State sends back Lafayette UGB plan for unusual reason
A small Willamette Valley city will be going back to the drawing board in 2016 to decide how to revise its land use plan and provide the land for housing the state says it needs for 20 years of expected growth.
The Lafayette City Council approved an expansion of its urban growth boundary, or UGB, to include about 50 acres of land for new residences. The city submitted the decision to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development for review and approval, as required by state law.
The department said Wednesday it has reviewed the city’s decision and has sent the plan back to Lafayette for changes.
The “remand” of the plan, as it is called, is based on insufficient land for future housing needs. The city found that it will need land for 307 new residences by the year 2033, but only added enough to provide for 214 units. The remand requires the city to account for the difference.
Lafayette, a Yamhill County community founded in 1846 and incorporated in 1878, has 3,745 residents on its 576 acres, located along the Yamhill River and Oregon Hwy. 99W.
“This is an unusual case,” said DLCD Director Jim Rue. “Typically, we find cities seek to add more land than is called for in a forecast, not less.” That type of finding is what led to a return of Bend’s UGB growth plan to the city for a remand process now underway.
State law requires cities to plan for the housing it will need by either adding land to the UGB or increasing the number of units allowed per acre.
“We are not telling the city that it must add more land to the UGB,” Rue said, “but it must plan for its housing needs. Failing to provide for the full need could contribute to an increase in housing prices.”
The city is faced with options, state officials said. It can use the data it offered to support the initial UGB expansion and expand the boundary to include more land, or it can reconsider how many residences it will allow in the existing boundary.
“We understand neither option is easy for the city,” Rue said, “but a city is obligated to provide for its land needs.”
