Ordinance No. 20201 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

character is existing high quality wetlands, on which small areas may need restoration or enhancement. The non-wetland areas within the southeast field have hydric soils and are only marginally non-wetland, which makes these areas suitable for restoration as well. These characteristics make the southeast field more appropriate for the Restoration designation than the Protection designation. Therefore, the Restoration designation for the southeast field area is consistent with the adopted wetland designation criteria. IV. Analysis of Wetland Designations for the Hyundai Site Against Approval Criteria for Refinement Plan Amendments Section 9.145(2) of the Eugene Code gives the criteria used to determine whether a proposed plan amendment should be approved or not. The proposed amendments must be consistent with the criteria in section 9.145(2) to be approved. The analysis below addresses the following wetland designations: (1) Development designation within the "north area" as shown on Map 1, (2) Protection Designation within the "southwest field" as shown on Map 1 and (3) Restoration designation within the "southeast field" as shown on Map 1. It is important to recognize that when considering one specific site, meeting each Metro Plan policy fully on that site may be impossible. For instance, if policies call for both protection of wetlands and preservation of potential expansion areas for existing industry, doing both completely on that one site may be impossible, if the only area for expansion is also a wetland. In such cases, it is necessary to evaluate the proposal on how it meets the body of policy as a whole, rather than base the decision on one or two particular policies. The Eugene Code sections which include the approval criteria for refinement plan amendments are shown in bold, italicized text, followed by applicable findings. Section 9.145 (2) "The planning commission shall review the proposed amendment and receive evidence, and decide whether the proposed change is consistent with the following approval criteria: (a) The plan amendment is consistent with the Metropolitan Area General Plan "; A. Metro Plan Policies This section analyzes the site against applicable goals and policies of the Metropolitan Area General Plan. Listed below are Metro Plan policies used in the analysis of the amendments in the March 19, 1996 staff report to the planning commissions. These are all of the Metro Plan policies we conclude apply to this refinement plan amendment proceeding. Not all these policies apply to site designations, as is stated where appropriate below. Policy 1, page III-B-4: "Demonstrate a positive interest in existing and new industries, especially those providing above average wage and salary levels, an increased variety of job opportunities, a rise in the standard of living, and utilization of our existing comparative advantage in the level of education and skill of the resident labor force." Hyundai Site Ordinance, Exhibit C (Refinement Plan Amendment Findings) Page 17