Jacksonville staff: city lacks buildable land to meet 10-acre employment need

City of Jacksonville staff told a citizen advisory group on Wednesday that the city has "essentially no buildable land" to meet a 2009-identified need for 10 acres of employment land, and asked the group whether to rely on the existing plan or pursue a targeted update to the economic element.

The question matters because the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission's Division 9 requires cities to maintain short- and long-term supplies of employment land; staff explained that "short term" means land ready for construction within one year of a building-permit application. The meeting focused on how to reconcile the 2009 plan with changing employment trends and limited, constrained parcels inside and just outside the urban growth boundary (UGB).

Staff member said the 2009 economic element identified a 10-acre need and that a subsequent analysis increased some scenarios to about 13.4 acres. "The identified need is for 10 acres of employment land," the staff member said, and noted that many vacant or underdeveloped parcels are small, in the historic core, or limited by riparian setbacks and slopes.

Agency official and committee members discussed whether lower population forecasts since 2009 affect employment-land needs; staff replied that employment demand is assessed with different methodologies and relies more on sector and employment trends than on population projections alone. The staff member also told the group that remote work currently accounts for about 15% of the local employment base and could reach roughly 40% by 2028, a trend that may shift demand away from traditional retail toward healthcare and other services suited to an older local population.

Committee members debated Jacksonville's economic vision for the next 20 years — whether to focus on a tourist-oriented economy that attracts nonresident spending or to prioritize businesses serving local residents — and how that vision should shape the kinds of employment sites the city preserves or seeks. One committee member summarized a point of the discussion: "People buy their stuff online," arguing that retail demand has weakened relative to other sectors.

Presenters reviewed a set of underdeveloped parcels carried forward from the 2009 study (off 5th Street and near downtown businesses) and said two of the sites identified by an applicant’s submission (the Freedom application) total about 2.45 acres of potentially redevelopable land. Staff cautioned that many of the candidate parcels are constrained by historic-core zoning, creek riparian setbacks, steep slopes and small parcel size, limiting their usefulness for larger employment uses.

As next steps, staff proposed drafting a final memo that captures the discussion and recommends whether to amend the economic element now or rely on the existing plan while updating select sectors. Staff also explained statutory rules for establishing a preliminary study area (buffers of 0.5 mile to 1 mile depending on population thresholds) and the order of priority for considering lands (reserves, exception lands, marginal lands, then farmland/forest as defined by statute). The group agreed to a "middle approach" — to evaluate sector needs without delaying the UGB process — and asked staff to circulate a memo and maps ahead of the next meeting.

No formal motion or vote was recorded during the meeting; staff said the next meeting will focus on screening the preliminary study area and ruling out impractical parcels before identifying candidate lands for potential UGB inclusion.

The meeting concluded with staff asking participants to send follow-up comments by email; staff will prepare and share the memo that summarizes the group’s recommendations.