Item 1: Ordinance on Oregon West Management

Home Browse Search

9.7415(5). On September 28,2007, notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was published in the Register-Guard, in accordance with the Eugene Code. The Plmming Commission public hearing was held on October 18, 2007, with deliberations held on November 5 and 19, 2007 and action take on November 19,2007. An additional public hearing before the Eugene City Council is scheduled for February 19,2007. Notice to interested and affected parties will also be provided for that hearing. In response to the Planning Commission public hearing notice, aside from phone calls, two letters of 'written testimony were received. One letter is regarding concerns for increased traffic and does not support the proposed zone changes. Traffic, regarding compliance with the Transportation Planning Rule, is discussed below under Goal 12. The other letter is from the SCCO. The letter states that: "the applicant's willingness to apprise the SCCO if its intentions and gather feedback has been greatly appreciated. Although we agree in concept with the idea of a mixed-use development, we differ with the applicant in the implementation of that idea." They state that there is an imbalance with too much commercial proposed, there is a lack of a truly public gathering space and adequate amounts of pervious surface, and a lack of transition bet\veen the proposed C-2 and the existing R-1 to the east. The SCCO letter includes comments regarding several adopted plan policies which are addressed under the applicable criteria below. The SCCO letter also includes several suggestions to meet the needs of the Santa Clara community. As noted in the SCCO letter, the applicant met with the neighborhood group early in the application process. At the Planning Commission public hearing, aside from the applicant's paliy there were nine people that spoke in favor of the proposal, and six people that spoke against it. The process for adopting these amendment,> complies with Statewide Planning Goal 1 since it complies with the requirements of the State's citizen involvement provisions. Goal 2 - land Use Planning: To establish a land use planning process and policyframework as a basis for all decisions and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual basefor such decisions and actions. The Eugene~Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) is the policy tool that provides a basis for decision-making in this area. The Metro Plan was acknowledged by the State in 1982 to be in compliance \-vith statewide planning goals. These findings and record show that there is an adequate factual base for decisions to be made concerning the proposed amendments. Goal 2 requires that plans be coordinated with the plans of affected governmental units and that opportunities be provided for review and comment by affected govemmentaltmits. To comply with the Goal 2 coordination requirement, the City coordinated the review of these amendments \vith all affected governmental units. Specifically, notice was mailed to the State Department of land Conservation and Development, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), lane County, and the City of Springfield. There are no Goal 2 exceptions required for these amendments. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2. Goal 3 - Agricultural Land: To preserve and maintain agricultural/ands. Goal 3 is not applicable to these amendments as the subject property and actions do not affect any agricultural plan designation or use. Goal 3 excludes lands inside an acknowledged urban grov.rtb Findings- November 19,2007 Page 2