A dispute regarding whether Eugene’s urban growth boundary should include additional land for housing is coming to the state land use board.

The Home Builders Association of Lane County has challenged Eugene’s newly adopted urban growth boundary after the City Council opted not to include additional land for housing.

The Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals will hear oral arguments in the case on Tuesday.

Prompted by years of resistance to expansion of Eugene’s urban growth boundary, the Legislature in 2007 approved a bill backed by the Home Builders Association ordering Eugene and neighboring Springfield to devise separate urban growth boundaries. Eugene and Springfield had shared an urban growth boundary since 1982.

Eugene’s new boundary includes 969 additional acres to accommodate 3,000 new jobs in the Bethel area, two parks and a school, but no more land for housing.

“Here we are 10 years later and still no expansion for single-family (homes),” said Ed McMahon, executive vice president of the Home Builders Association. “I believe that part of it is political. The political majority would prefer to see no expansion for single-family (homes) at all.”

Oregon’s urban growth boundary system is both credited with stemming sprawl and blamed for imposing artificial limits on housing and population growth.

Eugene officials forecast the city will gain 33,778 residents and need 15,105 new dwelling units by 2032. According to the city, housing growth will be 55 percent single-family and 45 percent multifamily – a slight increase in multifamily compared to the current mix.

That growth can be accommodated within Eugene’s existing growth boundary, said Terri Harding, principal planner for the city.

“Our studies show there wasn’t a need or a justification to add housing,” she said.

A committee called the Technical Resource Group that included the Home Builders Association, 1,000 Friends of Oregon and other community representatives began evaluating the growth boundary in 2012.

“Our community has invested a lot of time and volunteer hours in the analysis, and we’re pretty confident it will stand,” Harding said.

Eugene’s analysis found a deficit of 1,000 high-density homes – apartments and condominiums – and 600 medium-density homes in the city. At the City Council’s direction, the adopted UGB calls for accommodating those additional homes within the growth boundary. High-density homes would be encouraged downtown with various incentives.

Eugene’s land-use options are limited to the west by wetlands and the airport, and to the east by Springfield. The UGB needs to bring in a mix of farmland to the north and hillier areas to the south, McMahon said.

“I believe we need a combination of both to create the homes we need for the population we believe we’ll be housing, because we don’t have the inventory,” McMahon said.

Much like Portland, Eugene’s housing inventory has dipped to unusually low levels. Eugene had two months of housing inventory in October, according to RMLS, a real-estate listing service. Six months inventory is considered a balanced market.

Home prices have risen, too. The median sales price for a Eugene home in October was $265,000, up 6.4 percent from a year earlier.

“Demand is extremely high, supply is very low,” McMahon said. “They’re selling as soon as they’re finished, and prices are skyrocketing.”

LUBA is expected to issue a ruling in the UGB case in January. Either side may appeal the board’s ruling to the Oregon Court of Appeals.

The post Homebuilders challenge Eugene’s growth boundary appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.