June 16, 2017 <br />Page 12 <br />markets, day care centers, doctor's offices, etc., located in residential areas. I do not know <br />what assumptions the City used to make this determination. 10 From my observations, <br />construction of these types of facilities are not common these days, and most of those being <br />built are on developed land which does not use up vacant or partially vacant MDR or HDR <br />land supply. <br />Again, the City should not deduct from the vacant or partially vacant land supply need for <br />land which will not use up such supply. If half of these land needs came from redevelopment <br />as opposed to using the vacant or partially vacant land supply, 242 units capacity, or 15% of <br />the perceived deficit, should be deducted from that deficit." <br />VI. Failure to Consider Development Since 7/1/12 or 8/1/12 <br />The City insists that the four and 1/2 years of actual and planned development since 8/1/12, <br />the date of the BLI upon which the City presumably relies, should not be considered in its <br />planning analysis for the 2012-2032 planning period. The statutes and rules contemplate <br />future planning prior to the start of the planning period, when there is no knowledge of actual <br />development within the planning period. All of the development within the planning period <br />must be based upon assumptions if the planning occurs prior to the start of the planning <br />period. <br />However, there is no logical reason why actual development since 7/1/12 or 8/1/12 should not <br />be considered, over four and 1/2 years into the planning period. Information as to actual <br />development is much better information than assumptions as to future development. The <br />City states that if those 4.5 years of development are considered, then the City must consider <br />a new population forecast. However, actual development is known information completely <br />within the current planning period. A new population forecast is only an assumption for a <br />different planning period, such as 2015-2035. <br />Oregon statutes and rules contemplate planning in advance of the planning period, but do not <br />appear to preclude use of actual development information within the planning period if the <br />planning occurs within that period. ORS 197.296( 2) provides that "a local government shall <br />demonstrate that its comprehensive plan or regional framework plan provides sufficient <br />buildable lands within the urban growth boundary established pursuant to statewide planning <br />goals to accommodate estimated housing needs for 20 years." If the City has actual <br />development information within the 20 year planning period due to delays in the planning <br />process, it should use that information, which is the "best available information" required by <br />LCDC rules. OAR 660-024-0040(1). <br />10 The City indicated that employment on residential land assumptions are based on analysis of <br />employment located in residential plan designations using Quarterly Census of Employment and <br />Wages data from the Oregon Employment Department. It is unclear how this data was translated into <br />the assumptions. <br />11 17 acres MDR/2 = 8.5 acres X 10.7 du/acre = 91 unit capacity; 14 acres HDR/2 = 7 acres X 21.5 <br />du/acre = 151 unit capacity; 91 units + 151 units = 242 unit capacity <br />