Item 3: Ordinance Concerning Jefferson/Far West Plan Amendments

Home Browse Search

Eugene Planning Commission November 27, 2006 Page Two In addition, large numbers of residents of the subject area, other areas of the JWN, and. neighborhoods outside the JWN have stated their support for the proposed amendments and their intent. Over 135 residents of Area 15 signed the attaehed petition requesting City Council amend the Metro Plan, the JeffersonlFar West ReJinement Plan, and th.e Land Use Code to limit Area 15 to low density residential development. Earlier this year, a petition signed b)r 286 Eugen.e residents (also attached) was presented to Council urging Council to take action to prevent up-zoningsuntil standards to protect the neighborhood's character are adopted. (Approximately one-third of the people who signed this petition live in Area 15, approximately one third live in other areas of the JWN, and approximately one third live outside the JWN.) Collectively, these actions show broad support among families '\Tho live in the area and who will be most affected by these amen.drnents. We believe the proposed amendments are consistent \\lith all respective appro'V'al criteria. We note specifically that the Jefferson/Far West Refinement Plall amendments address the.following t\vo items in approval criteria EC 9..8424(2): (c) Ne11J or amended community policies. Council's September 11 motion explicitl)' directs the policy for this area be amen.ded. (e) A change in circurnstances in a Sllbstantial manrler that 11las not anticipated at the tin1e the refinementlJlanwas adopted. The density and scale of developnlent allowed by the R...2 zone has changed substantially since, the plan \\lasadopted in 1983.. Most notabl)r, the average number of dwelling units allowed on pare,eIs in the subject area has approximately tripled since that time. There is no evidence this substantial change 'ivas anticipated at the time the refinenlent plan was adopted. In addition~ the November 15,2006 code interpretation of the Jefferson/Far \\"est R.efinement Plan policy covering the subject area (tIle CI 06-13) h;as voided any limit on density allo\ved by "medium density" (i.e., R-2) standards - a staff action that was neither intended. nor anticipate;dby the policy~s explicit "10\'/- to med.iu.m.-densit)r" designation of the area. Further, this same code interpretation void,ed al1Y application of the policy's requirement for block plans or site re\rie\\lS to assure that up-z()nings and subseqllent de'velopment maintain th.e character of the are,a, as tIle plan clearl)l intends. This staff action \vas like,~vise neither intended nor anticipated by the policy.