.9% 89.9% 92.3% 2.4% Jacksonville 2.1 2.0 -5.9% 93.6% 89.0% -4.7% Medford 2.5 2.4 -1.4% 95.4% 92.8% -2.6% Phoenix 2.3 2.3 -1.2% 94.5% 93.2% -1.4% Rogue River 2.1 2.1 -1.2% 92.7% 90.2% -2.5% Shady Cove 2.3 2.3 -4.0% 89.8% 88.3% -1.5% Talent 2.4 2.3 -4.5% 96.1% 93.4% -2.7% Outside UGBs 2.6 2.5 -5.0% 93.3% 89.7% -3.6% Sources:U.S.Census Bureau,2000 and 2010 Censuses.Calculated by Population Research Center(PRC) 1 For simplicity each UGB is referred to by Its primary city's name. 17 Assumptions for Future Population Change Evaluating past demographic trends provides clues about what the future will look like,and helps determine the most likely scenarios for population change. Past trends also explain the dynamics of population growth specific to local areas. Relating recent and historical population change to events that influence population change serves as a gauge for what might realistically occur in a given area over the long-term. Assumptions about fertility, mortality, and migration were developed for Jackson County's population forecast as well as the forecasts for larger sub-areas.'The assumptions are derived from observations based on life course events, as well as trends unique to Jackson County and its larger sub-areas. Population change for smaller sub-areas is determined by the change in the number of total housing units and PPH.Assumptions around housing unit growth as well as occupancy rates are derived from observations of historical building patterns and current plans for future housing development. In addition assumptions for PPH are based on observed historical patterns of household demographics— for example the average age of householder.The forecast period is 2015-2065. Assumptions for the County and Larger Sub-Areas During the forecast period,as the population in Jackson County is expected to continue to age,fertility rates will begin to decline in the near term and continue on this path throughout the remainder of the forecast period.Total fertility in Jackson County is forecast to decrease from 1.9 children per woman in 2015 to 1.8 children per woman by 2065.Similar patterns of declining total fertility are expected within the county's larger sub-areas. Changes in mortality and life expectancy are more stable compared to fertility and migration.One influential factor affecting mortality and life expectancy is advances in medical technology.The county and larger sub-areas are projected to follow the statewide trend of increasing life expectancy throughout the forecast period—progressing from a life expectancy of 79 years in 2010 to 87 in 2060. However in spite of increasing life expectancy and the corresponding increase in survival rates,Jackson County's aging population and large population cohort reaching a later stage of life will increase the overall number of deaths throughout the forecast period. Larger sub-areas within the county will experience a similar increase in deaths as their population ages. Migration is the most volatile and challenging demographic component to forecast due to the many factors influencing migration patterns. Economic,social and environmental factors—such as employment,educational opportunities, housing availability,family ties,cultural affinity, climate change,and natural amenities—occurring both inside and outside the study area can affect both the direction and the volume of migration. Net migration rates will change in line with historical trends unique to Jackson County. Net out-migration of younger persons and net in-migration of older 3County sub-areas with populations greater than 8,000 in forecast launch year were forecast using the cohort- comoonent method.County sub-areas with populations less than 8,000 in forecast launch year were forecast using the housing-unit method.See Glossary of Key Terms at the end of this report for a brief description of these methods or refer to the Methods document for a more detailed description of these forecasting techniques. 18 individuals will persist throughout the forecast period.Countywide average annual net migration is expected to increase from 1,505 net in-migrants in 2015 to 2,855 net in-migrants in 2035.Over the last 30 years of the forecast period average annual net migration is expected to be more steady, increasing to 3,479 net in-migrants by 2065.With natural increase diminishing in its potential to contribute to population growth, net in-migration will become an increasingly important component of population growth. Assumptions for Smaller Sub-Areas Rates of population growth for the smaller UGBs are assumed to be determined by corresponding growth in the number of housing units,as well as changes in housing occupancy rates and PPH.The change in housing unit growth is much more variable than change in housing occupancy rates or PPH. Occupancy rates are assumed to stay relatively stable over the forecast period,while PPH is expected to decline slightly.Smaller household size is associated with an aging population in Jackson County and its sub-areas. In addition,for sub-areas experiencing population growth,we assume a higher growth rate in the near term,with growth stabilizing over the remainder of the forecast period. If planned housing units were reported in the surveys,then we account for them being constructed over the next 5-15 years. Finally, for county sub-areas where population growth has been flat or declined,and there is no planned housing construction, we hold population growth mostly stable with little to no change. Supporting Information and Specific Assumptions Assumptions used for developing population forecasts are partially derived from surveys and other information provided by local planners and agencies.See Appendix A for a summary of all submitted surveys and other information that was directly considered in developing the sub-area forecasts.Also, see Appendix B for specific assumptions used in each sub-area forecast. 19 Forecast Trends Under the most-likely population growth scenario in Jackson County, countywide and sub-area populations are expected to increase over the forecast period.The countywide population growth rate is forecast to peak in 2025 and then slowly decline throughout the forecast period. Forecasting tapered population growth is largely driven by an aging population,which is expected to contribute to an increase in deaths,as well as a decrease in births—fewer women within child-bearing years.The aging population is expected to in turn contribute to natural decrease over the forecast period. Net migration is expected to grow steadily throughout the forecast period, but this growth will likely not fully offset the decline in natural increase.The combination of these factors is expected to result in a slowly declining population growth rate as time progresses through the forecast period. Jackson County's total population is forecast to grow by nearly 95,600 persons(45 percent)from 2015 to 2065,which translates into a total countywide population of 306,858 in 2065(Figure 15).The population is forecast to grow at the highest rate—approximately one percent per year—in the near term(2015-2025).This anticipated population growth in the near term is based on two core assumptions:1)Jackson County's economy will continue to strengthen in the next five years,and;2)an increasing number of Baby Boomers will retire to the county.The single largest component of growth in this initial period is net in-migration. Nearly 24,000 net in-migrants are forecast for the 2015 to 2025 period. Figure 15.Jackson County—Total Forecast Population by Five-year Intervals(2015-2065) 350,000 – - - - 1.2% 300,000 --- - 1.0% c 250,000 - al o 0.8% ,N ffi t v, 200.000 - -- --- --- -- -- -- -- -- --- --- o. 0.6% 150,000 - – --- --- -- -- -- -- — --- --- - m o 0.4% c m• 100,000 to 50,000 - -- --- --- --- -- -- -- -- -- --- - 0.2% 0 0.0% 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045 2050 7855 2060 2065 665 Population 211,275 222,583 234,561 245,963 255,640 264,660 273,023 264902 289,239 29%078 306,856 —MGR 0.6% 1.0% 1.1% 1.0% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% Source:Forecast by Population Research Center(PRC) Jackson County's larger UGBs are forecast to experience a combined population growth of more than 31,600 from 2015 to 2035 and more than 34,300 from 2035 to 2065(Figure 16). Eagle Point is expected to grow at the fastest average annual rate at more than two percent per year during the first 20 years of 20 the forecast period.Over this same time period Central Point and Medford are forecast to grow at average annual rates greater than one percent,while Ashland is expected to grow at a relatively slower pace of about one half percent per year. Average annual growth rates are expected to slow during the final 30 years of the forecast period.The majority of larger UGB5 are expected to grow as a share of total county population; however Ashland is forecast to decline as a share of total countywide population. Population outside UGBs is expected to grow by more than 4,700 people from 2015 to 2035, but is expected to grow at a much slower rate during the second half of the forecast period,only adding a little more than 2,000 people from 2035 to 2065.The population of the area outside UGBs is expected to decline as a share of total countywide population over the forecast period,composing 29 percent of the countywide population in 2015 and about 22 percent in 2065. Figure 16.Jackson County and Larger Sub-Areas-Forecast Population and AAGR AAGR AAGR Share of Share of Share of 2015 2035 2065 (2015-2035) (2035.2065) county 2015 County 2035 County 2065 Jackson County 211,275 255,840 306,858 1.0% 0.6% 1020% 100.0% 100.0% Ashlandl 20,905 23,183 24,138 0.5% 0.1% 9.9% 9.1% 7.9% Central Point 18,329 22,680 27,485 1.1% 0.6% 8.7% 8.9% 9.0% Eagle Point 9,657 14,839 18,669 2.2% 0.8% 4.6% 5.8% 6.1% Medford 80,024 99,835 124,582 1.1% 0.7% 37.9% 39.0% 40.6% Smaller UGBs2 21,987 30,199 44,865 1.6% 1.3% 10.4% 11.8% 14.6% Outside UGBs 60,373 65,104 67,119 0.4% 0.1% 28.6% 25.4% 21.9% Source.Forecast by Population Research center(PRC) 'Fors,mpl¢ity each UGB is referred to by its primarycilia name. 'Smaller Was are those with populations less than 8,000 in forecast launch year Medford,Jackson County's largest UGB,is expected to capture the largest share of total countywide population growth throughout the entire forecast period (Figure 17).The remaining larger UGBs all account for significant portions of countywide population growth, but they are all expected to capture a smaller share(in relative terms)of population growth during the final 30 years of the forecast period. The area outside UGBs is forecast to capture a decreasing share of countywide population growth as time progresses through the forecast period. Figure 17.Jackson County and Larger Sub-Areas-Share of Countywide Population Growth 2015-2035 2035-2065 Jackson County 100.0% 100.0% Ashlandl 5.1% 1.9% Central Point 9.8% 9.4% Eagle Point 11.6% 7.5% Medford 44.5% 48.5% Smaller UGBs2 18.4% 28.7% Outside UGBs 10.6% 3.9% Source:Forecast by Population Research Center(PAC) 'For simplicityeach UGB is referred to by Its primary city's name. 'Smaller UGBs are those with populations less than 8,000 In forecast launch year. 21 The remaining smaller UGB5 are expected to grow by a combined number of more than 8,200 persons from 2015 to 2035,with a combined average annual growth rate of 1.6 percent(Figure 16).This growth rate is driven by expected rapid growth in Jacksonville, Phoenix, Rogue River,Shady Cove,and Talent (Figure 18). Butte Falls and Gold Hill are forecast to grow at average annual rates below one percent per year during the first 20 years of the forecast period. Similar to the larger UGB5 and the county as a whole, population growth rates are expected to decline for the second half of the forecast period (2035 to 2065). Even so,the smaller UGB5 are forecast to collectively add nearly 14,700 people from 2035 to 2065. Figure 18.Jackson County and Smaller Sub-Areas-Forecast Population and AAGR AAGR MGR Share of Share of Share of 2015 2035 2065 (2015-2035) (2035-2065) County 2015 County 2035 County 2065 Jackson County 211,275 255,840 306,858 1.0% 0.6% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Butte Fallsl 421 437 447 0.2% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% Gold Hill 1,267 1,496 2,018 0.8% 1.0% 0.6% 0.6% 0.7% Jacksonville 2,927 4,316 6,687 2.0% 1.5% 1.4% 1.7% 2.2% Phoenix 4,955 6,883 9,775 1.7% 1.2% 2.3% 2.7% 3.2% Rogue River 2,838 3,705 5,545 1.3% 1.4% 1.3% 1.4% 1.8% Shady Cove 3,168 4,343 6,105 1.6% 1.1% 1.5% 1.7% 2.0% Talent 6,411 9,020 14,290 1.7% 1.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.7% Larger UGBs2 128,915 160,537 194,874 1.1% 0.6% 61.0% 62.7% 63.5% Outside UGBs 60,373 65,104 67,119 0.4% 0.1% 28.6% 25.4% 21.9% Source.Forecast by Population Research Center(PRC) 'For simplicity each UGB is referred to by itsprimary city's name. 2 Larger UGBs are those with populations greater than 8,000 in forecast launch year. All of Jackson County's smaller sub-areas are expected to capture an increasing share of countywide population growth over the 50-year forecast period(Figure 19). Figure 19.Jackson County and Smaller Sub-Areas-Share of Countywide Population Growth 2015-2035 2035-2065 Jackson County 100.0% 100.0% Butte Falls1 0.0% 0.0% Gold Hill 0.5% 1.0% Jacksonville 3.1% 4.6% Phoenix 4.3% 5.7% Rogue River 1.9% 3.6% Shady Cove 2.6% 3.5% Talent 5.9% 10.3% Larger UGBs2 71.0% 67.3% Outside UGBs 10.6% 3.9% Source:Forecast by Population Research Center(PRC) 2 For simplicity each UGB is referred to by its primary city's name. 2 Larger UGBs are those with populations greater than 8,000 in forecast launch year 22 Forecast Trends in Components of Population Change As previously discussed, a key factor in both declining births and increasing deaths is Jackson County's aging population. From 2015 to 2035 the proportion of county population 65 or older is forecast to grow from a little over 20 percent to nearly 30 percent. By 2065 approximately 37 percent of the total population is expected to be 65 or older (Figure 20). For a more detailed look at the age structure of Jackson County's population see the final forecast table published to the forecast program website (http://www.odx.edu/prc/opfp). Figure 20.Jackson County—Age Structure of the Population (2015,2035,and 2065) 100% 20.1% 29.6%80% 37.1% 0 cooo 60% 0. To 0 6 40% a) �p a 20% _ 0% - 2015 2035 2065 Older than 65 years old •Ages 15 to 64 years old •Younger than 14 years old Source:Forecast by Population Research Center(PRC) As the countywide population ages—contributing to a slow-growing population of women in their years of peak fertility—and more women choose to have fewer children and have them at an older age, average annual births are expected to decline, although slowly, over the forecast period;this combined with the rising number of deaths, will lead to a natural decrease (Figure 21).The total number of deaths countywide is expected to increase more rapidly in the near term,followed by slower growth during the later years of the forecast period. This pattern of initial growth in the number of deaths is explained by the relative size and aging patterns of the Baby Boom and Baby Boom Echo generations. For example, in Jackson County, deaths are forecast to begin to increase significantly during the 2025-2035 period as Baby Boomers age out, and peak again in the 2040-2050 period as children of Baby Boomers(i.e. Baby Boom Echo) experience the effects of aging. As the increase in the number of deaths outpaces births, population growth in Jackson County is expected to become increasingly reliant on net in-migration; and in fact positive net in-migration is expected to persist throughout the forecast period. The majority of these net in-migrants are expected to be middle-aged and older individuals. 23 In summary, declining natural increase and steady net in-migration is forecast to result in population growth reaching its peak in 2025 and then tapering through the remainder of the forecast period (Figure 21). An aging population is expected to not only lead to an increase in deaths, but a smaller proportion of women in their childbearing years is expected to result in a long-term decline in births. Net migration is expected to grow steadily throughout the forecast period, but it will not fully offset the growth in natural decrease. Figure 21.Jackson County—Components of Population Change,2015-2065 20,000 1.2% a� v15,000 1.0% c c — 10,000 0.8% c -5 o - o c 5,000 m n-0 0.6% Q cro v c 0 °— 0.4% u L -5,000 y-10,000 0.2% T. v 15,000 0.0% Q 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 0 2045 2050 2055 2060 2065 204 Net Mig. 7,526 11,279 12,595 13,718 14,273 15,310 15,421 16,308 16,599 16,974 17,395 Nat.Inc. 254 163 -692 -2,415 -6,394 -8,535 -9,973 -10,995 -11,309 -11,694 -12,537 �AAGR 0.8% 1.0% 1.1% 1.0% 0.8% 0.7% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.6% 0.696 Source:Forecast by Population Research Center(PRC) 24 Glossary of Key Terms Cohort-Component Method:A method used to forecast future populations based on changes in births, deaths,and migration over time. Coordinated population forecast:A population forecast prepared for the county along with population forecasts for its city urban growth boundary(UGB)areas and non-UGB area. Housing unit:A house,apartment, mobile home or trailer,group of rooms,or single room that is occupied or is intended for occupancy. Housing-Unit Method:A method used to forecast future populations based on changes in housing unit counts,vacancy rates,the average numbers of persons per household(PPH),and group quarter population counts. Occupancy rate:The proportion of total housing units that are occupied by an individual or group of persons. Persons per household(PPH):The average household size(i.e.the average number of persons per occupied housing unit for a particular geographic area). Replacement Level Fertility:The average number of children each woman needs to bear in order to replace the population (to replace each male and female) under current mortality conditions in the U.S. This is commonly estimated to be 2.1 children per woman. 25 c w o r w p m c .. 'O E N ul a m a o 3 w 0 Ow O 03 CC a 0L a m o O w o d CO y t ^ EE 9 W _)e -° c x m O t m .- '- .,wac EU o c o ` w •° C c E 3 N t m Y w w H H N m L O w R c m U u t{' "0 G m L < C C +°-, p O c O m N Lao YO O` m Y m ea Y 4-1 .a .,-- � m 0 co C m E 7 0 o £ ._ m c o .O+ w N •V / a-C m 0 0 .c 4.4 -a a o. w w 0 >. c .til w O in .. w 03 yY '1c0 YH O N O L++ m 7 0 C7 C " u 2 m ^ L yC 0 CO cai m-O ° lo • '^ °E 9 L�S+ ° L�+ v ,� N c p O 0 m ^ y w 03 41t_ x c a v w E " E U- w a l9 a co w a 7 2 > o m z w m z - E m o .c W c 3 '� a •c ✓ v E 5 ?la o E w U L M h H m T t- m K Y w N N a o a C C N H C N Y 3 H U w C U w O O E0 m H O a m in w w y E ` o 3 bp w c a • 7 7 a c v E c m w E $ LL E Z N w 2 O 0 .. w v c 0. m• tO u U {7 8 wN w a V a. t'' w 'p y w C .7. = "U o c ' C u a) C ° ° LL c to z 4! 0 c m S+ m ` 33 0 m m a o L'> CC W O m Y r o 3 ' -O Cn Cm + Cw NE V 'na.. O w .c d LaY O 7 w ° N 7 C O w ° C ' w O L O N C0�. i ao c c CO { U-0w xEGOmw E tuF ya t °. YOuOwEO 'w0, > mL w w Ou - u°° w3 '� m w mC o E n ° n c to o c d , Li) n0 Co E '« m y y Z m a v V' o .� m u la v a w v ,aL_. = m a G y cc .c m m D m a Z z a m a 0. > Z' T a 3 ▪ a w ▪ 0 m 04c in w. in _ g g a 0A a m .. ° m (0 2 a o2 "O N C "O CL w L C �' C m g t N -O T w c 0 C — >. w C. f " 3 2 c e° Ui o c C a c w °c° w o o .m L in ti a V w 7 'y1 7 C CO d N w H m Y L w ry :C. C w w 7 in .n y U of 0 7 U u U :C -O C .. E m U 3 v w01 p c C CO 'c c w c a s 0 c m m o c c 3 c w w C w C 7 . ' L O C 0 o m x r_. > > w 7 m 0 7 t_ 7 .0 m Q O' o no u Q m w a N E a C s Y 0 a u DB ec c U X o o m ° • a� '-U _ 0 E 0 :c a en i >' -, 0 CO w L. N I — O O 6 .O N 'p m w c c a w o s. w .-I w as E Z O S O C T 7 a L co `� a N m «= O w w, c in C m ° Y L d 00 to '0' w r C O U N Z W r ° 6 U 00 'O 7 in E "O m H C. o c '- f0 2 .. a +• E ca L a am o v v m m C. 0 •w 7 LV a s D a t a 0 N 3 al ^. N O W L c 70 C Q V1 H In 'C C m u m .. w Q a C 'O N a N cn U Q x Q C Y a) N ol To 3 re 0 a) w a0+ m O L aH C O C ai O N m 3 CO' O Yo • 3 d waY s cac c O w e Xm N mN N > > a 'n W m a) moo O L CC •� a) 7' c a L O Y 'O N° aCY O VI m C C L E O > m d o 9 N 9CY . Q L m Y o > CL CO u O Y. O PiO Oau1 >• m N a c v > v u'ai w m 'a, m m .n co x v O m v u 00 �O C ,n = aL, c m 00 !•••• m = — u v w ° a w t E in a m m E L. N ams mLO 0.1 N U O cyQa W d a u s = a v a ca a m e q C E L—" E E a) 00 o w C a v in v Y ? •E E 1O w t C L m D m u I- CO Y i, m CO C Y "O C .. u o O CO a) m c •9 m a) = w a Yn O m a o c 0 cc a) 7.3 .t, Y v .L, r 0 N y 41 M a C ` c o "C �' L .0 C 0 C C O m Y m 0 0 'y, r= H m L O n N N a) L O C L CO > 0 C m a) = m al i u1 a) 00 = L L imr a, y m m a+ YO u 0 C 0 0 m m O 0 a) O C a c 0 N To O fa a C 0.1 C al L L 'V ` m Y 0:0 cf0 w c = m o 3 v �° a _ a 0- :5w d te wi • wrm E, m w t E > w N VI "0 a L v o -0 'c a „ o as 00 00 in c C M o 4 m CO `0 E r ., L Y Z' m e w v E y p m e c > > c m u w o 42 IA' o > c w ' to m c a aCO a) `o c o c .5 o - 3 c E t 0 a v E = m CO w w 0' 00 °1 w v d a E 9 U, E 45 v L "Cl 3 = .n "M -0 CO 'H 440 o c o C. to CO4=1 0, C a) E > O 0m0) n0= m • a o a cm -oaY v ° a a) m 5 —m !Li o o oU °a Ca a s a) = YGE n m a '- m > 0 0al u ` a) _U i a)O m L -5 0. a) Ca/ 0uN 4" L v 0 Y a) .f 00 ` N L — L 0 C N ,.m_, w '° 3e w a t' u w M ; E 3 0 a CO Y a, '0 a) W Y O L 0 C ti Y N 3 C44 0 ,m, m 'Yn v y CO u y co� E 2 .m c O c m M — C m • 7 N : c m o y " .o m y-- n 3 m v c v N N Us' N '0 4+. a C C = O` = CO N C N a/ 0 v) Vf m L it 0 E 0 W a) m u N O -• 6 c . a) c V in m Y W N n .0 Y m C O > 144 H a ro m a co ,L., a) 3 3 u v '�' m H E N '.^ C c a Ca L N m 'n O O N C X co —> C m c O i W Q i) 0 m Y N a W al Y m N m O a a1 u) 7 > E c 3 0 m ` m o E c u d Q m w .n 0 V a) a v° a 3 m r CO w `c ° v u 4" w o 'L' t o m ° m c Y -O 0 .0 0) m > t 0 a 00 C C aa) '.n C c >. O N LVI N W u o c = m O w C O• 0 'n C 'C 4_, 01 = o C C 3 c u '' x t n v, m N o 3 c 'n ~ .L o 2 a u C O C m a U, Y N N a) o u 3 .n ° ` w w M E co L t > v v W a) N C 3 "0 m 0 .- 0 ro le a O• � N 0 — 0 C C L N H C C = ja m C O OCO 2 C V al .••1 a) C ,m, L L um N 'OO m .•i d L 0 .Mi C ±' U 0 a) > ` 3 L O L a) m O O O Y N O O C C 7 O L a) O O Y N Y L Q Q v >+ O VI N L Q L N m 0 a L F "O .. N V O CZ O .. -0 L 'O r u c m c m E e as a c ` '0 O 0 m ZI •E ui 'O a) -0 411 c mc 44 M ern la 0 L '0—LO E 7 6 0 m a ? a) W a E m C —00 a) v, _m E Y o. O E0 '€ L Oo t > > t C I N C m a L . 'O II1 0 '0 u L u N L Co I C m N C Vh 'N 0 OC -0 a 's m N 0 Y 0 M Cm c N bi 7 .- 0 d E O C G .0 O C a 'x a 6 a 'x d I- V 2 N to .- .6- e FC eto C '0 V Y m V N m T m E Z3▪, a c 1. w o M U. w 3 a m y a 3 0 O w d I-t = w 7 0 N 0 U. O U. z m N C La 'N 3C O C 0o X E d c Ti m a w N 0 Y 0 0 EW Y z _• C a) N C a 3 w m N 3A• m C eto w C N ) m U Z c 3 u 0 •in 3 C ref Y CU 3UV N E W U O= d .0 0 C mA ' O0m0 0 NO m x > � C/ t w > w U uto 01 C OC r c 0 8 t 0 N CO C 0 CSR C 3 cC N a 7 O p 'p u 7 a z C0 Gt0OIO C N c 0E N Y ,« G : GO ^ in t• 3 0 Oa c c 10 0. Nt m Vy41.1 CU N N LYmr II v o > > a COm m m C a m c aE N , 0. , Y m E 3 $ a o a 9 « 'o N Oa 119 Y 'Coo E a 'r., a o c 'Y I co 0 m Y m w o, w !_^ a -o c x of C cco.o L w C IA I, C O V C O Y C o A E '.1 n to w C ./ COri p C Y c LL = m CU o, m a CU '. a £ N c o a d 'N d ' 8 0 7 > C CO 6 C: 9 u t y vii a' m a o N C m C el H m « C d ` 7 N 7 "O 8 1727 7 t m O C N T o c x o N C E x C �u d C N • m N w V 0 O u 0 Y C w u al c O CO ea C 0 in Ps C Vii 0 E v a L E a ;' u v o C C N O C a`' x a. o a` m w n 's E m E.' L = 0 al t n v • ` L Y V V H — N O O CO Y E N m 2 c a a m y 4.0 .N u 0 S c .a .T. v G a/ N u m - m a H IT 0 aiv in vi 3 m m x w Y12O a c o O 7a E u 91 a LLW v m UHOw aa o ,_ 7 o (7 L" d c U' ui m t a. m ` C 7• 7U 0 .. W C 2 2 w C W a. a1 N 4- v Cf. N 0 Y O m C m IA C C O` .2 Q E E $ a) -00 W rye x E co c 'r. — - v 7 . v 7 ai •> L 7 In Y E en ` a0 Vi 0 la O m 5 N w C e. V C C z as W N W 7• 0 0 a U.. 0 C y m C. L H u — ry u = to J LL co co an ce m Ve W C > m E .9 m a. a/ .0 m a! c m O. E ..y . .1 c a/ W C ,., to eu ! 0 0 = m 3 c m 3a) w 'a o f o S o m > L A a T a 0 yi u 2 a v v ea v v O. O L W Y N CO fV a v Y F" 0 v a. C N C ai C O 0 m >.a a Y w 0 kJ :17i C C ea C O c_ 9 u mo. N O N ..... e"'.e Y o = a/ on 0 0 7▪ .y le0DY m N al L 7 0 tic an O W 0 O 7 u 0 0 0 > u N O 3 C C m m o W O O O a' n O m 7 V1 E C u !!e L (B OC C v Cli to 2" F. C m Y al 0 N 0 to O en m▪ c m m an '^ N A uID 7 "O C a+ C i , a C 7 •- u U N y ' 0. 0 7 O v m 7 0 o O. H 0 Y c = m 3 Vi 6 m O u 0 o •C c C Y a' c ed N 0 'N L in i-i0 G N c a) tri N 7 c O a 0 u i. 00 C 0 u a. E a m a au T, a m .0 N v F. w C N O E O tV c E r a N of i+ .� m NLL" w N d a 0 -C113 as a/ Y a) L m ++ E 0 0 U O m um d m CC 3 u u x 5 'Wa 0 = Ou a m cu T d O VI to E in E toal m w E m 0 w o -' C 3w C N 10 O O W CX N Y `p CD 'OLo CO Y C C N MO 10 0 CO .-1 N O N O N C C L = O1 3 w E o 40 Y C_ 0 O1 - ^ � mi. d 0.0 C O v 03 -C N T W CO Y 0 C t N w N O. C 01 W T '- Op t C .0 C I- C 0 N as 04 N 0 = Y C u L y, CO -0 CO 2 Y '"1 V in 0 110 C N C O NDO T Y Y 'a+ a O O u _ 0 CO 0 la cn O N N G y ! ' O O 10 3 5- Y L W w 0/ '- O in Lai Y N a O - MI (N 0 0 V V CU 1 c o > ;; m 0 E a w m -C Y O. N 0 v no x '- u W W C C Y N > 'O. N tri 'E o w O ` O pl IR N O ry d Ol 4N+ VI �' O O N L N N CO E w t w m w y E E C c C W CO CO C w 0 o t w • w E r - o o. c c `w Y N Y W N N L T -O N 0 Y J > J -O y Y Y d 7 7 c Lw L w O Y - ♦ H Y+ o („) m 2` O) vi - L C 4- N N C V C o d - y 41 U U C F V A CO 1.0 C _ Y L 0 X10 01 a p s p C w c 1`e CO c d w C N .0 y '0 o m E C 1 ,C C ` E m ei fGCJ1 a to c o. E ONi a E N c o > E d E ;o ` ' da `—' n z tr�+ m u > > Z u S N C CO G L w N V ma V L 9 N w E m L C c # m 7 N Q O m C I a 'O m t' a t C .0 N Y X c w m C ., Cp Om 0 m .2 m m 3 o y E •3 a Y C w N C L Y Y ` Y v E c j.= C v o , > w O U (.J m rE cu w w -o m C O` C 'O N C E 30 7 C C O > N V Q 7 VI N COco U N > U, i_ L m Y O > U C V C • vt C w C aw+ 0 - w _C ° Tr,' O. 0 w 70 h p Y E m N C Y C Y C m E O ` O L m d L Y y ° la . c c m '.mom C a O > w v w �' _C " c O c O .c O m j 7 p m N V aj C 'a O °- u. m m O. 'x a 6 a` > co E m +L, V i VWi E in ,° 3 a E w c m w vii▪ C .w. a u to ,- m p m " Y N d a to 3 w `m f0 w c c E E 7 w o o " m MO w C Y 0 cN E a > w tc > w o ° c` C aXLTCO '0- ...)- c _ CC. •E w C N O E E >C w r o > • O N L Y Y m O Cw ID 10 O f IDI N • ° d *p Q Y aJ ` `m7pw p m C s- ma ° > wcmcm o i w y O C w w ° Y 7 E VI wte CL -m t a+ oO E c g ou aYE .- Cu. W vu c w .1.1L, W n m 2 C, O. o u >[ 0. w o o c m c ac jE yr _m +L. u, E w O Y a C C C O ii. rY m .0 c > vi 7 > 7 0 8 c u. 2 .0 'Tc V CW to Y C •O w C an aa o V=i w w I E 0 ,2 a E o v a yr_i m a , w o w oc o > C 7, m pE. N (NJ U, V w Y m w > O w w O w 35 a 0 Y u a ,L. 2 0 ,n a C C C w L O ,_ N U 7 m C w m L w C +L. j V w w ` 0 >i O r"o m e a 13 0 ° ° w 3 m '7 w c a o o u m w c C a 3 C 7 A N a/ m a, N N 'N vi U C w t u C U C LO Y p w O a a° O C m 4,: m m m 0 a w O O '� N O C p ° p c m •X H tv i^ O m S :.. > (_ W .c > L .Z' v u C V a c m Y m w. m > ai . Y V CO Oi 111 OD C kb• « m E ,C C w C CI -6 C C c 10 c E A atir N 03 L Ep C a- -0 .°. ai 3 ° o y v _ c 3 Y w 3 u E L .o p a o 9 u 7 Y Y w w '" Z' w O a '^ O `m 'c Y O_ .+ra p =en m p N c O a a m •u c t ,' •on 2 _m w " E co L 0 o, cmi o a) Y o0. Y > m ° a a aY 7 p m m ° L a Y Y 0 ca Y y m V ro a s o a v Lc, L m o E o `o 0 0 = o °, c w u . E I X E w O 1 8 m w w E W E v, u 0 u E m a c t u 5 m a 0. v w m 3 E D en CL 3 110 � � / { \ _0 § kaEw ± f ' [ ( m0 ; .• 03 © f ( ) C - ate » III co -0 ..0 ] / 13 k | 2 » / 2TJ \ ■ a § 2 • § 3 \gk | f § f y o ; ai= « \ 2 ] } / (5(0 _ \ / \ } / C / 0 00 4-• kr ® to• � ) ) •0 \ .— w on 03 4,, - ` _ C• f C > 3 47 W_• 70 § • k 111 { cc4.1 C -5EU 00 k ® ) / CU\ ( \ \ } � � � L- s- \ ) } ) \ La in 4, ea res > Elm « u $ _ .- , • 71 0 r _• - / _al j k 01 tn Q _ { | ) £ / _ _ - _ u - > 7 § in• / § e % 2 ) kf ; „ = f { • 2 % % { § 0.E # 2l G E ] f ) ; 1 § - u EE0 $ aaJ - / } a) (13 \ ( V \ ii / � _ § % 12C5 o \ w 7 & $ � | 24.0 to ) � = ! ■ = | 0333*— § .c ID � si � 2 / k I § E a.c .e 2 e2 '0 § ] a § L Nm W O >>, O N O M C N 10 > — Z L y r,� Q c C d s O r -O w i. a a a N mo O 9o Cc O L v in u m Y c N Y ma m mC O x o Nu YYd m c _ UO Z ❑ a! — CN a U N N C O m 03 L u aEv o3 > j O w E °ac E Nw N N YN L c "6 an dM. O.0 L (>a Y V . m O u O V F- J m — O Y F y,, al �+ L O m o m A c p •'-' E Z' a c +4 L m 3 H m o E c YE N oNW . d ~ C N C 13 YcN -9 t'-0 O u CU E u v O c N y C N W N m YO O Y 4. m C 0 U u L aJ L O 3 m -a m 3 m a 3 00 m m e a' 0. E .._“/ 0. m a L 0• 'L N a o Y = a o ar o m xai 3 t O W O E n O. a 0 C C 3 'E u t c v m m C m m E C 3 E — co 3 L. 4' mLI> c a o. w :: c _ > N c W m ....mm "O m • W >• .O+ in N N C m "O O O NC N C Pi+ a O O ! ° P2 m m m a) ' c u m E Ci a w m z > g E E5 E N L N o O ac M 0. C 1L W Z a. 3 O aJW 3 ▪ t' t• N 0 7 0 0 LL C! LL Z 120 inC . W 3 C = E0 C E 0 0. y = a d 0 o O >. m d y 0 a+ v = a 0 .: u in ❑ t >. Y N Y C >, C 3 m m 0 ai ai l.) m m c m a, no E E 2 es c v L+ Cc a CO 0. C c c 'VN _3 C In a/ no .. — w _ 0 O '" O 3 V u M oo N E > > a I m-0 .00c O m x > = n o �° v > E v ei V ro' d 4- W cLo > E m 0 m m a o c d CU C c c i CO a CO W L Y 0 L V h > 0 0 �O Y 3 c "O m Y " Y CO CO C Z O. i_. _ CO `O u c r CO 2 3 c 7 ON Z a $ u S. m a In E Y w C E u 41.4 N 3 0.1 Y N 3o E c d .4., r vCI " _ v° a .0 L m . Eu E ..m_ m r 0 0 m u m u ai x .- c a a u a` >. m m L a) E N F W m • m C CI E C' 'O LH m >, C C E o A m " E w C v E . c = v .N m F o o 2 C) O o 03ov .n .. E Q v Nin. -o a1 d c Y a) 'o to O d > op 4.1c 8 0. = in W m 3 0.). w a) V Y O N >, m a al E N W w L 2 Y a) `) a) o C -O E N C N Q t0 L N 4"1 d y wa = v .� I- .� > a = c '3 c a 0 v E w a o O O O L Tu G x c v on E a) -o c m co C m E m «. ` r w DO E X 0) m al N F a) m 0 d Y aY .0 CU ? N v Nco CO EO vL t C T a) w 2 317, > c cc c " E O O 'o )O N y ` v D - Y V rm al - t V m C O c V 7 C > L N C Q) 4 coII.I YVI U 3 C E 9 u n3 C Lc+ y r •E LI a) �_ C O N 'j' C R E C d aal C •> O O N O C ,_ C M 'C aN+C 9 Si O i R u N r 0a N d N C A a) y 0a a Y 0° E d •a m n a E d a E d e o au) E o o a) = a v u m E Z' :u a ; E �, LLW 8 - o d Z x in S m 6 L a: 9 N 5 L 9 u L 'O N S. en iv } � \ \ \ 00 ' § $ z $ ! « � t # ; 03 ii B § 2 E ( ( i - \ 2k } E § \ » k A—: al a. t ± k £ 41 c a cu I- 3 w k } ( § / to W � @ no ) • : 0. | s = ■ - ) � J2 iJ ] ) = _c 00 VI E 5. o al & W - { \ = � \ jk ma au # 2 oEaa222 ¥ af crania; ■ / ■ 22 « te E04a r / i . a < a % * I >• a C kz ._ ( £ / s ) ) 00I >uro fkV22 _ \ � _ - . � 2 � \ } = . \ § 2 { kg3 { - - an 44 ( / \ \ { E % / / \ \ _ -13 CCEbO0 � \ CCC \ } • in 50Uto � ; 05 -52 >. f ƒ 0I « E | ZZ3 = 2 { � en Le re co CD u .re \to C } >-0 Go C e E re \ ® cof Ek /\ . 00) _ - - 3 63 \ \ \• \ /\t / & _ — i E t o w 2c 4- - }• \ ) ) ) k DO 1-7 ) co $ $ a t crti mo k \ » ▪ _ ID %▪ .46 { I � § 0 tip ƒ \ . 0 e ! § ; } \ en \ \ a § oa2 « , � ) • C k § = 5 ± • mt ■ - � 2 % / - k in o \} �= /® c |\ 2� to bio ill ) ) \ )vl -C10 1- { & q _ co k in kt 0.0 ))( � ;) ° j ! — • _ r▪e c � \ — in $ ! |- —e▪s { } Z \ ( \ � � - ' - 0 { > $ — 17f \ g _c tri- j 20 E alt 8t ) ° d ,ar } 0. k \ } k \ j 18o -0 _ _ 0 2 fo \ ® % ® § © I ` 0 § mEa ` 0 . tukk ' mC a) 0 ( % § ; , — fo04 ) aEn ° >. / § ktknk8k k - lc002 § L 4. Co C Nen o l`7 -0 ET >> .c 0 �07, ..-, E A « c .� c° a ° 3 c c w �^ c O a r aci u 0 y -Ne c .N O a .' ` ou E 9 = E m = 3 r o y v r t ° o c .° o c L o c ,_ >. E o m a ` C u o on Y on CO w = o E � .L, v U C �^ c w w v > CO p E C 3 c w o u o Y VI - JO I- a -- CD Y 2 C Y U Y C Y C O m a c O )- y O m y0. incal s_ C C Y �' ` a` = a° S a` 'r a a m $ E E 3 "w' 8 .8 a N N C w a w +- "til 3 m ;o v Y 7 (>p t .C71 W > Ol > 3 ° E ` c c E a III _ a) O1 O) N w •- Z 'O > CQ u u at m -o Y >. N Y O C y N CIJ 14 4'S ry O1 X I. a E v E in ` 0 O o u p c o° _ > a -0 > ., su Cl. pE O c u Comm w2 ri a '6 o w O C 0 e in m > d wd a 42 1-D C a w w Y co 'u r. C L. O 1L C 2 Z U it to C 00 C W C -0 O1 N Y C N T — X 7' m N Y w Y 12 = C c 2 CLOO w C m W m = O CI) >' LUX y v a �' u u v $ E s° v E 'x + w 3 N O ) d w m m •x y a 'x a+ co c .� o mega) C Y O C O E N c m N C > OI E Q . N VI n L Y m L N N Y L OO q co m > O a v 0 0 0 a 0 C = a ". 3 L 3 v ¢` c E 0 a: u st L u N N mm 7 3 R e-I V Y N c N E on E w a m = ZYE 1 � C0-cE - '- ; �" E O d 77 b 7 C N 0 C DO N co O/ W 'uf _ y a > > N •...71C •.71w c c .° .. O — h d X Y u C OG 5 > C ra • oro cu cu 0 —, C !O c - R a o7S E m w v ,in 1 3 O Y W x ° a r v_ `o o .C - m 3 u 3 C Z a° 0 u i, m u, 0 , c o v, o O S g a ' m 'c m • E ° c E ° L o E E y 1 3 a 0 mum d a w oo u o m a a° 0, o CO N ` X (13E I- w O L cE _u � w v W ICI L L L ma W W d > u W ~ gn >' ` m y o0 O O O. E « m • E D W + > as u0 o > E .� W c o M V ` W j m Co 3 0DO 3 13 In d C O p N o .0 "00 0 w pop 0 C W E N a' co c - O c C C a/ _ •c - vs W o a c .3 O. m v w C1 L. n o m W 0 u 3 - •- c E o- C@ 272 v a T3 c c m n W 3 «, Wam ca... a 0 W u .O 3 C m .N L }, W O co m co E + °' W « a+ .,.c 0 ` tsi M W C W w N 8 O ? N v N ,n N m 3 C > 3 'Y° o O X C N N yor O E y, W IN W -0 W u u m -O 0 w C +� J p O -0 O m O ..:1: V C L N K C O. C c o c E W o. c • a) o. = d N v O u 0 L C ma WO >. W W a W N a 01 M XI > E E O c 3 N (NI 3 -0m Y013 L ]. CO N m C > W — W N m '.= N C :II-. E a/ W .c -o r c ID m v4.2 3 v m ammw _ In O ii; E mU, 01 E0 x o Y E LEL ` u „ vs C E `' « °— C L N ” W m O :E -04- a) 0 L = > in N C O O N W 0 a+ C / ° m IN> C W N CWCWCO •_ O .Np wm y c y cm • 7 x 0 m Yuw cN ° OWa to- y m F ai a ` ci c E o ^ c o au m E a F- m a+ o c m a m W 0 3 -O E a/ c o 3 .: ur W W L CO H al Y N O CU E N > V L V 7 W la 7 W m w to cc o Y/ ¢ ; N .;° d ° E O k L Y C .— W cci -0 3 n 01 .0• W v 3 m C 'ai N 00 D C C 0 `/ C N a/ a! W O N W m Y C CO a/ W L k- k- O 6. ` •• m o E a - v 3 , m C a ; m 3 N EC 0 O at W w Ill N a 4-0� H O W > W t. W L w E Z W C X i+ m W a C in N X N w m CO C 'O C co C t• O CD E C C a) C l.1 t C UI d O O D 3 L O` 0 O m C O. CO O. 7 'O u L a O. > L O. 0 Ln Y C U L w CO W MI O u Co m C C 10 m E C W C C X O O o O c a- c ao. C M C W C L m u m i. m 1O d N �C N N o. m a CU OD E c o m c Ti E W n E L,L c o > O r E Y 7 •— 7 W 7 a/ .N p1 W -C is 4 `. O. O C L Co u 3 > 2 C. = uo o cm a r w v N S ".vo uu .0 v 3 t o I Tr0 C7 c c A $ m o d c a _ o e CO in C y Cam.. O u o p N O M A c O E E 45 7 d E 'm 0 O C G +L' 2 C a` S a O a. S 0 Lm anY L L C V i0 t E c I- C i m m N N m O N 0 .k 0 m c o c E x m Z ._Z .E . m -O m 3m = N ul V Y E a ^ N m m o w N N CU m ri cu IA C Y O Y L m m m N 0 N ,7.. a c o u 0 - a w L a L 0 7 . U 1L W Z Y W a s . .. 3 m m D a Y a m c 2 c E CL t7 L" 6 1° 0 m m - « 0 t = m 3 i 7 3 > .I./ 0 c v LL C 2 Z z Y C J 00 in .an m 0 N m N13 IA T C O m C4. - m CC COC v a w p Y m aY, o a In m 0 I_ m = D m m .0 m ,r m > 7 La O mCmE +''0 m o E m E - Inm > 0o .. mo ' o isi a Cau LLEw — L C C N a Y O C h C C N O O a — m .. 0 U pp 0 U O7 m C m E m E 00 c O 0 c O m Ct +.• C 9� 3-• L m L . Cm C m o m L o O N C 7 V Y m E 3 `I .E a• cu L - i N C m co T - 0 0 S C > E Q c L .0 IO 3 d o Vim? N COCN O u m m CU a C 00 r C = C L O X O O/ L L O Y C = c O 9 L 'O cu :� Y « c 3 0 C m e c - o E 3 a o m = -o m Y L 0 0 C 13 C C m C in CC Y OCU eti 0, Y = L 0 O Q O m > _ V o m Y o m e C 3 2 wa a +• ` 0 m m a L O C m T m E C a CO C 6 E y pq N 7 7 m C L v = u .i- t c ,d_ t E "u_ .N E 7 'O O a s 0 a 'O r 0 m m N +• ro O m E ;. 6 7 O 7 5 0 M U 10 -al m Z a 0 L 1O aO+ u w .- 0 ... c00000 VI C m a .0 w 9 N L C▪ y C b O 4a O To aeO Y o {R ▪ E n 4- W 4- .0 L pp w C _ O m c o w W 4• I- C n m • C c 3 Y0 V N d L CC i U C ` W N C W • E C m m75 > E O a N m• +-• m m t W Y E o . c C d E a 0 _O W C d I- 6- m N w m L O W j 0 0 • 1 T (5 N C m C L m • ~ N O > N g V C W0 O en Y K LL u O m ti i N ECU 41 c • E cu;* v cc p C Y N C m W Op• m C. hA W . e 7 h W W 0 r = O 0 d j CC 0 v u .0 v In S C N C a) a M LIW 9 t C C -0 tti C p m ❑ t, O NCel C O W w A r C to C " +,, O Yi 7 V y O Iii ` •p L -0 m m TO 2 !--.1 u N E y = o v 00 01 v m w 3 o c -o c ` v A E E a _IA in' m m '^cp w c m o '> v E 'C o 0 o .+ x .0 W 0 E o a a i EE ,n = d woo o ° co sO c o -c O > u 14 as a 0 ao v m a • �= a , v � W 3 a 0 4- Y N N L IFC C N ltrI C 0.4 O O I. Ja Y p E C 1L W n O. 0 0 13 r y L y` Y Y _ U. V UL D CVI W 71 r 7 C OW C = E 0 W C p m a C W } E 0 O. O .: up z 4 c C . C 0 0 WD o L 0 a+ WD C C y. L WLI C h.0 Lan cWr mC O in d 'O O N O ' Cu WNC c in tri .0 0 fa a+ U ++ O O A Z > 2 O i m l o o 0 V I p m• .+ W m W 41 Y> IR RI .W. C W V m O V r.o c, ° v m o 40 4' p oo ° M 12 c `a > `° a0 0^ u y to in' a' W E o c a ro °m' 0 E 0 W L 44 C 2' 0 40 W C 0 E to Omum Ti a u0 > .E ico .E tat 01 CO r Cr Y v el O vi N C C 0 0 N_ N alv N = 'o N C C 7 O r CO O ` Y a1 C a N U al to (5 E a ani -o C w Ill M D LI U In En Cil m 2 N al c E C to C C C d C to N I- JD L CD C 'O Y al om E .` L a a. ... O C 4-1 a1 W o N bp V) >. C d N cal 2 =0 dN t C y a al C c E c m a m L O a M > NCO COal i. C T 00 d y • C 4- L 00 'H 7 OD ^i 0 1.1 N O O u en t C •0 V1 al N_ -C In a-, E: S 1-1O `y 4' `O N W ♦L+ C 00 L N N D C 0 L O O U m m in 0. v El g o n 4-• w > '^ 0 m I- m S U -+ C O .r L 7 f. OE al > O C S C Cm q 00 N C r o o 1 o C c o e E ui v aci .n o .. O c c c U al 'a 4 00 c c .t c c E 'a m E c a m c a E ai _ a E g c o > Ia r E . `ta a m E = v .0 Oil u t 71 > Z J, = u3i CD a .c w v O °.. v u .c v uu, . a 3 a 2 c C7 c re 2 m E u O o c a c m N 111 in O u O a+ O 0 C M C j4 N IR o i.E a 7 y E v o c o Y o c a 'x o. O a.` 'x . I' 7 V 7 Y h m c N= E o N O V 7 O. 4 E U. W a 7 O w e Nla W t. 4 ' a. 3 u RI u (7 LLL 7 0 V OD In C \ C N Y Y X E o I-) d o L "' i c —y m a md >" m a a a u°E ai Q c v o m CU • C > as as E C y Y O Si 7 u y a, Q a o C m m 0 U d C C C 00• Y a+ O C Ni C O C 5 m C m ID Z a.C. O a. >' u e0 m C m m 7. C a E In c $ 'o E 'o `m c t E m '„ m '7 c 7 Z O m u m m m 'x - m a t w v 101 In .° a+ N Y E CL d a. C_ N aJm N c .c Y .3 • 7 o? .0 47 .c 0 o v r E at N L d F 7 H 7 O N N L- X o w N 0 7 N N ej .e E a m w C m a CCO m c p w c +° v l r T Y u °0 E ro v 4- a a _w u m • C L N cu • o Y a v o v u t C 3 L N N p Y c i1 � o i u 0 u c c ° CO ai ou m y c E c m c l7 c e E c to ai $, m a E N c o d o W7 w 'N > p .c OC u 7 > z 6 v° $ ry N Email Communication Comment from State of Oreaon DLCD:March25.2015 Here are my comments as iterated in the meetings last week. City of Talent-the City has some significant land constraint/availability issues that will likely affect their ability to grow at the level predicted.The City has a limited amount of land within its current UGB that is developable. What is developable has some fairly serious development constraints(e.g. railroad crossing,steep slopes).Also, they do not have much residential land in their Urban Reserve areas. Glendale-Population estimates seem high for this community. Even if they have the infrastructure available to accommodate growth (which I'm not sure about)the estimates still seem high based on isolated location and limited services and employment. Comments from City of Phoenix:March 26.2015 I recently attended the Oregon Population Forecast Program in Medford and learned that the City of Phoenix had not submitted the housing development and demographic surveys. They have been completed and are attached. I have the following general comments regarding the population forecast The forecasts apply only to existing UGBs. The City of Phoenix and five other communities in the Rogue Valley have identified Urban Reserve Areas through a Regional Problem Solving planning process. In the case of Phoenix,one of those URAs consists of urbanized land that will be annexed by the City within the next 10 years. With approximately 1,229 dwelling units in this area the City's population will grow by 2,500 to 2,700 in a relatively short period of time. At the same time,Jackson County will lose that population. Two other URAs,which are currently undeveloped agricultural land,will likely be included(at least in part)in the City's upcoming UGB amendment process. Between them, 124 acres have been designated for residential development. At an average density of 10 dwelling units per gross developable acre,we anticipate that these residential lands will accommodate approximately 1,240 new households or another 2,500 people. We expect this development to begin over the next 5 years, reaching its peak between 10 to 20 years,and reaching buildout within the next 30-40 years. Please contact me with any questions or comments you might have. 46 Question from Jacksonville:March 17,2015 I went to your presentation on the population forecast for Jackson County.We are concerned that the numbers the forecast reflect for Jacksonville are too high. As I understand it, it sounds like you need comments fairly soon.Since next week is spring break,and some key people in our office are going to be gone,the soonest I can discuss this with our department and City Administrator is the week of March 30th. Could you send me some information regarding the process?What would you need with regards to data? One thing I can tell you right now is that our current water capacity will only support for a maximum population of about 5,000.Additionally,we have very little buildable land at this point.There are murmurs of possibly expanding our UGB, but even with that, I think the numbers in the forecast are still too high. If you could let me know how we should proceed, and your timeline,that would be great. Response from PSU:March 19,2015 If you can send comments prior to March 31,that would be great.We will post the proposed forecasts on March 31.The formal challenge period begins April 1 and continues through May 15.We will request that evidence or additional data be submitted to us to consider for revising the proposed forecast(in addition to survey data previously submitted).The link below will take you to our web page where additional information can be found about the 45-day review/challenge period(deadlines,type of data to submit). http://www.pdx.edu/prc/opfp Your comments and information included in your email (this one)are helpful to have.We will revisit the forecast for Jacksonville and reevaluate our assumptions for future growth. Follow up question from Jacksonville:March 26,2015 Our Planning Director is out of town this week,so I haven't had the opportunity to sit down with her and our City Administrator about the numbers.We are planning on meeting early next week.Any chance we can have until Friday,April 3rd to send you our comments? Follow uo response from PSU:March 26,2015 We cannot extend the period in which to respond to the preliminary forecasts because we release the proposed forecasts on March 31.The release of the proposed forecasts begins the formal challenge period. We did adjust Jacksonville's forecasts down to account for lower density growth and issues with water rights. If you check back later today,we can give you the revised average annual growth rates 47 Follow uo auestions from Jacksonville:March30.2015 Could you send me the revised annual growth rates for the City of Jacksonville? I am meeting with our City Administrator and Planning Director tomorrow morning and would like to show them the revised numbers. Follow uo response from PSU:March 30.2015 Below are tentative Proposed numbers for Jacksonville for 2015, 2035,and 2065. As you'll see these numbers are roughly 400 lower in 2035 and 700 lower by 2065. The AAGR is now at 2%for the 2015-2035 period and remains at 1.5%for the 2035-2065 period. Contact us with any questions or concerns. AAGR AAGR Share of Share of Share of 2015 2035 2065 (2015-2035) (2035.208) County 2015 County 2035 County 2055 Jackson County 211,275 255,840 306858 1.0% 0.6% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Butte Fallsl 421 437 447 0.2% 0.1% 0.2% 0.2% 0.1% Gold Hill 1,267 1,4% 2,018 0.8% 1.0% 0.6% 0.6% 0.7% Jacksonville 2,927 4,316 6,687 10% 1.9% 1.4% 17% 2.2% Phoenix 4,955 6,883 9,775 1.7% 1.2% 2.3% 2.7% 3.2% Rogue River 2,838 3,706 5,545 1.3% 14% 13% 1.4% 111% Shady Cove 3,168 4,343 6,105 1.6% 1.1% 1.5% 1.7% 2.0% Talent 6,411 9,000 14,190 17% 1.5% 3.0% 3.5% 43% Larger UGBs2 128,915 160,537 194,874 1.1% 0.6% 61.0% 62.7% 63.5% Outside UGBs 60,373 65,104 67,119 0.4% 0.1% 20.6% 25.4% 2126 Source:Forecast by Population Research Centr(PRC) z Fors.mplkityeach UGa is referred to byits primary nty'sname. `Larger UGBs arethose with populationsgreater than 8,000 in forecast launch year. Other aeneral inauiry for Jackson County and UGBs.April and May.2015 Per telephone conversation and emails after the challenge period commenced, more information and insight about population growth in Jackson County and its sub-areas from a local planning firm were provided and discussed. 48 Appendix B: Specific Assumptions Ashland The total fertility rate(TFR)is assumed to stay slightly above the historical average TFR observed in the 2000s.Survival rates for 2060 are assumed to be a little above those forecast for the county as a whole. Ashland has historically had slightly higher survival rates than observed countywide;this corresponds with a slightly longer life expectancy.Age-specific net migration rates are assumed to generally follow historical patterns for Ashland, but at slightly higher rates over the forecast period. Butte Falls The annual housing unit growth rate is assumed to rapidly increase to one percent during the initial years of the forecast period and then gradually decline to zero over the remainder of the forecast period.The occupancy rate is assumed to steadily decline over the forecasting period, starting at a rate higher than observed in 2010 and ending at a rate slightly lower than observed in 2010.Average household size is assumed to slightly decrease over the forecast period.Group quarters population is assumed to stay steady over the forecast period. Central Point The total fertility rate(TFR)is assumed to begin at the rate observed in 2010 and then gradually decline over the forecast period.Survival rates for 2060 are assumed to be a little above those forecast for the county as a whole.Central Point has historically had slightly higher survival rates than observed countywide;this corresponds with a slightly longer life expectancy.Age-specific net migration rates are assumed to generally follow countywide historical patterns, but at slightly higher rates over the forecast period. Eagle Point The total fertility rate(TFR)is assumed to decline over the forecast period—although more slowly than it has historically—from the rate observed in 2010.Survival rates for 2060 are assumed to be a little above those forecast for the county as a whole. Eagle Point has historically had slightly higher survival rates than observed countywide;this corresponds with a slightly longer life expectancy.Age-specific net migration rates are assumed to generally follow historical patterns for Eagle Point, but at slightly higher rates over the forecast period. Gold Hill The annual housing unit growth rate is assumed to rapidly increase in the initial years of the forecast period and then slightly decline to a rate just greater than one percent and remain at this level for the duration of the forecast period.The occupancy rate is assumed to slightly increase during the initial years of the forecast period and then gradually decline through the remainder of the forecast period. Average household size is assumed to gradually decline over the forecast period.Group quarters population is assumed to remain at zero over the forecast period. 49 Jacksonville The annual housing unit growth rate is assumed to slightly increase during the initial years of the forecast period and then gradually decline to a rate just above a long term historical average annual rate over the later years of the forecast period.The occupancy rate is assumed to slightly increase in the first few years of the forecast period and then gradually decline through the remainder of the forecast period,ending at rate slightly lower than what was observed in 2010.Average household size is assumed to gradually decline over the forecast period.Group quarters population is assumed to stay relatively steady over the forecast period. Medford The total fertility rate(TFR) is assumed to begin at the rate observed in 2010 and then gradually decline over the forecast period. Survival rates for 2060 are assumed to be a little below those forecast for the county as a whole. Medford has historically had slightly lower survival rates than observed countywide; this corresponds with a slightly shorter life expectancy.Age-specific net migration rates are assumed to generally follow countywide historical patterns, but at slightly higher rates over the forecast period. Phoenix The annual housing growth rate is assumed to rapidly increase during the initial years of the forecast period and then gradually decline over the remainder of the forecast period.The occupancy rate is assumed to remain slightly above 90 percent throughout the forecast period.Average household size is assumed to gradually decline over the forecast period.Group quarters population is assumed to stay relatively steady over the forecast period. Rogue River The annual housing unit growth rate is assumed to rapidly increase during the initial years of the forecast period and then decrease slightly and remain at this level through the remainder of the forecast period.The occupancy rate is assumed to slightly decrease over the forecast period,starting from the rate observed in 2010.Average household size is assumed to remain at about two persons per household over the forecast period.Group quarters population is assumed to stay relatively steady over the forecast period. Shady Cove The annual housing unit growth rate is assumed to rapidly increase during the initial years of the forecast period and then gradually decline to and remain at a rate slightly higher than a long term historical average over the duration of the forecast period.The occupancy rate is assumed to initially increase and then gradually decrease through the end of the forecast period.Average household size is assumed to gradually decline over the forecast period.Group quarters population is assumed to remain relatively steady over the forecast period. Talent The annual housing unit growth rate is assumed to rapidly increase during the initial years of the forecast period and then gradually decline through the end of the forecast period.The occupancy rate is assumed to slightly decline over the forecast period.Average household size is assumed to slightly 50 decline over the forecast period. Group quarters population is assumed to remain relatively steady over the forecast period. Outside UGBs The total fertility rate (TFR) is assumed to gradually decline over the forecast period from the rate observed in 2010.Survival rates for 2060 are assumed to be a little above those forecast for the county as a whole.The area outside UGBs in Lane County has historically had slightly higher survival rates than observed countywide;this corresponds with a slightly longer life expectancy.Age-specific net migration rates are assumed to generally follow countywide historical patterns,but at slightly higher rates over the forecast period. 51 N u1 In lD N M o M e-1 IN M lG M LD M 00 IN pM O1 Co `� M tV0 N v C11 CO N N N 001 tv, N M eel W VD CO CO od N N N N N N N V Il reye N N l LS 00 O N tri N - tD` N N N e-I el e-1 el eel el N N N .-I N co th O 01 N N CO M M u1 (p M ON N 0}0 eell M M el Co M IN0 el m eM-I N V N 011 Cr N O v-I t1.0 t0 0 Co N N N N N N ni V u1 t0 00 01' N M N N I: N 01 el el N N N r-I el N N N el el N N N N N N 0) pp1p pp1 tpp N O N ICA e-I a N 011 N M 0 011 t^N v 1 M ,A eI W N co N N N N N N N N V u1 IR ri Oi N N N Oi ui t7 01 N v-I el el N N N el el eel N N N N N el el N 00 pp may} N N 0 M 10 N Mtt V Dell 000 ON1 0~1 1l1 N N N 000 LAA N 0 0 �1 N N N N N N N N rtl Ill t0 00 01 01 O 01 I1 If1 01 p` N N et el N e1 N e l el e l N N ei N N el el e-1 co I/Q� ppp tpp p o tpp ppp CO co N O Cr N M INA M - 00 1/1 N Ol MV M V N CYtel 00 V01 0 N N N N N N N N C ui t0 00 00 Oi 00 r t0 ui t0 M ei N N el el ei N N el el el el el el N el ei el N N N Si pa a tp CV IN N p� ON tap CON t��1 O 1~A 000 m N O M OMO 1011 O O O V N Ol N N tD tp N N N N N N N N M M ui N N 00 IN t0 t0 n u1 M I0 N N ei el N N N el el e1 N el el N e-I e-I e l e l t� LL N p00a y OW ~ NN 01 11* CO ~ N N M N113 ODCO 00 N LD V tD CO R N N N N N N N N v ui ui t0 t0 u1 t0 n t0 v O u1 vei v-I el e-1 el el el el e1 el el el el el el el el e1 to d N L FR 74pa p p tp LOL a o M N e-I Ni N Omi O N IMA un N Ln m m O IO _I o pj N N N N N N tel V a u1 0 <t u1 IN 00 LO N N h N N ei ei e1 el el el el N e1 el e l el el v-I N O D pp p p pp 8 miN 1p 0 IOA IND e~-I 00 v-I N eeI O A O t0O N N W 00 M 171 utpl M > N N N N N N N PA M V O t'tl a t0 I� n M 00 ui d> ^ ; e-1 ei el e l e l el el v el el el el el el el e l M a N O •LL IA 1.O WMD OM V c N eel Oi N v N COO 'Cr °IA1 ILA 0ei0 m I!1 V O N N N N N N N ni N N m ui t0 r V 6 t0 Y r. R N N el ei N N eN el el el 1 e-I el el el N N CO a ppp a ttpp 0 G N V N N N N LLD N O 000 t0 V 00 CO t~O N N N m 001 N Q �. el N N N N N NN N N ui t0 yr t7 r: ul a ej C el el el e-1 N el el N N el el N N ei eey V 0 N v 0 A _ II a 7 • n 2 0. E, 0 8 5i e°-4 N N N M V 4 A 1071 o n n O Q 00 0 M el d N M M v1 d Ln $ LA N LiiN Ln+Do o ii V u1 u1 t0 6 n m 78 CO la 1.11 N la rel A `VN' V V `l0 0 O US N F IA NN'. Cri lic le Ti el el el 1m w V � LIS L'44 4 EA N N W N O M D 00 .--I l0 O 01 1!1 1!1 M lD N N el pp N el t0 el Yet 47 CO N 00 l!1 0 el IA r1 001 40 O l� Cr el 01 N 1.0 O CO CO IA r1 el R m tD 1C rl tf1 N 00 O V1 N lA 071 N aa N el pap el Qryp1 el t0 N N lb 111 N ID al 47 CO CN O m R 4-1 V M lO m O M lA N m N ffffVVVV N N M rt 1!1 00 Le'el 4-1 el R aa p1 el pp0 Fly-. V o M O 01 n 4. m O u1 Q W a N 01 1N l0 N N iel et u1 00 I4 V O a N g el 1.0N m V N N in N m m tm0 N a N N el .--i O en' V 0 g IC f1 a el 0 el 4 OD477MCO cNenog N r» N v ri v of to M v ai ui N N el a p 0011 p a t0 ccoo v tm0 N C T O V a O cn a• m fV N . M rl M t(1 l0 M V 00 S N N el 01 C �/N1 rl 01 Dap O CA p 01 N 01 CO l0 01 to r O N CO Q Al m tt0 m m1 .-4 N C N a N N N N . M u1 M M r-:CO O. O a le pN Ian N Al O CO IN M m m frl (N al N 0 O IA 47 m ff0 M N CO 67 r V W N NNN N 01 r1 . M aa V1 N r l0 N N el rl W tD N A al in .-i 01 N N N Ill 09 OCI M CD el m Q O 01 v M ttO Ill N CONO m 000 el Tr el m N ... N CO' 01 44 N O R N m t0 O N 0000 0 CO 0 O D m COU m CO o � c� mDm > j in u 0 c .., 0 w 0 0 y v m C7 D O c o > > > > Ve a 'p - > v x_ o[ O 7 N m W To a 2 0 0 c w >, - v L t c Wn N V Sin 7 0 00 N 0 ate+ LL Q m U W l0 A' 2 a te v11- 0 Photo Credit: A view of the rugged landscape along Highway 66 in the Cascade Mountains. (Photo No.jacDA0063) Gary Halvorson, Oregon State Archives http://www.sos.state.or.us/archives/pages/records/local/county/scenic/jackson/103.html