The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCAP042519 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT Oregon City Council Meeting Agenda Thursday, April 25, 2019 Mayor Hank Williams Ward I Neil Olsen Ward II Kelley Johnson Ward III Brandon Thueson Ward IV Taneea Browning At Large Rob Hernandez At Large Michael Parsons At Large Michael Parsons Next Res(1575) Ord (2057) I. REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL IV. SPECIAL PRESENTATIONS 1. Police Department Swearing In 2. Police Department Accreditation Presentation V. PUBLIC COMMENTS Public comment is for non-agenda items. If you are here to make comments on a specific agenda item, you must speak at that time. Please limit your remarks to 3 minutes per individual, 5 minutes per group, with a maximum of 20 minutes per meeting being allotted for public comments. The council may ask questions but may take no action during the public comment section of the meeting, except to direct staff to prepare a report or place an item on a future agenda. Complaints against specific City employees should be resolved through the City’s Personnel Complaint procedure. The right to address the Council does not exempt the speaker from any potential liability for defamation. VI. CONSENT AGENDA A. Approval of April 11, 2019 City Council Minutes B. Approval of OLCC Application for Montgomerys Meats, LLC C. 3rd Quarter Financial Report VII. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA VIII. ORDINANCES, AND RESOLUTIONS A. An Ordinance adopting the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Housing Element (2019-2039). (Holtey) B. Resolution Approving Formation of a County Law Enforcement Service District (Dreyer) IX. MAYOR'S REPORT X. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT XI. COUNCIL REPORTS XII. DEPARTMENT REPORTS XIII. EXECUTIVE SESSION - ORS 192.660 (2)(d) Labor Negotiations The City Council will adjourn to executive session under the provisions of ORS 192.660. Under the provisions of the Oregon Public Meetings Law, the proceedings of an executive session are not for publication or broadcast. XIV. ADJOURNMENT Individuals needing special accommodations such as sign language, foreign language interpreters or equipment for the hearing impaired must request such services at least 72 hours prior to the City Council meeting. To make your request, please contact the City Recorder at 541-423-1026 (voice), or by e-mail to Deanna.casey@centralpointoregon.gov. Si necesita traductor en español o servicios de discapacidades (ADA) para asistir a una junta publica de la ciudad por favor llame con 72 horas de anticipación al 541-664-3321 ext. 201 CITY OF CENTRAL POINT Oregon City Council Meeting Minutes Thursday, April 11, 2019 I. REGULAR MEETING CALLED TO ORDER The meeting was called to order at 7:00 PM by Mayor Hank Williams II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE III. ROLL CALL Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Hank Williams Mayor Present Neil Olsen Ward I Present Kelley Johnson Ward II Present Brandon Thueson Ward III Present Taneea Browning Ward IV Present Rob Hernandez At Large Present Michael Parsons At Large Excused Staff members: City Manager Chris Clayton; City Attorney Sydnee Dreyer; Community Development Director Tom Humphrey; Parks and Public Works Director Matt Samitore; Police Lieutenant Scott Logue; Principal Planner Stephanie Holtey; and City Recorder Deanna Casey. IV. SPECIAL PRESENTATION 1. Transportation Updates Transportation Representative Mike Quilty updated the Council on transportation meetings and legislative items that are of interest to Central Point and Southern Oregon. ODOT is planning a roundabout at the location where Highway 140 meets Kershaw Road. They have set up cones where local trucking companies provided drivers to maneuver proving that it will work at this location. He attended Oregon Aviation and Connect Oregon meetings. V. CONSENT AGENDA RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Rob Hernandez, At Large SECONDER: Brandon Thueson, Ward III AYES: Williams, Olsen, Johnson, Thueson, Browning, Hernandez EXCUSED: Michael Parsons A. Approval of March 28, 2019 City Council Minutes 6.A Packet Pg. 3 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Apr 11, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes April 11, 2019 Page 2 B. Approval of 2019 City Surplus List C. Authorization to Cancel May 9th and July 25th City Council Meeting VI. PUBLIC HEARING A. An Ordinance adopting the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Housing Element (2019-2039). City Manager Chris Clayton read the Legislative Hearing Procedures for tonight’s meeting. No conflict of interest was declared by Council Members. Principle Planner Stephanie Holtey explained that the Housing Element includes an analysis of housing needs within the City’s urban area over a 20-year growth period and addresses the City’s capacity to accommodate that need within the existing Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) based on past and forecasted housing and demographic characteristics. The Housing Element sets forth goals and policies intended to encourage the number of various housing types at appropriate locations and densities, as well as the price levels that are compatible with Central Point households. The Housing Element was last updated in 2017. Portland State University provided a new population estimate last year which shows a substantial increased needs for future housing. She provided the background and tables that need to be updated to meet the new demands going into the future and the expansion of our urban growth boundary. We estimate that the city now needs 305 acres to increase our minimum density and adjusted land use distribution. Only tables referencing the population number are being amended. No other changes were made to the Housing Element. Mayor Williams opened the public hearing. Larry Martin, representative for the Taylor West Group. Mr. Martin complemented the Community Development Department for the hard work they have been doing on the Urban Growth Boundary Expansion. There will be a challenge with the higher density designations but he urges the Council to approve the housing element and move on to the next step of approving the Urban Growth Boundary expansion. Russel Kockz, Grant Road resident Mr. Kockz is in support of the element as presented. Mayor Williams closed the public hearing. Rob Hernandez moved to second reading an Ordinance updating and adopting the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Housing Element (2019- 6.A Packet Pg. 4 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Apr 11, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes April 11, 2019 Page 3 2039). RESULT: 1ST READING [UNANIMOUS] Next: 4/25/2019 7:00 PM MOVER: Rob Hernandez, At Large SECONDER: Brandon Thueson, Ward III AYES: Williams, Olsen, Johnson, Thueson, Browning, Hernandez EXCUSED: Michael Parsons VII. BUSINESS A. Dennis Richardson Memorial Discussion Parks and Public Works Director Matt Samitore explained that several members of the community have reached out to the city regarding a memorial, to be located at the Oregon War Memorial, for Dennis Richardson. Mr. Richardson was a catalyst for the Memorial and was the driving factor to help it come to Central Point. It would not have happened without his leadership and vision. He explained there are two primary options recommended by staff at this time. The first option would be to move the blue star memorial rock and replace it with a monument rock and plaque with language describing Dennis and his life of service and dedication to the war memorial. The second option would be to name the existing gazebo structure after him including a memorial plaque. Mayor Williams opened the discussion up for public comment. Dave Dotterrer, Ashland resident Mr. Dotterrer has worked with Dennis Richardson in the legislature and has spoken at the memorial for different City events. There are a lot of veterans here tonight in support of whatever the city is able to do in memory of Dennis Richardson. He stated that he has been contacted by several people at the state level who would be interested in helping with something significant if necessary. Community Development Director Tom Humphrey stated that the Central Point Rotary has expressed their support in a memorial for Mr. Richardson. Debbie Miles, Central Point Resident Mrs. Miles suggested that the City have a statue made of Dennis and put it in the park. Kathy Richardson, Central Point Resident and Dennis Richardson’s widow Dennis would be honored about all of this and anything that the city decides to do in memory of him would be great. Laura Branson, lives in RPS Area A park would be a great idea. She thinks Dennis would be proud to know a park was named after him. 6.A Packet Pg. 5 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Apr 11, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes April 11, 2019 Page 4 Mike Quilty, Central Point Citizen Mr. Quilty stated that he was appointed to fill a position on the Council when Dennis was elected to the State Legislature. Dennis was his inspiration when he became a council member and the city should do something in his memory. Katie Mallums, Heritage Road resident Mrs. Mallums stated that a future park would be a nice option when the UGB is expanded and future development provides a new family park. Council was in agreement that we should show our respect for Mr. Richardson with more than a rock and a plaque, or the Gazebo. There were suggestions of a future park, renaming Don Jones Memorial Park, or creating a rose garden in his name. It was suggested that an AdHoc Committee be created to discuss options and return to Council. If it is not something that can be done prior to this year’s Memorial Service hopefully we could have an idea and have it announced at the event this year. Staff recommends involving the Parks and Recreation Committee if the recommendation involves a city park. Mr. Clayton stated that the city would like to do something that is nice. We have not had much time to research all of the options. The items that Mr. Samitore has suggested were items that we could do without construction. Neil Olson moved to form a Adhoc Committee to research options to appropriately memorialize Dennis Richardson. RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Neil Olsen, Ward I SECONDER: Kelley Johnson, Ward II AYES: Williams, Olsen, Johnson, Thueson, Browning, Hernandez EXCUSED: Michael Parsons B. Motion to: Appoint Adhoc Committee members to Dennis Richardson Memorial options Taneea Browning moved to appoint Rob Hernandez, Brandon Thueson and Kelley Johnson to an AdHoc Committee to research appropriate venue to memorial Dennis Richardson. RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Taneea Browning, Ward IV SECONDER: Kelley Johnson, Ward II AYES: Williams, Olsen, Johnson, Thueson, Browning, Hernandez EXCUSED: Michael Parsons C. Discussion of Little League Partnership Options Mr. Samitore explained the city has had a series of meeting about the Central Point Little League and a potential partnership for youth and adult softball leagues that would be organized by the City. In order to better understand the issues associated with the Little League fields and establish a long-range plan, staff recommends a masterplan/facility analysis be done for the fields. 6.A Packet Pg. 6 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Apr 11, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes April 11, 2019 Page 5 Staff would like to budget $25,000 for a masterplan/facility analysis. The analysis would be funded by the General Fund through the City’s Parks Department. We are looking for direction from Council to see if they are in favor of this commitment. The funds will need to go through the budget recommendation process. If the council feels this is a worthwhile expenditure we will bring back an agreement between the City and Little League regarding funding of a consultant and outlining the possible future steps. There was discussion that before much could happen at the fields water and electricity would need to be extended to the buildings. The proposed master plan will give the city and little league an idea of the work involved in those plans. If the City does continue forward with this project we would have a long term agreement to share the fields with Parks and Rec programs and Little League sports. Council is in favor of working with the Little League but doesn’t think the full $25,000 would be needed. Staff would be directed to find someone to do a masterplan that would not take the entire amount. Staff is only looking for direction tonight. The funds would need to go through the budget process. If approved staff would bring back an agreement for Council to review and further direct staff. Tonight we are only asking if this is something the Council would like us to move forward with. Consensus was to move forward with the budget recommendation process. RESULT: FOR DISCUSSION ONLY D. Appointment of New Planning Commission Member City Manager Chris Clayton explained that Planning Commissioner John Whiting resigned as of April 3, 2019. The City has received applications from Patrick Smith, Michael House, and David Gilmore. Mayor Williams recommends appointment of Patrick Smith to the Planning Commission Position No. 5. He is a current member of the Citizens Advisory Committee and has been participating in the Urban Growth Boundary Expansion. Kelley Johnson moved to approve the recommendation of Patrick Smith to the Planning Commission Position No. 5 position with a term expiration date of December 31, 2021. RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Kelley Johnson, Ward II SECONDER: Taneea Browning, Ward IV AYES: Williams, Olsen, Johnson, Thueson, Browning, Hernandez EXCUSED: Michael Parsons E. Motion to: Appointment of Citizen Advisory Committee member Community Development Director Tom Humphrey stated that with this appointment there are now two vacant positions on the Citizens Advisory Commission (CAC). The 6.A Packet Pg. 7 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Apr 11, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes April 11, 2019 Page 6 City Recorder has advertised for applicants for the CAC but we have not received any. She asked the Planning Commission applicants prior to tonight’s meeting if they would be willing to serve on the CAC. Michael House indicated that he would like to be appointed to the CAC if he was not appointed to the Planning Commission. David Gilmore declined the offer to be on the CAC. These committee members do not have expiring terms. Brandon Thueson moved to appoint Michael House to the Citizens Advisory Committee. RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Brandon Thueson, Ward III SECONDER: Kelley Johnson, Ward II AYES: Williams, Olsen, Johnson, Thueson, Browning, Hernandez EXCUSED: Michael Parsons F. Preliminary Residential Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) Mapping Discussion Mrs. Holtey presented rough drafts of maps for our Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) expansion. Staff is looking for feedback on what direction the Council wishes staff to pursue. These are very preliminary maps according to what the state and RPS process will allow. Staff has taken into consideration: 1. Properties that abut either the city limits or current UGB; 2. Properties greater than 10 acres in size; 3. Properties that abut or are within 500 feet of basic urban services; 4. Properties that are proximate to or include mixed use/pedestrian friendly areas; 5. Compatibility with nearby agricultural uses outside the proposed UGB; 6. Proximity to transporation infrastructure; 7. Lands that have been master planned; 8. Readiness for development; and 9. Proximity to the City Center using a central growth pattern. Alternative 1A applies the criteria addressed but emphasizes inclusion of larger lots resulting in greater acreage east of Interstate 5 between Upton and Gebhard Roads and north to Wilson Road. Alternative 1B applies the criteria addressed but increases the emphasis on small to mid-size parcels with access to services and exception lands in proximity to basic urban services. The Planning Commission identifies Alternative A1 as the preferred alternative with the caveat that careful consideration be given to development readiness based on continued public input throughout the application process. The Taylor West property group has master planned the area and have gone to the effort to show the city what the possibilities could be for that area. Mayor Williams opened the discussion for public comment. Katie Mallams, Heritage Road resident Mrs. Mallams supports Alternative A1. It would cause the least disruption to residents south of the Taylor West Group that are not interested in becoming part of the city at this time. 6.A Packet Pg. 8 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Apr 11, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes April 11, 2019 Page 7 Russel Kockx, Grant Road resident Mr. Kockx is in favor of Alternative 1A. Tim Higginbotham, Taylor West Group Mr. Higginbotham stated that they have access to utilities for sewer, natural gas and water. He can see the benefits of 1A. There will be nice parks in the Taylor West Group development; there would be room for a Dennis Richardson memorial park. There is a section on the map that is gray and to the west of his property that could be added into the Alternative 1A, it is west of the Taylor West Group master plan. Larry Martin, Taylor West Group Mr. Martin is representing Jim Brown tonight. His property has serviceability issues and would like to include their property to the Alternative 1A option. His property was previously left out of the master planning process but has since changed their minds and would like to be included. The property is just west and abuts the Taylor West Group master plan. They would need to work on their concept plan before the real master plan can be complete. This would also take care of the serviceability issue for this property and increase property ready to develop on the west side of town. Jim Gieger, Grant Road resident There are water issues on Robin Lane, there are additional properties in that area that are interested in being included in the Alternative 1B. Mrs. Holtey stated that staff has taken note of all of the feedback provided tonight and has gotten a sense of the growth pattern the Council would like to see. Mr. Humphrey stated that the Medford Water Commission does allow hook up to areas inside our Urban Reserve Areas. This could help solve some of the immediate issues regarding the wells on the west side of town. We need to have a more refined map before going to the state and taking the final steps for the amendment. Council would like to see the property included in Alternative 1A that have expressed interest tonight. Staff will be returning to Council with a more defined map for further discussion. We are not sure if we could return to Council at the April 25th meeting, and may need to wait until the May 23rd meeting. Council would be in favor of removing some properties in the CP-2B area if adding the properties to the Taylor West Group increases above the recommended amount. Staff will return to Council with a final draft of the map before proceeding with the application process. RESULT: FOR DISCUSSION ONLY G. Planning Commission Report Community Development Director Tom Humphrey presented the Planning Commission Report for April 2, 2019: 6.A Packet Pg. 9 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Apr 11, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes April 11, 2019 Page 8 The Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the conditional use permit application for Fire District 3 on Scenic Avenue. The Commission discussed the impacts which included traffic, emergency responses and determined that the applicant made the necessary adjustments and improvements to safeguard the use and to mitigate impacts to the surrounding neighborhood. The Commission approved the Conditional Use Permit with conditions recommended by staff. The Planning Commission held a public hearing for the site plan and architectural review application for a 10,200 foot fire station including parking and landscape areas at 1909 Scenic Avenue. Property boundaries are being adjusted and public improvements are being made that will benefit the application and surrounding properties. The site plan was approved with conditions recommended by staff. The Planning Commission discussed the two preliminary map alternatives for the Residential UGB amendment. The Commission provided helpful feedback and expect a more refined “hybrid” of the two scenarios at the May Planning Commission meeting. RESULT: FOR DISCUSSION ONLY VIII. MAYOR'S REPORT Mayor Williams reported that he attended: The Pear Valley ribbon cutting. The Asante Clinic ribbon cutting. The Medford Chamber Luncheon. IX. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT City Manager Chris Clayton reported that: He will be at the Spring LOC Conference tomorrow in Ashland, and on vacation next week. He attended the Medford Chamber Lunch where Representative Greg Walden was the speaker. The Library District is preparing to take control of the library facilities. We will be working on a new IGA with the District for the Central Point Library location. We currently share cost for maintenance and we want to be assured that if the building is not used as a library it will revert back to city possession. Staff is diligently working on budget preparation. He attended the Asante Clinic Ribbon Cutting. The City Attorney will be working on a resolution of support for the Jail District to be on the April 25th Council Agenda. He and Mr. Samitore spoke with a news reporter about the Citizen Survey results. X. COUNCIL REPORTS 6.A Packet Pg. 10 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Apr 11, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes April 11, 2019 Page 9 Council Member Kelley Johnson reported that: She will be attending the LOC Spring Conference tomorrow. She attended an Airport Advisory Committee meeting. She will not be attending the next Council meeting because of work obligations. Council Member Brandon Thueson reported that he attended the Study Session and the CAC meeting. Council Member Rob Hernandez reported that: He attended the Medford Chamber Forum Lunch. He attended a SOREDI meeting on Tuesday. They are working on their Strategic Plan. He attended the Chamber Mixer on Tuesday. Council Member Taneea Browning reported that: She attended an LOC Board meeting in Salem. She attended the Medford Chamber Forum Lunch. She attended the Chamber Mixer. The Saturday Market will begin on May 4th. Council Member Neil Olson reported that he will not be attending the next Council meeting. XI. DEPARTMENT REPORTS Parks and Public Works Director Matt Samitore reported that: There is a noticeable improvement in how fast things are moving for the Twin Creeks crossing project. RVTD has decided to keep the bus stop at 7th Street. They are not willing to reduce the size of the bus in Central Point. Workers are finding interesting things out at the Mae Richardson Trail by the Expo. We hope to get support from partners in the area to help keep the area clear and welcoming to the community. Police Lieutenant Scott Logue reported that the Chief and Captain are in Bend for the Annual Chiefs Conference. 6.A Packet Pg. 11 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Apr 11, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point City Council Minutes April 11, 2019 Page 10 Community Development Director Tom Humphrey reported that: They will be interviewing for a Planner 1 the first part of May. Staff has been working on the UGB amendment application. XII. ADJOURNMENT Taneea Browning moved to adjourn. Brandon Thueson seconded and the April 11, 2019 Council meeting was adjourned at 9:10 p.m. The foregoing minutes of the April 11, 2019, Council meeting were approved by the City Council at its meeting of April 25, 2019. Dated: _________________________ Mayor Hank Williams ATTEST: __________________________ City Recorder 6.A Packet Pg. 12 Minutes Acceptance: Minutes of Apr 11, 2019 7:00 PM (CONSENT AGENDA) City of Central Point Staff Report to Council ISSUE SUMMARY TO: City Council DEPARTMENT: Administration FROM: Deanna Casey, City Recorder MEETING DATE: April 25, 2019 SUBJECT: Approval of OLCC Application for Montgomerys Meats, LLC ACTION REQUIRED: Consent Agenda Item RECOMMENDATION: Approval The City of Central Point has received an OLCC Application from Montgomerys Meats, LLC for limited On-Premises Alcohol License. The Central Point Police Department has conducted a back ground check and found no information pertinent to the application. ATTACHMENTS: 1. OLCC Montgomery Meats PD Letter 2. OLCC App - Montgomerys Meats 6.B Packet Pg. 13 155 South Second Street. Central Point, OR 97502 Kristine AIIison CENTRAL L' -¿=- POINT Ph: (541) 664-5578 . Fax: (541) 664-2705. www.centralpointoregon.gov Date: 0411712019 From: Chief Kristine Allison To: Honorable Mayor V/illiams Subject: Request for OLCC License RE: Montgomery, Shawna / Montgomery Meats, [nc. / Persons associated therewith Files of the Central Point Police Department contain no information pertinent to the request. Chief ç Chief Kristine Allison Central Point Police Department " 0r/roø/ 6 ,9"rnro", Coan'ttø/ 6 f*"//",tou" 6.B.a Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: OLCC Montgomery Meats PD Letter (1134 : OLCC approval for Montgomerys Meats) ffi OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION CITY AND COUNTY USE ONLY Recommends this license be _ Granted _ Denied By Date Date application received Name of City or County t. Do not include the license fee with the application (the license fee will be collected at a later time). APPLICATION: Application is being made fortr Brewery tr Brewery-Public House n Dlstillery ! Full On-Premises, Commercial ! Full On-Premises, Caterer n Full On-Premises, passenger Carrier [] Full On-Premises, Other public Locationt] FullOn-Premises, Nonprofit private Clubfl ¡ull on-Premises, For-profit private Club ! Grower Sales Privilege ! Off-Premises ! Off-eremises with Fuel pumps ! Warehouse ! Wholesale Malt Beverage & Wine (WMBW) LICENSE FEE: Umited On-Premíses oLc dbv License Action N\o Application re Date furplican,t H1 lluttAt M€rq'\,,ffi.)u. oration or for the license:m or lN IVID1. LEGAT ENTITY Applicant #2 -sêApplicant #3 cant f4 2. 'frade Name of the he name custo rs will see nc-.3. Busin : Number a Cou 4. ls the business at this licensed the OICC?curre Yes No Address (where the OLCC wilt send5. Mai +5 Street, Rural RoutePOumber State 6. Phone of the ation: 7. Contact Person for o Name Phone Number lso z-PState,¡tMa Addresing Email ation, samples, give-away, sale, etc,) isconsumption,inhalI understand that m ana (such a on the licensed mises, nt #l-Signature of Applicant #2 Signature of Applicant S3 Signature of Applicant #4 OICC tiquor Lrcense Appt¡cdr¡on (Rev 06/20t71 6.B.b Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: OLCC App - Montgomerys Meats (1134 : OLCC approval for Montgomerys Meats) toì(ì(OREGON LIQUOR CONTROL COMMISSION CORPORATION QU ESTION NAI RE Please Print or Type Corporation Name: Trade Name (dba): Business ocation Address: City:rrL) (name) c_ 3- Year I nco rporated: 1p I ? ZIP Code: Ql:; Ô 2- rsf f rn Board DN ( u^ vz-k¡e¡ (name) List StockhOlders: {Note: lf any stoc}drolder is another legal entit¡ that enti$ may also need to cornplete another Coçoration Questionnaire. See Liguor License Application Guide for more infonnation.) Number of Shares Held: t () Server Education Desi ötn(,&(4 DoB -l (See Liquor License Application Guide for more information), I understand that if my Officer's Signature and complete, the OLCC may deny my license ap (title) l -800-452-OLCC (65221 MttAIv. O re g o n. g Ovlo I c c Unissued: -d Shares Authorized lssued: lssue: Number of Stock Shares (name) (rev. 08/1 1) 6.B.b Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: OLCC App - Montgomerys Meats (1134 : OLCC approval for Montgomerys Meats) City of Central Point Staff Report to Council ISSUE SUMMARY TO: City Council DEPARTMENT: Finance FROM: Steven Weber, MEETING DATE: April 25, 2019 SUBJECT: 3rd Quarter Financial Report ACTION REQUIRED: Consent Agenda Item RECOMMENDATION: Approval BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Attached are the City’s financial statements for the period ending March 31, 2019 which represents 21 months of the biennium. The next 6 pages are the Revenue and Expenditure statements for each of the respective funds while the last page is the Budget Compliance report which recaps expenses by department. In all funds, revenues and expenditures are on track for the time period. General Fund revenues are on a positive trend to date for the biennium with 93.31% of budget. This is aided by property tax revenues being at 97.48% received as well as Licenses/Fees and Interest Income line items being well above budget. Expenditures for te General Fund are at only 78.66% of the budgeted amount. The Street Fund revenues are at 76.82% of budget while expenditures are at 82.48% of total budget. The revenue total is impacted due to the timing of the Costco fees coming in just before the start of the biennium whereas those fees were budgeted to be received in this current biennium. Otherwise the fund is in a good position. The Building Fund continues to show strong revenue totals that exceed overall budgeted revenues for the biennium. Water Fund total revenues are 87.18% of budget with expenditures at 91.71%. The Charge for Services revenue line item (which includes water sales) is trending slightly lower than expectations (86.64%) but we expect that to get back on track when the weather warms up. The expenditure total is trending higher due to the completion of large capital projects. Stormwater and Internal Services Fund revenues and expenditures are in line with this point in the biennium. Overall, the City is in a very good financial position with overall revenues at 89.01% of total budget and expenditures of 81.98% of total budget. 6.C Packet Pg. 17 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: LEGAL ANALYSIS: COUNCIL GOALS/STRATEGIC PLAN ANALYSIS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Mayor and Council approve the March 31, 2019 financial statements as presented as part of the consent agenda. ATTACHMENTS: 3rd Quarter Financial Statements ATTACHMENTS: 1. 3rd Quarter Financial Statements - 2019 6.C Packet Pg. 18 City of Central Point Councíl Financíal Statements For period endíng Mdrch 3t, zotg % of biennial budget 87.ïoit zotTlrg Biennial Budqet Biennium to Date Revenues & Expenditures Difference Percentage Received/Used General Fund Revenues Taxes Licenses & Fees lntergovernmental Charges for Service Fines and Forfeitures lnterest lncome Miscellaneous Transfers In Total Revenues Expenditures by Department Administratíon City Enhancement Technical Services Mayor & Council Finance Parks Recreation Planning Police lnterdepartmental Transfers Out Contingency Total Expenditures by Department Net Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance t83zz166o 17t415,4)1 907,229 95.05i¿ g't4,zo83zo $'r3o,ooo $1,177,34o Sz,232,ooo g167,ooo $73,ooo $lj5,ooo $o 513,672,726 s1l3,587 5'1,12o,9o4 $'t,9't4,267 gl28,678 9181,691 s263,578 $o $i35,594 -$3,581 156,436 5317,733 g38,3zz -91o8,691 571,422 $o 96.23% 1o2.76% 95.21% 85.76% 77.o57" 248.89% 78.68% o.oo% 1,577,835 4O9,OOO 1,224,13O 13O,OOO 1,620,539 2,'t59'402 1,OO4,18O 1,25O,53O 9,58o,315 347,ooo 246,1OO 18o,ooo 1,274,639 337,744 1,060,O74 117,331 1,373,23'l 't,559,979 734,974 989,4't1 7,980352 34o,268 246,1oo o 3o3,196 7't,256 t64,o56 12,669 247.3o8 599,423 269,206 26'1,119 1,599,983 6,732 o lSo,ooo 80.78% 82.j8% 86.60% 90.25% 8+.t+% 72.24% 73.19% 79.12% 83Bo% 98.06% 100.oo% o.oo% t9r729r05t 3,952,493 t6ro14r1o)j,7r4,948 8t.r7% 1,4O1,327 t19821987 30,494 2,546,1O2 SB84B14 2,838,212 6.C.a Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: 3rd Quarter Financial Statements - 2019 (1135 : 3rd Quarter Financial Report) City of Central Point Council Fínancial Statements For períod ending Mdrch 31r 2o1g g6ofbienn¡atbudget 87.50.% zorTlrg Biennial Budget Biennium to Date Revenues & Expendítures Difference Percentage Received/Used Hígh Tech Críme Unit Fund Revenues lntergovernmental Revenue Charges for Services Miscellaneous lnterfund Transfers Total Revenues Expenditures Operations Transfers Contingency Total Expenditures Net Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance $o o o o $o o o o $o o o o o.oo% o.oo% o.oo% o.oo% ooo o.oo7" o.oo% 'too.oo% o.oo% o 78,842 o 78,842 o o o o o 78,842 78,842 78,842 (78,842) 78,842 o roo.ooz o o o o 6.C.a Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: 3rd Quarter Financial Statements - 2019 (1135 : 3rd Quarter Financial Report) City of Central Point Council Financial Statements For period endíng March 31,2otg ?6ofbiennialbudget 67.50% zol7lr9 Bíennial Budget Biennium to Date Revenues & Expenditures Difference Percentage Received/Used Street Fund Revenues Franchíse Tax Charges for Services I ntergovernmental Revenue lnterest lncome Miscellaneous Transfers ln Total Revenues Expenditures Operations 5DC Transfers Contingency Total Expenditures Net Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance Capítal I mpr ov ement F un d Revenues lntergovernmental Charges for Services lnterest lncome Total Revenues Expenditures Parks Projects Parks Projects - 5DC Transfers Out Total Expenditures Net Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance $486,0oo 92,74t,66o 92,358,96o 928,62o $536,ooo S15o,ooo 5425,250 5't,485,794 $2,'t44,'tz5 5122,1j1 $513,596 $l5o,ooo 56o,75o 't,255,866 214,835 '93,531 22,4O4 o 87.jo% 54.19% 90.89% 426.8o% 95.821^ o.oo% 6Bo1rz4o 5,554,856 1,665,ooo 6o,ooo 157,OOO 4,642,4o5 1,339,657 152,OOO o 912,451 325,343 -92,OOO 157,OOO 8l.slz 80.46% 253.)3% o.oo% 4r84or9t6 t,46o,724 76.82% 714)61856 2r21O1714 (t,293,t46) 3t4t5ì94 1,2O4,58O 6,t34,o62 tr3ozr794 82.48% 1,O75,O98 2,122¡48 1,O47,O5O $15O,OOO $7o5,ooo $4,ooo 549,972 $3o4,629 51 5,228 $too,oz8 4oo,371 -111228 33l-17" 43.21% l'8o.7o% 859rooo 664,ooo 5O,OOO 143.8oo 369,829 67,330 o l¿r.8oo 596,67o 5O,OOO o 10.147" o.oo7" loo.ooZ 489,171 43.0'5?¿ 85718oo 2t1r13O 646,670 24.61% 36o,462 r58,699 43r,t65 70,903 36 1,662 590,o64 zz8,4oz 6.C.a Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: 3rd Quarter Financial Statements - 2019 (1135 : 3rd Quarter Financial Report) City of Central Point Council Financial Statements For períod endíng Mdrch 3t,2019 %ofb¡ennialbudgea 87.50% zorTltg Bíennial BudEet Biennium to Date Revenues & Expenditures Difference Percentage Received/Used Reserve Fund Revenues I nterest Transfers ln Total Revenues BuíldíngFund Revenues Charges for Service lnterest lncome Miscellaneous Total Revenues $6,ooo Srz8,8+z gz5,t69 Srz8,8+z -9r9,r69 o 419.497¿ 1oo.oo% 134,842 154,Ofl o 114.22i¿ o o.oo% Expenditures Facility lmprovements Total Expenditures oo o o 154,O11 8o4r2o4 o o.oo% Net Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance Net Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 631,2o4 173,OOO 766,c46 958,215 192,169 Debt Service Fund Revenues Charges for Service lnterest lncome lntergovernmental Special Assessments Miscellaneous Revenue Transfers ln Total Revenues Expenditures Debt Service Total Expendítures 5794,67o $2,O0O $o S44,ooo So $j91,9oo 9694,2t4 s4,305 $o $o $o $391,900 $10o,456 -2,3o5 o 44,ooo o o 87 36% 211.26% o.oo% o.oo% o.oo% 1oo.oo% 1r2)2r57O 1,241,993 tro9or419 1,O13,529 t42,1jt 88.+Z% 228,464 81.61% 11241,993 1O1,336 110131529 76,89o 52þ97 zz81464 8t.6t% -49,239 91,913 l28,987 37,O74 $55i,ooo $6,ooo $o 1s43,52s 522,677 $6oo 57,475 -'t6,677 -6oo 98.64% 377.95% o.oo% 557rooo 438,275 1O4,9OO 5,560 566,8o2 258,4o2 88,444 o 179,873 16,4:56 5'560 58.96% 843lz o.oo7" -9r8o2 101.767" Expenditures Personal Services Materials and Services Contingency Total Expenditures Net Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 548,735 4o8,782 346,846 219,955 603,3o]. zorr889 6t.21% 194,521 417,O47 823,258 406,2',t1 6.C.a Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: 3rd Quarter Financial Statements - 2019 (1135 : 3rd Quarter Financial Report) Cíty of Central Point Council Financial Statements For períod ending March 31,2019 %ofbiennialbudget E7.rO% zorTlrg Biennial Budget Biennium to Date Revenues & Expenditures Difference Percentage Received/Used Water Fund Revenues Charges for Services lnterest lncome Miscellaneous Total Revenues Expenditures Operations SDC lmprovements Contingency Total Expenditures $6,963,ojo 132,764 $o 56,o32,762 554,779 $11,277 $93o,268 -22rO15 -11,277 86.64% 167.197" o.oo% 6ß95t94 7376,89',r 37O,OOO 151,1OO 6,o9818r8 7,202,354 41,O13 o 174,537 328,987 '151,1OO 97.63% 11.o8% o.ooy" 896,976 8l.tBT" Net Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 7,897,99t 7,243..367 65.4,624 91.71% 305,o722r5O21253 -1,'144,549 2,8o7,325 1,6oo,o56 1,662,776 62,720 Stormwater Fund Revenues Charges for Services lnterest lncome Miscellaneous Total Revenues Expenditures Operations SDC Contingency Total Expenditures $1,8o9,2o6 s15,894 $o $t,698,538 i46,443 $o grro,668 -30,549 o 93.88% z9z.zo% o.oo% trSz5rtoo 1,593,961 8,ooo 46,500 t,744,98o Sorrzo 95,.61% 1,313,'141 o o z8o,8zo 8,ooo 46,500 82.38% o.oo% o.oo% 11648r46t 1,O99,275 431,840 r,536389 1r}t)rt41 )35ùzo 79.66% 437,114 Net Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 1,275,914 t,968,229 692,315 6.C.a Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: 3rd Quarter Financial Statements - 2019 (1135 : 3rd Quarter Financial Report) CÍty of Central Point Council Financial Statements For períod endíng Mdrch 31,2019 %ofbiennialbudget 87.507" zorTl'r9 Biennial Budqet Biennium to Date Revenues & Expenditures Difference Percentage Received/Used lnterndl Services Fund Revenues Charges for Services lnterest lncome Miscellaneous Total Revenues Expenditures Facilities Maintenance PW Administration PW Fleet Maintenance lnterfund Transfers Total Expenditures $2,640,4oo S5,ooo S2,ooo 52,292,597 $11,O59 i347,8o3 (6,osg) (rs,o8r) 86.83% 221j9% 8sq.ol%517,o8r z1647r4oo 652,ooo 1,322,619 }tz,94o 5O,OOO zr3zo1738 512,381 't,137,590 60i,433 5O,OOO 't39,619 185,o29 2O7,5O7 o 78.597" 86.o1% 74.47% 1oo.oo% 326,662 87.66% Net Change in Fund Balance Beginning Fund Balance Ending Fund Balance 218)7'559 2rro5r40+ 354,607 15,333 1o5,638 532t55 8t.25% -48,969 't64,448 320,971 156,523 6.C.a Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: 3rd Quarter Financial Statements - 2019 (1135 : 3rd Quarter Financial Report) Fund Department/ Classífication Cíty of Central Point Budget Complíance Report For períod endíng March 3t,2otg % of bíennial budget 87.50% zoltZltg Bienníum to Date Percent Bíennial Expenditures Used Difference General HTCU Street Capítal Proiects lnternal Services $'t,i77,835 409,oOO 11224r13O 13O,OOO 1,620,539 2,159,4o2 t,oo4,18o 1,25O,53O 9,580,335 347,ooo 246,1oo r8o,ooo g't,274,639 337,744 l,o6oro74 117,331 1,373,231 1,559,979 734,974 989,411 7,980352 34o,268 246,1oo o 8o.18% 82.58% 86.6o% 90.25% 84.74% 72.24% 73.19% 79.12% 833o% 98.06% 1oo.oo% o.oo% $303,r g6 7'1,256 164,o56 12,669 247,308 599,423 z69,zo6 261,119 1,599,983 6,732 o 18o,ooo Admínistratíon City Enhancement Technical Services Mayor and Councíl Finance Parks Recreatíon Planning Políce lnterdepartmental Transfers Contingency Total Expenditures Materials and Services Total Expendítures Operatíons SDC lmprovements Contingency Total Expendítures Park Projects Park Projects - SDC Transfers Total Expendítures Facilities Maintenance PW Admínistration PW Fleet Maíntenance Transfers Total Exoendîtures 19.72q.O51 16.o14.ro3 8t.t7%a,714,948 78,842 78,842 1oo.oo%o t8,8+z 10,o.,oo%o 5,6t4,856 1,665,ooo 157,OOO 4,702,4O5 1,431,657 o 83.lsz 8s.gg% o.oo% 912,451 233,343 157,OOO 7,416,856 6,1?,4,062 82.+8%1,JO2.794 '15O,OOO 564,ooo 143.800 49,277 r8,o53 l¿¡,8oo 32.85% 3.zo% 10o.oo% 10O,723 545,947 o 8sz.8oo 211,24.61%646,67o Debt Service TotalExpenditures Buílding Personnel Services Materials and Services Contingency Total Expendítures Water Operatíons SDC lmprovements Contingency Total Expendítures Stormwater Operations SDC lmprovements Contingency Total Expenditures 1r2+1rgg3 1ro13r'z9 81.61%228,464 438,275 1O4,9OO 5.560 258,4o2 88,444 o 58.96% 84.3't% o.oo% 't79,873 't6,456 5,560 548,735 j46,846 63.21%201r889 7376,89t 37O,OOO 151,1OO 7,202,354 41,O13 o 97.63% 't't.o8% o.oo% 174,537 328,987 151,1OO 7,897,991 7,24t,t 67 91.71%654,624 1,593,961 8,ooo 46,5oo 1,313,141 o o 82.38% o.oo% o.oo% z8o,8zo 8,ooo 46,500 t,648,46l r.ìr3,141 79.66%f35'32o 652,ooo 1,322,619 812,940 5O,OOO 512881 1,137 '59o6o5,433 5O,OOO 78.59% 86.o't% 74.47% 1oo.oo% 139,619 185,o29 2O7,5O7 o 2.817 z,1os,4o4 81.2s%532,155 Total Cítv Ooerations 5¿z.zzz.z88 $14,66o,42s 8r.98%$7,6r6,861 6.C.a Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: 3rd Quarter Financial Statements - 2019 (1135 : 3rd Quarter Financial Report) City of Central Point Staff Report to Council ISSUE SUMMARY TO: City Council DEPARTMENT: Community Development FROM: Stephanie Holtey, Principal Planner MEETING DATE: April 25, 2019 SUBJECT: An Ordinance adopting the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Housing Element (2019-2039). ACTION REQUIRED: Ordinance 2nd Reading RECOMMENDATION: Approval BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On March 5, 2019, the Planning Commission approved Resolution No. 866 recommending approval of the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Housing Element (2019-2039). After considering the Planning Commission’s favorable recommendation and conducting a public hearing at the April 11, 2019 meeting, the City Council forwarded the Housing Element to a second reading. It was also considered by the Citizen’s Advisory Committee with a favorable recommendation. The draft Housing Element is attached. Housing Element Overview: The Housing Element evaluates the City’s forecast growth and associated need for housing based on the availability of built land, household and housing characteristics. It was last updated in 2017 and is being updated now to reflect changes in the City’s 20-year population forecast per the 2019 Population Element and updated residential buildable lands. The updated is needed to amend the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The Housing Element includes an analysis of housing needs within the City’s urban area over a 20-year growth period and addresses the City’s capacity to accommodate housing needs within the UGB. Based on demographic household characteristics, the Housing Element sets forth goals and policies intended to encourage the number of various housing types at appropriate locations and densities, as well as the price levels that are commensurate with the capabilities of Central Point households. Since the Housing Element was last updated in 2017, population forecast changes and updated residential buildable lands information have resulted in an increased need in housing for the period 2019- 2039 as shown in Table 1. The proposed Housing Element addresses these changes and maintains the previously adopted policies without changes. 8.A Packet Pg. 26 Table 1 Projected Residential Buildable Land Need 2019 to 2039 2018 Pop.1 19,101 2032 Forecast2 23,662 2039 Forecast3 26,317 Population Increase 7,216 Persons/HH4 2.50 Household Increase 2,887 Average Gross Density5 7.04 Needed Gross Residential Acres 410 Total Buildable Residential Acres6 105 Additional Needed Gross Residential Acres 305 1 Portland State University Population Research Center, Preliminary Estimate, 2018 2 Portland State University Population Research Center, Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2018-2068 3 Based on PSU Interprolation Worksheet 4 City of Central Point Population Element, 2017 - 2037 5 City of Central Point Regional Plan Element, 2015 - 2035 6 City of Central Point Buildable Lands Report, 2019 - 2039, Table 5. Infill Availability Adjusted Buildable Vacant Land by Comprehensive Plan FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: The housing needs identified in the Housing Element do not generate additional cost to the City beyond the in-kind staff expenses, postage and legal notification cost included within the budgeted funds for Community Development. The fiscal impact of extending public infrastructure and services to accommodate future housing will be evaluated at such time as the City proposes amendments to its UGB. LEGAL ANALYSIS: Comprehensive Plan text amendments are “Major Amendments” per CPMC 17.96.300 and are subject to Type IV Legislative application procedures per CPMC 17.05.500. Conducting a second reading of the Ordinance by the City Council is necessary and a requisite procedure to adopt changes to the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Housing Element. COUNCIL GOALS/STRATEGIC PLAN ANALYSIS: The City Council goal is to provide managed growth and infrastructure and is predicated on the ability of the City to forecast growth and the corresponding land and service needs over the long term. The 2019- 2039 Housing Element aligns with the Council’s goal by: “Continually ensuring that planning and zoning review and regulations are consistent with the comprehensive plans and vision.” STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Consider the Second Reading of the proposed amendment to the 2019-2039 Housing Element of the Central Point Comprehensive Plan and 1) approve the ordinance; 2) approve the ordinance with revisions; or 3) deny the ordinance. 8.A Packet Pg. 27 RECOMMENDED MOTION: Approve Ordinance No. _____ Updating and Adopting the Central Point Comprehensive Plan Housing Element (2019-2039). ATTACHMENTS: 1. Ordinance (Housing Element) 2. Housing Element (PC Recommended) 3. PC Resolution No 866 8.A Packet Pg. 28 Ordinance No. _____; April 11, 2019 Page 1 of 1 ORDINANCE NO. _______ AN ORDINANCE UPDATING AND ADOPTING THE CENTRAL POINT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT (2019-2039) 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. ORS 197.296 directs jurisdictions to demonstrate its comprehensive plan provides sufficient buildable lands within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) to accommodate estimated housing needs for 20-years. The Housing Element reflects the analysis and determination of residential housing needs necessary to satisfy this requirement. D. Pursuant to authority granted by the City Charter and the ORS, the City has determined it is necessary to update its Housing Element which was last adopted and acknowledged in 2017. E. Pursuant to the requirements set forth in CPMC Chapter 17.96 Amendments and Chapter 17.05.500, 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 February 5, 2019 and March 5, 2019; and, b) City Council hearing on April 11, 2019. THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF CENTRAL POINT DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Based upon all the information received, the City Council adopts the Staff Reports and evidence which are 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 Housing Element is hereby updated and adopted as set forth in Exhibit A –Comprehensive Plan Housing Element, 2019-2039 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 Housing Element. Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this ___ day of ____________, 2019. __________________________ Mayor Hank Williams ATTEST: _____________________________ City Recorder ______________________________________________________________________________ 8.A.a Packet Pg. 29 Attachment: Ordinance (Housing Element) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) Housing Element 2019-2039 City of Central Point Comprehensive Plan Final Draft 3/5/2019 Ordinance No. DLCD Acknowledged: 8.A.b Packet Pg. 30 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 2 | 37 Contents 1. Summary ................................................................................................................................. 4 Residential Land Need ..................................................................................................... 4 1.1 Housing Affordability ...................................................................................................... 6 1.2 Housing Types.................................................................................................................. 7 1.3 2. Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 7 3. Oregon’s Statewide Planning Goal 10, Housing .................................................................... 8 4. Purpose .................................................................................................................................... 9 5. Household Characteristics ...................................................................................................... 9 Household Tenure .......................................................................................................... 10 5.1 Age of Householder ....................................................................................................... 11 5.2 Household Size ............................................................................................................... 12 5.3 Household Income.......................................................................................................... 12 5.4 Special Needs Housing................................................................................................... 14 5.5 5.5.1 Elderly Residents .................................................................................................... 14 5.5.2 Handicapped Residents ........................................................................................... 15 Poverty (Extremely Low Income) Residents ................................................................. 15 5.6 Summary, Household Characteristics ............................................................................ 15 5.7 6. Housing Characteristics ........................................................................................................ 16 Housing Age ................................................................................................................... 16 6.1 Housing Type ................................................................................................................. 16 6.2 Housing Value ................................................................................................................ 21 6.3 Housing Vacancy ........................................................................................................... 22 6.4 Summary, Housing Characteristics ................................................................................ 23 6.5 7. Housing Density, Land Use and Zoning ............................................................................... 23 Housing Density ............................................................................................................. 23 7.1 Land Use and Housing Type .......................................................................................... 27 7.2 Summary, Housing Density ........................................................................................... 27 7.3 8. Buildable Residential Lands ................................................................................................. 27 Summary, Buildable Residential Lands ......................................................................... 29 8.1 9. Housing Affordability ........................................................................................................... 29 Renter Households ......................................................................................................... 29 9.1 Owner Households ......................................................................................................... 30 9.2 Summary, Affordability ................................................................................................. 31 9.3 8.A.b Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 3 | 37 10. Future Housing Demand and Residential Land Need ........................................................ 31 Future Housing Tenure ............................................................................................... 34 10.1 Future Housing Types ................................................................................................ 34 10.2 11. Housing Goals and Policies ............................................................................................... 34 8.A.b Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 4 | 37 1. Summary Over the next twenty-years (2019-39) the City of Central Point’s population is projected to add an additional 7,216 people, the equivalent of 2,887 new households. Most of the households will be the result of in-migration as the region continues to grow. The physical and demographic characteristics of these new households are not expected to significantly change. Single-family detached owner-occupied housing will continue to be the preferred housing type, followed by multiple-family rental housing. The most significant housing challenge will be affordability. Regardless of housing type the cost of housing is taking a larger percentage of household income. Residential Land Need 1.1 To accommodate the housing demand the City will need an estimated 410 gross acres of residential land (Table 1). The City’s current inventory of Buildable Residential Land totals 105 gross acres, requiring 305 gross acres of additional Buildable Residential Land. Aside from the Great Recession of 2008 (“Great Recession”), which had a significant negative impact on jobs and housing, the most significant influence on the City’s housing program was the adoption of a development standard requiring a minimum average density of 6.9 dwelling Table 1 Projected Residential Buildable Land Need 2019 to 2039 2018 Pop.1 19,101 2032 Forecast2 23,662 2039 Forecast3 26,317 Population Increase 7,216 Persons/HH4 2.50 Household Increase 2,887 Average Gross Density5 7.04 Needed Gross Residential Acres 410 Total Buildable Residential Acres6 105 Additional Needed Gross Residential Acres 305 1 Portland State University Population Research Center, Preliminary Estimate, 2018 2 Portland State University Population Research Center, Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2018-2068 3 Based on PSU Interprolation Worksheet 4 City of Central Point Population Element, 2017 - 2037 5 City of Central Point Regional Plan Element, 2015 - 2035 6 City of Central Point Buildable Lands Report, 2019 - 2039, Table 5. Infill Availability Adjusted Buildable Vacant Land by Comprehensive Plan 8.A.b Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 5 | 37 units per gross acre1 for new residential construction. The relevance of this new density standard becomes evident when compared to the City’s current average (1889 through 2018) gross density of 4.41 dwelling units (Table 2). For purposes of comparison Table 2 also shows the City’s 1980 maximum allowable density. Unlike the new density standards, which are measured in terms of required minimums, the 1980 densities were stated in terms of maximum allowed densities. The use of minimum average densities does not preclude higher density development. As an example, during the latter two time periods (2006 through 2018 and 2010 through 2018) the higher average densities in Table 3 exceed the average 6.9 minimum density standard. It should be noted that these periods of higher average density were primarily due to the concentration of Developable Residential acres in the higher density districts (MRes and HRes), and the 1 City of Central Point Regional Plan Table 2 City of Central Point Land Use Classification 1980 Maximum Allowed Gross Density1 Historic Average Gross Densities 2019-2039 Minimum Required Gross Density VLRes 1.00 1.31 1.00 LRes 6.00 3.85 4.00 MRes 12.00 6.02 7.00 HRes 25.00 7.11 20.00 Average Gross Density 10.95 4.41 7.04 Source: City of Central Point Residential BLI, 2019 1 Based on build-out of residentially designated lands 1980, Actual, and 2019-2039 Gross Density Comparision Table 3 City of Central Point Gross Density Comparision Historic, 1980-2018, 2006-2018, and 2010-2018 Land Use Classification Historic Average Gross Densities Actual Developed Gross Density, 1980 - 2018 Actual Developed Gross Density, 2006 - 2018 Actual Developed Gross Density, 2010 - 2018 VLRes 1.31 1.51 1.65 - LRes 3.85 4.14 5.22 5.06 MRes 6.02 7.85 9.71 9.21 HRes 7.11 9.56 19.97 22.04 Average Gross Density 4.41 5.42 8.42 7.99 Source: City of Central Point Residential BLI, 2019 8.A.b Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 6 | 37 subsequent development of higher density housing. These higher densities do not represent the City’s long-term housing goal of 6.9 dwelling units per gross acre, but instead illustrates the City’s need to re-stock the low density (LRes) Buildable Residential acres and rebalance the total Buildable Residential lands inventory to meet the minimum density objective. To achieve the minimum density standard it will be necessary to modify the acreage distribution within the City’s residential land use classifications (Table 4). The redistribution is most significant in the low density (LRes) classification where there was a 10% reduction from the LRes historic participation. To offset this reduction the medium density (MRes) was increased 9% and a 1% increase in the high density (HRes) land use classifications. As previously noted (Table 1) the City will need an estimated 410 acres of gross residential land. After taking into consideration the City’s current inventory of residential land (105 gross acres), there is a need for an additional 305 gross acres of residential land distributed as shown in Table 5. Housing Affordability 1.2 Housing affordability will continue to be a challenge for many households, improving and declining as a function of the national economy. The City is very aware of the challenges in addressing housing affordability. The Housing Element includes policies requiring the development of a Housing Implementation Plan (the “HIP”). The specific purpose of the HIP will be to monitor housing needs and affordability in the context of regional efforts by local governments and the private sector, and to put into action those strategies that have a positive mitigating impact on addressing housing need and affordability in the City of Central Point. Table 4. City of Central Point Comparison Historic Developed Residential Acreage (Gross) Distribution vs. 2006-2018, 2010-2018 and Proposed New 2019-2039 Residential Acreage (Gross) Distribution Land Use Classification Historic Percentage Developed Residential Acres, pre-2018 New Percentage Buildable Residential Acreage Distribution, 2019-2039 VLRes 4%4% LRes 70%60% MRes 11%20% HRes 15%16% Totals 100%100% Source: City of Central Point Residential BLI, 2019 8.A.b Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 7 | 37 The City does have control over a very critical resource in the affordability equation – the availability of vacant land necessary to meet market demand for housing. Therefore, the primary objective of this Housing Element is the continued assurance that sufficient land is available for housing and that zoning standards are flexible and take in to account all housing types and needs. There are other tools available such as urban renewal and system development charge credits (SDCs), but consideration of these and other options requires additional analysis beyond what this Housing Element offers, analysis more appropriate for the HIP and regional strategies. Housing Types 1.3 Historically the preferred housing type has been single-family detached (SFD) housing. As a result of changing demographics and affordability the SFD unit has been taking less market share, and is expected to continue that trend until the issue of affordability is resolved. In 1980 the SFD unit accounted for 80% of the City’s total housing stock. For the period 1980 through 2018 SFD representation dropped to 70% of all housing units built during that period. The difference was made up in the single-family attached and manufactured homes. Going forward it is expected that the SFD unit will continue to be the preferred housing type, but with a declining market share. This is reflected in the Developable Residential Land distribution shown in Table 4 and Table 5. 2. Introduction The City’s Housing Element was last updated in 2017 and was based on the 2015 population forecast prepared by Portland State University’s Population Research Center (PSU). The most recent PSU forecast (2018) for the City increases the City’s population by 7,216 vs. the 4,420 in the 2015 PSU forecast. The magnitude of the 2018 increase is sufficient to warrant a re- Table 5 City of Central Point Required Buildable Residential Lands 2019-2039 Land Use Classification Percentage Distribution of Needed Developable Residential Acres, 2019- 2039 Needed Developable Residential Acres, 2019- 2039 2018 Existing Buildable Residential Acres Surplus or (Shortage) VLRes 4%16 3 (13) LRes 60%246 35 (211) MRes 20%82 46 (36) HRes 16%66 21 (45) Totals 100%410 105 (305) Source: City of Central Point Residential BLI, 2019 8.A.b Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 8 | 37 evaluation and 2019 update of the Housing Element, particularly as it applies to the need for Buildable Residential Lands. Prior to the 2017 Housing Element there was the 1983 Housing Element. Ironically, the 1983 Housing Element was completed just after the 1980’s Real Estate Crash. Its purpose statement reflects local government’s frustration in its inability to offer timely, meaningful and sustainable solutions to needed housing as “. . . usually ineffective.” This reaction is understandable given the circumstances in 1983. At the housing peak in 1978 over 4 million homes across the U.S. were sold. Then, over the course of the next four years housing sales dropped over 50%. With interest rates in excess of 15% housing affordability was a major issue. It wasn’t until 1996, almost two decades later, that the national housing market recovered to its 1978 level. Since the Recession we once again confront the issue of housing need and affordability. Housing demand and supply, as with most commodities, varies with changing demographics and economic cycles. Demographic changes can affect the long-term (generational) demand for housing and is predictable and easily factored into the supply side of the housing equation. Economic cycles, unlike demographic changes, are more whimsical, less predictable, and can be very disruptive to the shorter-term demand and supply for housing. The Great Recession had, and still poses, a significant impact on housing, both on the demand and the supply side of the equation. Prior to the Great Recession demand for housing was high and with sub-prime lending practices housing was affordable. By the end of 2007 the housing bubble had burst – the Great Recession had arrived. Unemployment skyrocketed (16%), mortgage foreclosures reached historic levels, and housing prices tumbled. Overnight housing production of all types virtually ceased. Without jobs homeownership was out of reach for many households. The Great Recession did not reduce the real demand for housing; people still needed a place to live. Consequently, the demand for rental units increased, but due to the failure of the financial system, real estate lending for all housing types dried up, the short-term housing supply plateaued. With the increase in the demand for rental housing rents began to escalate. Today, unemployment and interest rates are near all-time lows, wages are increasing (although slowly), and lending practices are easing, all of which are improving the supply and affordability of housing, but affordability still remains a challenge. As the economy continues to improve the question remains – will housing affordability continue to improve, or will additional measures be needed before sustainable solutions to the affordability issue are realized? 3. Oregon’s Statewide Planning Goal 10, Housing The need for housing/shelter is one of man’s basic survival needs. Oregon’s Statewide Planning Goals, Goal 10, Housing, recognizes this need and offers a venue to address not only housing needs in general, but also the broader spectrum of housing – its affordability. The stated purpose of Goal 10 is to “. . . encourage adequate numbers of needed housing at price ranges and rent levels commensurate with the financial capabilities of the City’s households”. The City of Central Point’s Housing Element addresses the objectives set forth in the State’s Goal 10, Housing. The Housing Element will not only encourage adequate numbers of needed housing, but the continuous monitoring of housing activity as it relates to both need and affordability, and the development of strategies and actions addressing housing affordability. It is 8.A.b Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 9 | 37 for this reason that the Housing Element introduces the creation of a Housing Implementation Plan, a dynamic working document that monitors housing activity within the City and coordinates with other communities in the development and implementation of affordable housing at both the local and regional level. 4. Purpose Over the course of the next 20-year planning period (2019-39) the City’s population is projected to increase by 7,216 residents2. With an average household size of 2.5 persons3 there will be a need for 2,887 dwelling units. The types, density, and land required to meet the projected housing demand will be addressed in this Housing Element. On the demand side the Housing Element will monitor the demand for housing and make necessary adjustments in the land supply, while on the supply side the Housing Element will encourage and support the development of a wide array of housing types. The purpose of the Housing Element is: To assure that the City’s land use policies, support a variety of housing types at densities and locations that provide and encourage opportunities for the provision of adequate numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levels commensurate with the financial capabilities of the City’s households. It is also the purpose of this element to open and maintain communication between private industry and local public officials in seeking an improved housing environment within the Greater Bear Creek Valley Region. There are six basic indicators of housing need that serve as the basis for this Housing Element: 1. Household Characteristics; 2. Housing Characteristics; 3. Housing Density, Land Use and Zoning; 4. Buildable Residential Lands; 5. Housing Affordability; and 6. Future Housing Demand and Residential Land Needs The conclusions, goals and policies of this Housing Element are derived from the current status of each indicator. As part of the Housing Implementation Plan it is expected that each indicator will be monitored and tracked periodically for changes that affect the City’s housing needs. 5. Household Characteristics One of the factors in determining housing demand is an understanding of the characteristics of our households. As defined by the U.S. Census a household includes all the people who occupy a housing unit (such as a house or apartment) as their usual place of residence. There are two 2 PSU 3 City of Central Point Population & Demographics Element 8.A.b Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 10 | 37 major categories of households, "family" and "nonfamily." For purposes of this Housing Element the term “household” includes both “family” and “non-family” households. The following describes those household characteristics pertinent to understanding the City’s housing needs. Household Tenure 5.1 By definition tenure refers to the distinction between owner-occupied and renter- occupied housing units. For the City of Central Point owner occupied housing has been historically the dominant, but declining, form of tenure. In 2017 owner occupied housing represented 61% of all households (Figure 1), down slightly from 2015. Renter occupied units have typically been less than half (Figure 2) of owner occupied units (39%). As a result of the Great Recession, and its impact on jobs and income, the owner occupied percentages have been declining as foreclosures forced many to abandon their homes and seek rental housing. Since the Great Recession, as jobs and wages gradually improved, there should have been some movement back to ownership as the preferred tenure. At the county and state level, although slightly lower, there have been some gains in ownership, but at the City level ownership continued to decline. The reason for the decline may be as simple as the increase in construction of rental units since 2015, which may now have reached market capacity, or the result of the growing disparity between increasing housing costs and lagging household income. Source: U.S. Census American FactFinder, Selected Housing Characteristics 8.A.b Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 11 | 37 Age of Householder 5.2 A householder is a person, or one of the people, in whose name the home is owned or rented. If there is no such person present, then any household member 15 years old and over can serve as the householder4. As illustrated in Figure 3 the dominant householder age has been within the 35 to 64 category. As a result of the Great Recession, and the subsequent loss in jobs and income, householders in this age category experienced a reduction, 49% in 2010. Since the Great Recession, as job conditions improved this age category as returned to its pre-recession level. 4 U.S. Census Glossary Source: U.S. Census American FactFinder, Selected Housing Characteristics Source: U.S. Census American FactFinder, Occupancy Characteristics 8.A.b Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 12 | 37 The age category 65 plus was not affected by the Great Recession. Householders in this category are typically retired, and therefor insulated against the income induced impacts (jobs) of a recession. The increase of householders in this age category is the product of the aging Baby Boomer generation. Unlike the other two age categories the 15 to 34 category experienced an increase as a result of the Great Recession. Since the recovery the housing participation of this category has dropped below 20%, possibly as a result of relocation for employment purposes. Household Size 5.3 The average household size is computed based on occupied housing and total population. Until the Recession the average City household size had been continually declining and projected to level-out at 2.5 persons per household. Since the Recession the average household size has actually increased. The increase in household size also occurred at the state and county. The primary cause for the increase in average household size is again due to the Recession as many younger adults moved in with their parents or cohabitated for affordability reasons. It is anticipated that as the economy improves and ages that the average household size will continue its downward trend. Figure 4 identifies changes in the average household size since 1990. The City’s Population Element identified an average household size of 2.5 for planning purposes over the next twenty years. Household Income 5.4 Between 2000 and 2010 the median household income has steadily increased, peaking in 2010 at $50,631 for the City. Since the Great Recession household incomes have declined. As of 2017 the median household income for the City was $48,409 (Figure 5), Source: U.S. Census American FactFinder, Selected Housing Characteristics 8.A.b Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 13 | 37 down slightly from 2015. At the county and state level median incomes have increased. As with household ownership this decline may be a function of rental housing construction since 2015. Pending continued improvement in the economy the median household income should improve, which in turn should improve housing affordability. During the Great Recession the most financially impacted household income group was the $35,000 to $49,999 category. This group has almost recovered to pre-Recession levels (Figure 6). The $50,000 to $74,999 income group is the largest group representing approximately 25% of all households. Source: U.S. Census American FactFinder, Selected Economic Characteristics 8.A.b Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 14 | 37 Special Needs Housing 5.5 Certain minority groups within the general population have unique challenges and needs that deserve consideration as part of this Housing Element. Often these groups are ignored because they represent a small portion of the total population. However, it is the responsibility of local government to ensure that all citizens have an opportunity for safe and decent housing. The City’s most significant contribution to addressing special housing is assurances that the City’s zoning and building regulations are not impediments and that the City works collaboratively with other organizations to assure that special needs housing is not left behind. 5.5.1 Elderly Residents The Baby Boom Generation is the fastest growing segment of the population at both the national, state, and local level. By 2040 it is projected that nationally one in eight persons will be at least 75. In 2014 that figure was one in sixteen5. Among individuals aged 80 and over more than 75% live in their own homes, making “aging in place” the preference of most of the elderly population. However, as this older demographic continues to grow, they will find themselves in housing that is not suited or “. . . prepared to meet their increasing need for affordability, accessibility, social connectivity, and well-being.” As people age, their physical needs change. Climbing stairs and turning doorknobs can become more difficult impacting the ability to “age in place” becomes more difficult. The majority of elderly residents are retired and living on pensions or other forms of fixed income. As the costs of maintaining a household increase over time the 5 The State of the Nation’s Housing; Joint Studies for Housing Studies of Harvard University, 2017 8.A.b Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 15 | 37 elderly are typically spending an increasing percentage of their income on housing. As people age, they need housing that is structurally and mechanically safe and that is designed to accommodate people with disabilities. Given the widely varying circumstances of older adults, meeting their housing and housing- related needs requires a range of responses. 5.5.2 Handicapped Residents Residents who are physically handicapped suffer many of the same problems as the elderly, such as fixed incomes and difficulty in maintaining property. Strategies for elderly housing are applicable to handicapped households. Poverty (Extremely Low Income) Residents 5.6 The federal government defines the 2017 poverty level between $12,600 and $41,320 depending on the household size6. In 2017 approximately 10% of all families within the City were classified at or below the poverty level, up from 2015. At the County and State level there was a decline in the percentage of families at or below the poverty level. The increase in poverty level households correlates with the decline in median household income. The construction of more single-family detached owner occupied homes will change this trend. Summary, Household Characteristics 5.7 Since 2015 the City’s percentage of owner occupied units has dropped below the county and state level. The median household income in 2017 is lower than the county and the state. Although the average household size increased this is expected to be a reaction to the Recession, and will return to lower levels in the future as housing affordability 6 HUD User, FY 2015 Income Limits Documentation System Source: U.S. Census American FactFinder, Selected Economic Characteristics 8.A.b Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 16 | 37 improves. As noted earlier the reduction in ownership and income may be a short-term event resulting from rental housing construction since 2015. 6. Housing Characteristics The City’s housing stock is approaching 7,000 dwelling units of various type, ages, and value. In 1980 the City’s housing inventory totaled 2,2917 dwelling units. By the end of 2018 the housing unit inventory within the City was 6,864 dwelling units. The following describes the characteristics of the City’s housing stock by age, type, tenure, and value. Housing Age 6.1 Based on the age of the City’s housing stock Central Point is considered a young community. Most of the housing was constructed after 1980 (71%). The older housing stock (pre-1949) is concentrated in the original central area of the City. Because of its age most of the City’s housing stock is in very good physical condition. Housing Type 6.2 The City’s housing stock is comprised of seven (7) housing types as follows: 1. Single-Family Detached; a dwelling on a legally defined property designed to be occupied by only one family. 2. Single-Family Attached; a dwelling on a legally defined property designed to be occupied by only one family, but has a common wall with other single-family attached dwelling(s); 7 City of Central Point Housing Element Source: City of Central Point, 2019 Residential BLI 8.A.b Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 17 | 37 3. Duplex/Triplex/Apartments; a group of dwellings on a legally defined property having 2, 3, and 4 or more dwelling units with separate entrances. This includes two-story houses having a complete apartment on each floor and also side-by-side apartments on a single legally described lot that shares a common wall. Apartments that have accessory services such as food service, dining rooms, and housekeeping are included within this definition; 4. Manufactured Homes; a dwelling on a legally defined property that is constructed for movement on the public highways that has sleeping, cooking and plumbing facilities intended for residential purposes and that is constructed on a foundation in accordance with local laws and federal manufactured construction and safety standards and regulations. 5. Manufactured Homes in Mobile Home Parks; a group of dwellings located on a legally defined property (Mobile Home Park) that are constructed for movement on the public highways that has sleeping, cooking and plumbing facilities intended for residential purposes and that is constructed on a foundation in accordance with local laws and federal manufactured construction and safety standards and regulations and 6. Government Assisted, housing that provides the occupants with government sponsored economic assistance to alleviate housing costs and expenses for needy people with low to moderate income households. Forms of government assisted housing include direct housing subsidies, non-profit housing, public housing, rent supplements and some forms of co-operative and private sector housing. The City’s housing policies and zoning regulations allow for all of the above housing types. Historically (1889-1979), the City’s housing preference has been for single-family detached housing supplemented by apartments (Table 6). SFR attached units account for less than .5% of the total housing inventory, but this is expected to change as attached housing becomes more acceptable and is an affordable housing option. Between 1980 and 2018 the distribution of housing type by land use category is illustrated in Table 7. At 70% of the total housing stock the single-family detached home was still the preferred housing type, followed by apartments (11%) and Duplex/Triplex (5%). As a housing type Assisted Living housing accounts for approximately 1% of the total housing inventory. Table 8 measures residential construction between 2006 through 2018 illustrating the shifting of preferences in new residential construction. As a percentage of new construction single-family detached, at 56%, was down from historical highs. Single- family attached increased significantly (12%) from its historic level. For the duplex housing types it was 5%, and for apartments it was at 25%. The purpose in comparing various construction periods is to illustrate that during any given time span the housing inventory will respond with variations in the housing type mix depending on economic circumstances. 8.A.b Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 18 | 37 The decline in single-family detached dwelling types was the due to the loss of jobs and the subsequent reduction in income occurring as a result of the Recession. When measured between 2010 (post-recession) to 2018 (Table 9) the preference for single- family detached homes improved, whether or not it will continue improving to its post- Recession levels remains to be seen. The point is that during any given time span the housing inventory will respond with variations in the housing type mix. It is worth noting (Table 6) that a significant number of single-family detached units are located within the higher density land use classifications (24%). The reason for this is primarily historic and regulatory. Many of the older single-family detached neighborhoods have been designated as medium density (MRes) to encourage infill development. On the regulatory side prior to 2006 new single-family detached dwelling units were permitted in the HRes classifications as an acceptable housing type. This practice was suspended in 2006 with amendments to the zoning code requiring minimum densities in all residential zones, and the exclusion of single-family detached dwellings in the high density residential districts. 8.A.b Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 19 | 37 Table 6.City of Central PointHousing Inventory by Type and Land Use Classification, 1889 through 1979 Land Use ClassificationSFR DetachedSFR AttachedDuplexTriplexApartment Mobile Home Mobile Home ParkMixed Use ResidentialAssisted LivingTotal Developed UnitsGross DensityVLRes45 - - - - - - - - 45 1.20 LRes1,256 1 6 3 4 4 - - - 1,274 3.32 MRes215 8 18 15 39 1 - - - 296 4.29 HRes167 - 20 15 232 5 53 1 - 493 7.12 Total Units1,683 9 44 33 275 10 53 1 - 2,108 3.77 Percentage of Total80%0%2%2%13%0%3%0%0%100%Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLINumber and Type of Dwelling UnitsTable 7.City of Central PointHousing Inventory by Type and Land Use Classification, 1980 through 2018 Land Use ClassificationSFR DetachedSFR AttachedDuplexTriplexApartment Mobile Home Mobile Home ParkMixed Use ResidentialAssisted LivingTotal Developed UnitsGross DensityVLRes30 - - - - - - - - 30 1.51 LRes2,573 49 8 - - 5 76 - - 2,711 4.14 MRes603 27 70 - 130 - - - 15 845 7.85 HRes358 53 171 12 439 114 287 11 60 1,505 9.56 Total Units3,564 129 249 12 569 119 363 11 75 5,091 5.42 Percentage of Total70%3%5%0%11%2%7%0%1%100%Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLINumber and Type of Dwelling Units8.A.b Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 20 | 37 Table 9.City of Central PointHousing Inventory by Type and Land Use Classification, 2010 through 2018 Land Use ClassificationSFR DetachedSFR AttachedDuplexTriplexApartment Mobile Home Mobile Home ParkMixed Use ResidentialAssisted LivingTotal Developed UnitsNet DensityGross DensityVLRes- - - - - - - - - - - - LRes144 21 4 - - - - - - 169 6.32 5.06 MRes94 17 12 - 71 - - - 15 209 11.51 9.21 HRes- 28 - - 82 - - - - 110 27.55 22.04 Total Units238 66 16 - 153 - - - 15 488 9.98 7.99 Percentage of Total49%14%3%0%31%0%0%0%3%100%Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLINumber and Type of Dwelling Units8.A.b Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 21 | 37 Housing Value 6.3 Prior to the Great Recession the median owner occupied housing value increased substantially reaching a peak value of $233,000 (Figure 9). These early value increases were indicative of the demand and affordability of housing. Jobs were plentiful and easy financing was accessible. With the on-set of the Great Recession the real estate bubble burst causing a 22% reduction ($181,200) in the 2010 median house value. Since 2010 owner occupied housing values have been increasing, but not to pre-Recession levels. By 2017 the median housing value, at $203,500, had not reached its 2010 peak. Source: U.S. Census American FactFinder, Selected Housing Characteristics 8.A.b Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 22 | 37 In 2017 the housing value distribution (Figure 10) places 48% of the City’s owner occupied inventory in the $199,999 or less category, down from 55% in the 2017 Housing Element. Housing Vacancy 6.4 Another characteristic of the housing supply is the vacancy rate. Vacancy rate is the percentage of housing units (rental and ownership) are unoccupied or are available for rent at any given time. The vacancy rate also serves as a measure of housing demand vs. supply. A vacancy rate less than 5% is equivalent to market equilibrium supply equals demand. As illustrated in Figures 11 and 12 the vacancy rates for owner and renter housing have been increasing in both the City, while for the county and the state the 8.A.b Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 23 | 37 vacancy rate has been declining. Summary, Housing Characteristics 6.5 The City’s housing inventory is typical of the region reflecting the western region’s preference for single-family detached housing. The housing stock is young and heavily concentrated in the single-family detached category. The cost of housing is slightly on the high side for the region, but typical for the state. The demand for housing, measured by the vacancy rate in 2017, is strong. 7. Housing Density, Land Use and Zoning In 2012 the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan was approved by Jackson County. Shortly thereafter the City of Central Point adopted its component of the Regional Plan as an element to the City’s Comprehensive Plan. In the City’s Regional Plan Element it was agreed that all new residential development within the UGB would be constructed at an average minimum density of 6.9 dwelling units per gross acre, and after 2036 the minimum density would increase to 7.9 dwelling units per gross acre. The targeted density for this Housing Element is 7.04 dwelling units per gross acre. Housing Density 7.1 Measured in 10-year increments beginning in 1980 the City’s average gross residential density has been steadily increasing (Table 10). The causes and rates of increase have not been specifically studied, but in general can be attributed to a variety of factors from changes in the economy to improving efficiencies in housing development practices. In 2006 the City amended its zoning ordinance setting mandatory minimum density standards for all residential zoning districts. Until then the higher density zoning districts were allowed to build at much lower single-family detached densities. Tables 11 through 14 identify the residential development activity between 1980 through 2018 Table 10. City of Central Point Cummulative Average Gross Density by Land Use Classification 1980 through 2018 Land Use Classification Gross Density, 1980 Gross Density, 1990 Gross Density, 2000 Gross Density, 2010 Gross Density, 2018 VLRes 1.20 1.25 1.30 1.31 1.31 LRes 3.32 3.33 3.56 3.80 3.83 MRes 4.28 4.33 4.67 6.05 6.33 HRes 7.12 7.07 7.40 8.52 8.58 Average Gross Density 3.77 3.80 4.19 4.67 4.73 * Based on build-out Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLI 8.A.b Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 24 | 37 and 2006 through 2018 by land use designation and zoning. The information in Tables 11 through 14, by removing pre-1980 development, provides a different perspective from the density information in Table 10. The most significant difference is in the dramatic density increase post-2006. This increase is attributed to the 2006 codified minimum density requirement and the declining inventory of low density (LRes) designated lands. 8.A.b Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 25 | 37 Table 11.City of Central PointHousing Inventory by Type and Land Use Classification, 1980 through 2018 Land Use ClassificationSFR DetachedSFR AttachedDuplexTriplexApartment Mobile Home Mobile Home ParkMixed Use ResidentialAssisted LivingTotal Developed UnitsGross DensityVLRes30 - - - - - - - - 30 1.51 LRes2,573 49 8 - - 5 76 - - 2,711 4.14 MRes603 27 70 - 130 - - - 15 845 7.85 HRes358 53 171 12 439 114 287 11 60 1,505 9.56 Total Units3,564 129 249 12 569 119 363 11 75 5,091 5.42 Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLINumber and Type of Dwelling UnitsTable 12.City of Central PointHousing Inventory by Type and Land Use Classification, 2006 through 2018 Land Use ClassificationSFR DetachedSFR AttachedDuplexTriplexApartment Mobile Home Mobile Home ParkMixed Use ResidentialAssisted LivingTotal Developed UnitsGross DensityVLRes1 - - - - - - - - 1 1.65 LRes298 49 8 - - - - - - 355 5.22 MRes139 17 12 - 83 - - - 15 266 9.71 HRes17 28 18 - 258 - 1 - - 322 19.97 Total Units455 94 38 - 341 - 1 - 15 944 8.42 Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLINumber and Type of Dwelling Units8.A.b Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 26 | 37 Table 13City of Central Point ZoningSFR DetachedSFR AttachedDuplexTriplexApartment Mobile Home Mobile Home ParkMixed Use ResidentialAssisted LivingTotal Gross Acres DevelopedR-L1.51 - - - - - - - - 1.51 R-1-64.13 - - - - 1.77 4.68 - - 10.58 R-1-83.70 - - - - 2.78 - - - 6.48 R-1-103.27 - - - - - - - - 3.27 LMR5.28 11.02 8.39 - - - - - - 24.68 R-26.11 16.19 8.84 - - - - - - 31.13 R-37.81 22.34 10.75 13.41 15.18 6.54 5.66 - 97.69 179.38 MMR9.83 8.35 25.77 - 14.42 - - - 12.84 71.20 HMR19.67 17.31 - - 23.15 - - 17.04 - 77.16 Average Gross Density4.55 14.02 10.17 13.41 17.17 6.00 5.42 17.04 42.08 5.42 Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLIDeveloped Gross Acres1980 through 2018 Gross Density by Zoning DistrictTable 14City of Central Point ZoningSFR DetachedSFR AttachedDuplexTriplexApartment Mobile Home Mobile Home ParkMixed Use ResidentialAssisted LivingTotal Gross Acres DevelopedR-L1.65 - - - - - - - - 1.65 R-1-64.77 - - - - - - - - 4.77 R-1-84.16 - - - - - - - - 4.16 R-1-103.62 - - - - - - - - 3.62 LMR5.43 11.02 8.39 - - - - - - 24.83 R-27.23 15.78 8.63 - - - - - - 31.64 R-38.40 16.09 14.26 - 18.00 - 6.18 - - 62.93 MMR8.84 8.35 - - 12.63 - - - 12.84 42.66 HMR17.99 17.31 - - 23.46 - - - - 58.76 Average Gross Density5.60 11.96 11.26 - 18.64 - 6.18 - 12.84 8.42 Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLI2006 through 2018 Gross Density by Zoning DistrictDeveloped Gross Acres8.A.b Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 27 | 37 Land Use and Housing Type 7.2 The City has four (4) residential land use classifications and seven residential zoning districts. These classifications accommodate differing densities and housing types. Each land use classification has assigned zoning districts. Within each residential land use classification/zoning district the following housing types are allowed: Table 15. Housing Type by Land Use Classification Land Use Class SFR Detached SFR Attached Duplex Triplex Apt Manuf. Home Mobile Home Park VLRes R-L Yes No No No No Yes No LRes R-1 Yes No No No No Yes No MRes R-2 Yes Yes Yes No No Yes Yes LMR Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes HRes R-3 No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes MMR No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No HMR No Yes Yes Yes Yes No No Summary, Housing Density 7.3 Since 1980 the City’s average gross density has been steadily improving. The ability of the City to achieve a minimum density of 6.9 for the period 2019 through 2039 appears to be very attainable. 8. Buildable Residential Lands The 2019 Residential BLI identified a total residential land inventory within the City’s urban area of approximately 1,488 acres that are zoned and planned for residential use (Table 16). The City’s residential lands are distributed over four residential land use categories and nine zoning districts. The largest of the residential classifications is the LRes (Low Density) at 67% of all residential lands followed by the MRes (Medium Density) at 15%. The four (4) residential land use classifications and their related zoning districts are: 1. Very Low Density Residential (VLRes); a. Very Low 2. Low Density Residential (LRes); a. R-1-6 b. R-1-8 c. R-1-10 3. Medium Density Residential (MRes); a. LMR b. R-2; and 4. High Density Residential (HRes). a. R-3 8.A.b Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 28 | 37 b. MMR; and c. HMR Table 16 identifies the City’s residential land allocations by land use classification. Table 17 provides the same information by zoning district. As of the end of 2018 there were approximately 105 acres of Buildable Residential Land8 within the City’s urban area. The vacant acreage in each land use classification is illustrated in Table 18. The vacant acreage available in the single-family VLRes and LRes land use classifications is 3% and 36% respectively of the total vacant land use inventory. The bulk of the City’s net buildable residential acreage is in the MRes (40%) and HRes (21%) classifications, representing over 60% of the City’s buildable vacant residential acres (83 acres). 8 See City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLI for definition. Zoning Total City Acres Total UGB Acres Total Urban Area Acres Percentage of Total R-L 45.87 21.86 67.73 4.6% R-1-6 373.91 5.92 379.83 25.5% R-1-8 392.95 11.25 404.19 27.2% R-1-10 33.66 22.12 55.78 3.7% LMR 110.62 48.49 159.11 10.7% R-2 106.60 - 106.60 7.2% R-3 179.75 - 179.75 12.1% MMR 77.70 22.56 100.26 6.7% HMR 34.77 - 34.77 2.3% TOTAL RESIDENTIAL 1,355.83 132.19 1,488.01 100% Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLI Table 17. City of Central Point Residential Land Inventory by Zoning District Comprehensive Plan Designation Total City Acres Total UGB Acres Total Urban Acres Percentage of Total VLRes 45.87 21.86 67.73 5% LRes 901.86 87.77 989.63 67% MRes 193.58 22.56 216.14 15% Hres 214.51 - 214.51 14% TOTAL RESIDENTIAL 1,355.83 132.19 1,488.01 100% Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLI Table 16. City of Central Point Residential Land Inventory by Comprehensive Plan Designation 8.A.b Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 29 | 37 Summary, Buildable Residential Lands 8.1 The City’s Buildable Residential Land inventory is currently under represented by the LRes classification and over represented in the higher density residential land use classifications (MRes and HRes). 9. Housing Affordability Housing affordability, whether renter or owner occupied, is typically measured as a percentage of household income. A standard benchmark for housing affordability is when housing costs are less than or equal to 30% of total household income. When housing costs exceed 30% of household income affordability becomes an issue. Renter Households 9.1 As illustrated in Figure 13 the Great Recession had a significant impact on rental housing affordability as the percentage of renter households paying more than 30% increased from 37% to 50% by 2010, and by 2017 had continued to rise to 57% of all renter households. At the county and state level the experience was much the same except that in 2015 there was a slight decline, but by 2017 there was a slight increase in the number of renter households paying more than 30%. Table 18.City of Central Point 0.20 Comprehensive Plan Designation Vacant City1 Vacant UGB1 Total Vacant Acres Infill City Infill UGB Redev. City & UGB Total Infill & Redev. Acres Total Gross Vacant Acres (less) Envir. Acres, Vacant Lands (less) Envir. Acres, Infill Lands Total Net Vacant Acres Total Buildable Acres VLRes - - - 2 1 1 4 4 - 1 3 3 LRes 17 7 24 9 10 10 29 53 5 13 35 35 MRes 46 - 46 4 3 1 8 55 6 2 46 46 HRes 12 - 12 10 - 5 14 27 2 4 21 21 Vacant Residential Acres 76 7 83 25 14 17 56 138 13 20 105 105 Percentage of Total Gross Vacant Acres 60%18%10%12%40% Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLI Infill Availability AdjustedBuildable Residental Land Inventory by Comprehensive Plan Designation 8.A.b Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 30 | 37 Owner Households 9.2 To a lesser extent the rate of affordability in owner households followed the same pattern as renter households. By 2017 owner households paying more than 30% of income on housing increased from a pre-Recession 25% to 32% (Figure 14). Since the Great Recession the price of housing has continued to rise, exceeding the increase in wages. As of December 2018, average hourly wages were up 2.9% year-over-year, while the median home value in the U.S. was up 7.7%. It is expected that in 2019 local home values will continue to rise, but at a slower 3.79%9. 9 Zillow, www.zillow.com/central-point-or/home-values Source: U.S. Census American FactFinder, Selected Economic Characteristics Source: U.S. Census American FactFinder, Selected Economic Characteristics 8.A.b Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 31 | 37 Summary, Affordability 9.3 The question of housing affordability, especially since the Recession, is without question an issue that needs addressing and continual monitoring. The basic demand and supply mechanics of housing affordability are easily understandable, but the solutions; either on the demand or supply side, are extremely complex, especially at the local level. During preparation of this Housing Element many housing affordability programs and strategies were reviewed, but without any final determination on a preferred strategy to mitigate the affordability issue. At this time the only solutions that this Housing Element offers regarding affordability are: 1. Provide an inventory of vacant residential lands sufficient to accommodate the need for all housing types. 2. Monitor and manage residential development standards and processes to eliminate unnecessary costs. 3. Prepare and maintain a Housing Implementation Program (HIP) that annually tracks the demand and supply of vacant residential lands and housing construction by type of housing. 4. Collaborate at the regional level in the identification, prioritization, development, and implementation of strategies specifically addressing housing affordability. 10. Future Housing Demand and Residential Land Need Based on the 2018 Population Projections prepared by PSU it is estimated that by 2039 the City’s population will have increased by 7,216 residents. With an average household size of 2.5 persons per household10 an additional 2,887 new dwelling units will be needed to accommodate the projected population growth. At a minimum density of 6.9 dwelling units per gross acre11 the City will need approximately 41012 acres of residentially planned lands to accommodate the 2,887 new dwelling units. Given the existing Buildable Residential Lands (105 acres) the City needs an additional 305 acres of Buildable Residential Land (Table 19). As previously discussed the City has historically and consistently made gains in residential density (Table10). Since 1980, a time period representative of a balanced Buildable Residential Land inventory, the residential density pattern and land use distribution yielded an average gross density of almost 5.42 units per acre (Table 21). If new residential construction follows a similar land use and density pattern the City would not meet its 6.9 minimum density requirement. To achieve the minimum density standard it is necessary to either re-allocate the distribution of housing by land use classification; increase the minimum density requirements for each land use classification; or a combination of both. 10 City of Central Point Population & Demographics Element, 2016-36 11 City of Central Point Regional Plan Element 12 Rounded figure 8.A.b Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 32 | 37 For purposes of meeting the 6.9 density standards the City used an iterative process based on a mix of land use distribution and density. Table 20 shows the preferred distribution of Buildable Residential Lands. To achieve the 6.9 minimum density it was necessary to decrease the LRes and increase the higher density MRes. For comparison purposes the historic distribution is also shown. Table 19 Projected Residential Buildable Land Need 2019 to 2039 2018 Pop.1 19,101 2032 Forecast2 23,662 2039 Forecast3 26,317 Population Increase 7,216 Persons/HH4 2.50 Household Increase 2,887 Average Gross Density5 7.04 Needed Gross Residential Acres 410 Total Buildable Residential Acres6 105 Additional Needed Gross Residential Acres 305 1 Portland State University Population Research Center, Preliminary Estimate, 2018 2 Portland State University Population Research Center, Coordinated Population Forecast for Jackson County, its Urban Growth Boundaries (UGB), and Area Outside UGBs 2018-2068 3 Based on PSU Interprolation Worksheet 4 City of Central Point Population Element, 2017 - 2037 5 City of Central Point Regional Plan Element, 2015 - 2035 6 City of Central Point Buildable Lands Report, 2019 - 2039, Table 5. Infill Availability Adjusted Buildable Vacant Land by Comprehensive Plan Table 20. City of Central Point Comparison Historic Developed Residential Acreage (Gross) Distribution vs. 2006-2018, 2010-2018 and Proposed New 2019-2039 Residential Acreage (Gross) Distribution Land Use Classification Historic Percentage Developed Residential Acres, pre-2018 New Percentage Buildable Residential Acreage Distribution, 2019-2039 VLRes 4%4% LRes 70%60% MRes 11%20% HRes 15%16% Totals 100%100% Source: City of Central Point Residential BLI, 2019 8.A.b Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 33 | 37 By adjusting both the mix and density of the various residential land use classifications the needed 2,887 dwelling units can be accommodated on 305 acres yielding an average density of 7.04 dwelling units per gross acre (Table 22). The proposed densities and land use allocations are explained as follows:  VLRes – The VLRes classification supports the R-L (Rural) Low Density) zoning district. The allocation of very low density lands has remained constant at 4%. The allocation retention was based on the finding that as the City expands into the UGB/URA there will be environmental and agricultural conflicts which may necessitate larger lots as a buffering mitigation strategy.  LRes – The LRes classification represents the R-1-6, R-1-8, and R-1-10 zoning districts. Table 22 City of Central Point Required Buildable Residential Lands 2019-2039 Land Use Classification Percentage Distribution of Needed Developable Residential Acres, 2019- 2039 Needed Developable Residential Acres, 2019- 2039 Minimum Gross Density Requirements New Dwelling Units, 2019- 2039 2018 Existing Buildable Residential Acres Surplus or (Shortage) VLRes 4%16 1.00 16 3 (13) LRes 60%246 4.00 984 35 (211) MRes 20%82 7.00 574 46 (36) HRes 16%66 20.00 1,312 21 (45) Totals 100%410 7.04 2,887 105 (305) Source: City of Central Point Residential BLI, 2019 Table 21. City of Central Point Cummulative Average Gross Density by Land Use Classification 1980 through 2039 Land Use Classification 1983 Maximum Allowable Gross Density* Actual Gross Density, 1980- 2018 Minimum Required Gross Density, 2019-2039 VLRes 1.00 1.51 1.00 LRes 6.00 4.14 4.00 MRes 12.00 7.85 7.00 HRes 25.00 9.56 20.00 Average Gross Density 10.79 5.42 7.04 * Based on build-out Source: City of Central Point 2019 Residential BLI 8.A.b Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 34 | 37 The allocation of low density residential lands has been reduced from a previous 70% to 60%. Historically the LRes has been the preferred land use category, with an emphasis on single-family detached housing. The single-family detached preference is likely to continue into the future. The LRes classification experienced the most quantitative changes in both density and land use allocation.  MRes – The MRes classification represents the LMR and R-2 zoning districts. The allocation of medium density residential lands increased from 11% to 20%.  HRes – The HRes classification represents the MMR, HMR, and R-3 zoning districts. The allocation of the high density residential lands was increased from 15% to 16%. The minimum density increased slightly with the conversion from net density to gross density. The City currently has an inventory of 105 buildable acres of residential land (Section 8, Buildable Residential Lands). Table 23 identifies the current vacant acreage need, and where there is a shortage, the additional needed acreage by land use classification. Of the 410 acres needed to satisfy the future demand a total of 305 new gross acres are needed to supplement the existing inventory. Future Housing Tenure 10.1 It is expected that the long-term mix of owner (70%) and renter (30%) occupied housing will be the preferred tenure mix in the long run. If the future tenure mix does not trend toward the 70/30 mix then issues in affordability should be evaluated and appropriate measures in housing type and affordability addressed. Future Housing Types 10.2 For the foreseeable future the preferred housing type will be the single-family detached dwelling. The only impediment to this choice will be affordability, which will rise and fall with changes in the economy. It is expected that attached single-family will continue to improve as a housing choice. The City’s current land use regulations provide for a wide variety of housing types, and should continue to do so throughout the planning period. Over the course of time the City needs to monitor, through its HIP, any changes in housing type demand against deficiencies in land supply, and where appropriate make adjustments. In addition to availability of housing type the City needs to take into account the health aspects afforded well planned neighborhoods. The land use planning of new neighborhoods and the revitalization of existing neighborhoods needs to acknowledge the health, both social and physical, benefits to the City’s residents in living in well planned neighborhoods. 11. Housing Goals and Policies Goal 1. To provide an adequate supply of housing to meet the diverse needs of the City’s current and projected households. 8.A.b Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 35 | 37 Policy 1.1. Continue to support new residential development at the new minimum residential densities. Policy 1.2. Develop a Housing Implementation Plan that is regularly updated based current market conditions . Policy 1.3. Provide an efficient and consistent development review process. Policy 1.4. Work with regional partners to develop and implement measures that reduce upfront housing development costs. Policy 1.5. Support UGB expansions and annexations that can be efficiently provided with urban services and that will in a timely manner meet the City’s housing needs. Policy 1.6. When properly mitigated to preserve the integrity of existing neighborhoods support higher density residential development within the Downtown and older surrounding residential areas, capitalizing on availability of existing infrastructure and supporting revitalization efforts. Goal 2. To encourage the development and preservation of fair and affordable housing. Policy 2.1. Through a Housing Implementation Plan explore and promote federal, state, and regional programs and incentives that support new affordable housing. Policy 2.2. Support and participate in the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan’s program addressing regional housing strategies, particularly as they apply to affordable housing. Policy 2.3. Support regional efforts addressing homelessness, medical and social services for special need households. Goal 3. To maintain a timely supply of vacant residential acres sufficient to accommodate development of new housing to serve the City’s projected population. Policy 3.1. Provide a sufficient inventory of residential planned and zoned vacant land to meet projected demand in terms of density, tenure, unit size, accessibility, and cost. Policy 3.2. Throughout the 2019-2039 planning period the City’s new vacant residential land use mix shall support an average density of not less than 6.9 dwelling units per gross. Policy 3.3. Update the Housing Element’s vacant acreage needs every four-years consistent with the PSU Population Research Centers update of population. Policy 3.4. To avoid speculation the City shall, when expanding the UGB establish procedures that give priority to lands that will be developed in a timely manner and with 8.A.b Packet Pg. 64 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 36 | 37 a residential mix and density consistent with the Housing Element. Policy 3.5. Monitor residential in-fill development activity and develop and enact programs that encourage the expanded use of in-fill as a component to the City’s residential land use inventory. Goal 4. To ensure that a variety of housing will be provided in the City in terms of location, type, price and tenure, according to the projected needs of the population. Policy 4.1. Residential land use designations on the General Land Use Plan and the Zoning Map shall be compliant with the residential land use needs and housing types identified in the Housing Element. Policy 4.2. Based on the findings of the Housing Implementation Plan incentivize housing types that are needed but not being provided in adequate numbers by the private sector market forces. Policy 4.3. In larger residential developments (in excess of 5 acres) encourage a mix of densities and housing types to accommodate a variety of households based on age and income levels. Policy 4.4. Support programs that encourage the ability of older residents to age in place by making existing housing more age friendly and accessible. Goal 5. To ensure that municipal development procedures and standards are not unreasonable impediments to the provision of affordable housing. Policy 5.1. As part of a Housing Implementation Plan periodically evaluate development procedures and standards for compliance with the goals of this Housing Element and modify as appropriate. Goal 6. To develop and maintain a Housing Implementation Plan that includes programs that monitor and address the housing affordability needs of the City’s low- and moderate- income households. Policy 6.1. Support collaborative partnerships with non-profit organizations, affordable housing builders, and for-profit developers to gain greater access to various sources of affordable housing funds. Policy 6.2. Support and participate in the Greater Bear Creek Valley Regional Plan’s program addressing regional housing strategies. Policy 6.3. Address the special housing needs of seniors through the provision of affordable housing and housing related services. Goal 7. To assure that residential development standards encourage and support attractive 8.A.b Packet Pg. 65 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) F i n a l D r a f t 1 -30-2 0 1 9 P a g e 37 | 37 and healthy neighborhoods. Policy 7.1. Encourage quality design throughout the City that acknowledges neighborhood character, provides balanced connectivity (multi-modal), and integrates recreational and open space opportunities. Policy 7.2. Provide flexible development standards for projects that exceed minimum standards for natural resource protection, open space, public gathering places, and energy efficiency. Policy 7.3. Where appropriate encourage mixed uses at the neighborhood level that enhance the character and function of the neighborhood and reduce impacts on the City’s transportation system. Policy 7.4. Support minimum parking standards for multiple family development served by public transit. Policy 7.5. Maintain and enforce Chapter 17.71 Agricultural Mitigation ensuring that all new residential development along the periphery of the Urban Growth Boundary includes an adequate buffer between the urban uses and abutting agricultural uses on lands zoned Exclusive Farm Use (EFU). 8.A.b Packet Pg. 66 Attachment: Housing Element (PC Recommended) [Revision 1] (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) 8.A.c Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: PC Resolution No 866 (2019-34 : Housing Element (2019-2039)) City of Central Point Staff Report to Council ISSUE SUMMARY TO: City Council DEPARTMENT: City Attorney FROM: Sydnee Dreyer, City Attorney MEETING DATE: April 25, 2019 SUBJECT: Resolution Approving Formation of a County Law Enforcement Service District ACTION REQUIRED: Motion Resolution RECOMMENDATION: None Forwarded BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Jackson County has proposed formation of a county service district to construct, operate and maintain a new local correctional facility in Jackson County per ORS 451.010. The County desires to include all county territory within the boundaries of the proposed district, including the City of Central Point. Before the County can consider an order on formation of the district, the city (and all other cities proposed to be included) must approve the creation of the district and consent to inclusion in the boundaries of the district by resolution. All cities must vote on whether to be included by May 17, 2019. The County Board of Commissioner’s is scheduled to consider the order initiating the formation of the Law Enforcement Service District (the “District”) at its May 22, 2019 meeting. If the order is approved by the Board, the matter would then be set for public hearing on June 26, 2019 before the Board. The purpose of the hearing is to take testimony and receive written comment on the proposed formation of the District, the economic feasibility of the District and the permanent tax rate limit, which is currently proposed as $.8353 per $1,000 of assessed value. This means for a residence valued at $200,000, the tax would be approximately $167/year. At the conclusion of the hearing the Board will vote on whether the County will benefit from the creation of the District, and per the procedures specified in ORS 198.805, would refer the matter to the voters. In the event the City approves the resolution for inclusion in the District, the City will be proposed for inclusion. The subject resolution does not create the District, nor ensure that a District will be created in the future. The resolution only provides the County authority to include the City in the District if it is ultimately formed. Per the County, if any one city does not consent to inclusion, the County would likely have to come up with a new plan, as the current service district proposal, with less than the entire County, wouldn’t be viable. In the event the cities consent, and the County approves the order, the County shall be required to hold an election on the question of forming the district. The election would be held in November 2019. Authorization of the District requires approval by a majority of the votes cast in 8.B Packet Pg. 68 the proposed District. The election results are determined by the votes cast of the proposed district as a whole, not on a city-by-city basis. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS: No direct financial impact to City. LEGAL ANALYSIS: ORS Ch 451 allows for the establishment of a county service district for law enforcement services, including construction, maintenance and operation of a local correctional facility. District boundaries are established at its inception and the city must consent to be included in the boundaries. COUNCIL GOALS/STRATEGIC PLAN ANALYSIS: STAFF RECOMMENDATION: None. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Make a motion to approve or not approve Resolution No. ______ approving a Jackson County Order to initiate formation of a Jackson County Law Enforcement Service District and consenting to the inclusion of city territory within the boundaries of the District ATTACHMENTS: 1. RESO County Law Enforcement Service District 2. OrderToInitiateFormation.LawEnforcementSD.Proposed.4.5.2019 8.B Packet Pg. 69 Res. No.___________; April 25, 2019 Page 1 RESOLUTION NO. ______________ RESOLUTION APPROVING A JACKSON COUNTY ORDER TO INITIATE FORMATION OF A JACKSON COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICE DISTRICT AND CONSENTING TO THE INCLUSION OF CITY TERRITORY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT Recitals: The City Council of the City of Central Point, Oregon (City), finds: A. The Jackson County, Oregon, Board of Commissioners intends to form a county service district for law enforcement services under the authority of Oregon Revised Statute (ORS) 451.010(1)(n). The name of the proposed district is the Jackson County Local Correctional Facility Service District (hereinafter “District”). The proposed District would have authority to construct, operate, and maintain a local correctional facility in Jackson County. B. The Jackson County Board of Commissioners may initiate the formation of the District by adopting an order under authority of ORS 198.835. The Board proposes to include all county territory within the boundaries of the proposed District. C. Jackson County voters will be asked to establish a permanent property tax rate limit of $.835 per $1,000 of assessed value for the District as authorized by ORS 451.547. D. The territory of the City may only be included within the boundaries of the District if the City Council adopts a resolution approving the proposed Jackson County Order Initiating Formation of a Jackson County Law Enforcement Service District. The proposed order is attached hereto. E. The City Council believes that a law enforcement service district for the construction, operation, and maintenance of a local correctional facility in Jackson County is in the best interests of the citizens of the City. The City of Central Point resolves as follows: Section 1. The City of Central Point hereby consents to the inclusion of all the territory of the City within the boundaries of the proposed Jackson County Local Correctional Facility Service District, and approves the Jackson County Board of Commissioners’ proposed Order Initiating Formation of a Jackson County Law Enforcement Service District in substantially the form attached hereto. 8.B.a Packet Pg. 70 Attachment: RESO County Law Enforcement Service District (1133 : Resolution Approving Formation of a County Law Enforcement Service Res. No.___________; April 25, 2019 Page 2 Passed by the Council and signed by me in authentication of its passage this _____ day of April, 2019. _______________________________ Mayor Hank Williams ATTEST: ______________________________ City Recorder STATE OF OREGON ) ) ss County of Jackson ) I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the original resolution on file in the office of the City Recorder. _____________________________ City Recorder 8.B.a Packet Pg. 71 Attachment: RESO County Law Enforcement Service District (1133 : Resolution Approving Formation of a County Law Enforcement Service ORDER INITIATING THE FORMATION OF A JACKSON COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICE DISTRICT - Page 1 of 3 BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS STATE OF OREGON, COUNTY OF JACKSON IN THE MATTER OF INITIATING THE FORMATION OF A JACKSON COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICE DISTRICT ) ) ) ORDER NO. _________________ WHEREAS, when the current Jackson County jail opened in 1981, the population of Jackson County was approximately 134,500 residents; and WHEREAS, due to the increase in the population of Jackson County since the opening of the current Jackson County Jail and other factors, the current Jackson County Jail is insufficient for the needs of the County; and WHEREAS, in 2017, the Jackson County Jail was required to release approximately 7,000 inmates prior to their first court appearance solely due to a lack of capacity; and WHEREAS, forced releases of inmates due to lack of capacity in the Jackson County Jail have impacted the entire criminal justice system in Jackson County including, in 2017 alone, over 10,000 warrants being issued for criminal defendants failing to appear for required court appearances and over 7,000 lodgings into the jail for repeat offenders; and WHEREAS, the current Jackson County jail, due to its design and limited capacity, is not conducive to providing comprehensive services to inmates suffering from mental health issues or addiction; and WHEREAS, Chapter 451 of the Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) provides for the establishment of a county service district for law enforcement services which includes authority for the construction, maintenance, and operation of installations, works, or services provided for the purpose of law enforcement services; and WHEREAS, the construction, maintenance, and operation of a local correctional facility is a law enforcement service purpose; and WHEREAS, without the establishment of a county service district for law enforcement services, Jackson County will not be able to construct, operate, and maintain a new local correctional facility which adequately meets the needs of the County; and WHEREAS, ORS 451.435 provides that all county service districts shall be initiated, conducted, and completed as provided by ORS 198.705 to 198.955; and 8.B.b Packet Pg. 72 Attachment: OrderToInitiateFormation.LawEnforcementSD.Proposed.4.5.2019 (1133 : Resolution Approving Formation of a County Law ORDER INITIATING THE FORMATION OF A JACKSON COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICE DISTRICT - Page 2 of 3 WHEREAS, ORS 198.835 authorizes of the county board of commissioners to initiate the formation of a district by an order and sets forth the requirements of that order including setting the date, time, and place of a public hearing on the proposal to form the district; and WHEREAS, ORS 198.840 requires that notice of the public hearing on the proposal be given in the manner set forth in ORS 198.800, except that the notice shall state that the county board has entered an order declaring its intention to initiate the formation of the county service district. Now, therefore, The Board of County Commissioners of Jackson County ORDERS: 1. The Board intends to initiate formation of a county service district for law enforcement services in Jackson County as authorized pursuant to ORS 451.010(1)(n) and ORS Chapter 541, which is the principal act governing the formation of such a district, for the purpose of constructing, operating, and maintaining a local correctional facility in Jackson County. 2. The name of the proposed district is the Jackson County Local Correctional Facility Service District (District). 3. The boundaries of the District shall include all territory within Jackson County, less the territory within any incorporated city that chooses not to be part of the District; [If any city opts out, the following language would be inserted into the final order – “The city or cities choosing not to be included within District territory are: list.]. 4. As required by ORS 198.835(3), certified copies of City Council Resolutions of each city approving this Initiation Order and formation of the District are attached. 5. The Jackson County Board of Commissioners will serve as the governing body of the District as required pursuant to ORS 451.485; and 6. The District will have all of the general powers granted by ORS Chapter 451 (the Principal Act) necessary and convenient for providing law enforcement services as permitted by ORS 451.010(1)(n). 7. The District will be authorized to construct, maintain, and operate a law enforcement service facility, specifically a local correctional facility, pursuant to ORS 541.420. 8. Jackson County voters will be asked to establish a permanent property tax rate limit of $.8353 per $1,000 of assessed value for the District as authorized by ORS 451.547. The District will have authority to levy and collect general property taxes up to the approved rate limit. 9. Pursuant to ORS 198.800 and 198.835, a public hearing on the formation of the Jackson County Local Correctional Facility Service District shall be held at the Board’s regular meeting on June 26, 2019, beginning at 9:30 a.m., in the Auditorium of the Jackson County Courthouse, 10 South Oakdale, Medford, Oregon 97501. All interested persons may appear and be heard. At this hearing, the Board will hear testimony and receive written comment on the proposed formation of this District, including information about the services to be provided by the District, the economic feasibility of the District, and the permanent tax rate limit. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Board shall determine, in accordance with criteria described in ORS 198.805, whether Jackson County could be benefited by the formation of the service district and whether the County should continue with the formation process. 8.B.b Packet Pg. 73 Attachment: OrderToInitiateFormation.LawEnforcementSD.Proposed.4.5.2019 (1133 : Resolution Approving Formation of a County Law ORDER INITIATING THE FORMATION OF A JACKSON COUNTY LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICE DISTRICT - Page 3 of 3 10. Notice of the hearing shall be provided to interested persons in accordance with ORS 198.800. // DATED this 22nd day of May, 2019, at Medford, Oregon. JACKSON COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS _____________________________________________ Bob Strosser, Chair _____________________________________________ Colleen Roberts, Commissioner _____________________________________________ Rick Dyer, Commissioner I:\Admin\BoC\z_LocalCorrectionalFacilitySvcDist\Drafts\OrderToInitiateFormation_FrmCounsel_DRAFT_rev.docx 8.B.b Packet Pg. 74 Attachment: OrderToInitiateFormation.LawEnforcementSD.Proposed.4.5.2019 (1133 : Resolution Approving Formation of a County Law