Ordinance No. 19833 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Based on the information avai 1 ab1 a and the criteria contained i n Section 9. fi18~2~ of the Eugene Code, the co~ni ssi on makes the following evaluation: Section 9.618 2 a : The uses and density that wi 11 be allowed i n the 1 ocat on of the proposed change I } can be served through the orderly and efficient extens i an of key urban faci 1 i ti es and services prescribed i n the Metropolitan Area General P1 an, and ~~ are consistent with the pri n- ci pl es of compact and sequential growth, A full range of public faci 1 i t i es and services i s currently avai 1 abl a to serve the area. A change i n Toning from I -2 to MU should not affect the avai l abi 1 i - ty or capacity of key urban faci 1 i ti es and services to serve the subject sites. The proposed MU district wi 11 permit some commercial uses, though not to the extent allowed under the C-2 or C-3 district. Existing or past uses i n the area already represents of mix of uses. The property is located near the geographic center of the city. Encouragement of new development or redevelopment within the city's core i s consistent with the pri nci p1 es of compact growth and sequential development, part i cul arl y given the fact that many of the existing structures are vacant or under-uti - 1 i zed . Section 9.. fi18~2~ ~b~ : The proposed change i s consistent with the Metro- pol itan Area General P1 an I ~ applicable text, 2~ specific elements rel at- ed to the uses 1 i sted i n the proposed zoning districts, and 3} appl i cabl e land use designations . The written text of the plan takes precedence over the plan diagram where apparent conflicts or inconsistencies exist. Previous findings under the refinement plan amendment criteria Sect i on 9.145a} are applicable and are incorporated herein. The applicant's statement supplements those findings and i s referenced here as well . Section 9.618~2~ ~c~ : The proposed change i s consistent with appl i cabl e adopted neighborhood refinement plans, special area studies, and func- ti oval plans. In the event of inconsistencies between these plans or studies and the Metropolitan Area General Plan, the latter is the pre- vai 1 i ng document. This zone change request is being considered concurrently with an amendment to the applicable refinement plan, the Whiteaker Refinement P1 an. Approval of that amendment will allow implementation of this tone change to a mixed-use zoning designation. Summary and Conclusions Based on information provided prior to the public hearing and staff comments and pubi 1 c testimony presented at the public hearing, the Planning Cori ssi on finds that the proposed p1 an amendment meets al 1 of the criteria for approval . The Planning Commission recommends approval of the proposed amendment submit- ted by Jenova. P1 an Amendment Implementation Findings and Conclusions -~ S Exhibit B