New Search
I assignment of error." Home Builders Association of Lane County v. City of Springfield, LUBA <br />2 Nos. 2004 -118, 2004 -122, 2004 -126, 2004 -127 and 2004 -142, September 2, 2005. Petitioners <br />3 appear to provide no more justification for their view in this case. <br />4 Under Petitioners' view, a city with a comprehensive plan period that will expire in two <br />5 years could not plan beyond those two years. The prohibition that Petitioners suggest would <br />6 stifle planning across the state and is not what the Court of Appeals was suggesting in Dundee, <br />7 as discussed below. <br />8 b. The PROS Population Projection. <br />9 With respect to population projections, Petitioners first argue that the City is prohibited <br />10 from conducting any land use planning that is based on a Eugene- specific population projection <br />11 since the Metro Plan population projections are based on the entire Eugene- Springfield Metro <br />12 area. (Pet. Br. 26, lines 12 -18). Petitioners cite only to the Dundee ruling in support of their <br />13 assertion that such a scenario is unlawful. As discussed below, Dundee provides no such <br />14 support. <br />15 LUBA's decision in Home Builders Association of Lane County v. Cit) o "Springfield, <br />16 discussed above, supports the assertion that a city can have plans that consider different planning <br />17 periods for different planning considerations. Plans having different planning horizons will <br />18 inherently have different population projections. Similarly, there is no question that a city may <br />19 take part in both regional planning as well as planning for its own jurisdiction. A multi - <br />20 jurisdictional plan will address the needs of the population for the region included in the plan. <br />21 A plan that addresses only the land within the city's limits will consider the needs of the city's <br />22 portion of that population. There is no question that such plans must be consistent. Petitioners <br />23 have provided no evidence that the population projections in the PROS Plan - pertaining to only <br />24 the City of Eugene — actually conflict with those in the Metro Plan which project the population <br />25 for the entire region. <br />26 /// <br />Page Ic -BRIEF OF RESPONDENT <br />