09-26-16 Work Session - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

C“” SWS OMMENTS REGARDING NEXT STEPFOR PLANNING IN THE AREA OF OUTH ILLAMETTE TREET Paul Conte Submitted September 20, 2016 By the numbers An overwhelming proportion of community members support a refinement plan process, with the initial step being led by a Planning Team comprised of members of the affected area, following direction by City Council to produce a draft proposal for a new refinement plan. At the September 19, 2016 public forum there were 39 individuals who presented oral testimony. Twenty-five individuals explicitly stated support for a refinement plan (or have stated their support in the past, e.g., Christine Sundt). Only five individuals spoke in support of an alternative, city-wide committee as the next step. (See below) More compelling is the petition in support of a refinement plan signed by 600 individuals. In addition, the board of all four of the affected neighborhood organizations voted to support the letter from the Council of South Eugene Neighborhoods, which supported a refinement plan. There is simply no justification for acting as if this is a “split” community. There is a miniscule group of individuals, most who don’t live in the area, that are trying to block a community-driven first step at a refinement plan. Refinement plan facts – the accurate ones For as long as Donald Trump has been claiming that Barack Obama wasn’t born in the United States, City Planning Division staff have been presenting the City Council and public with similarly untrue claims about refinement plans. Recently, Terri Harding finally agreed that the following are the true facts about the type of refinement plan that would be adopted for the South Willamette Street area: 1.Regarding ORS 197.200. A “refinement plan” under ORS 197.200 is a particular form of “refinementplan,” and the Metro Plan establishes a different form of refinement plan, which does not need to meet the requirements of ORS 197.200 and does not establish mandatory “expedited land division” processes. From a practical standpoint, ORS 197.200 isn’t particularly relevant to the current discussion. 2.Requirements for land use code implementing a refinement plan. There is no requirement that a Metro Plan refinement plan include land use code to implement plan policies. However, ORS requires that a comprehensive plan policy must be incorporated into land use code to be used as an approval criteria. This is mere “housekeeping” that can be satisfied with simple “copy-and- paste” into Chapter 9 Land Use Code as part of the ordinance adopting a refinement plan. Therefore, this ORS requirement isn’t a burden or hurdle for adopting prescriptive refinement plan policies. It’s notclear whether the current land use code’s numerous instances of “inclusion by reference” to plan policies is adequate. However, since it’s no problem going forward to – a) write (some) refinement plan policies as prescriptive and (in in the case of housing-related policies) in clear- and-objective terms; and b) copy-and-paste into Chapter 9 – this aspect also isn’t an issue or hurdle for adopting new refinement plan policies.