Item A: River Road/Santa Clara Transition Project

Home Browse Search

development processes will be limited to single lot or small tract projects (or through City/County special assessment processes). Santa Clara The pattern of local streets in Santa Clara is generally more uniform than with River Road. As a general characterization, local streets in the more southerly parts of Santa Clara look much like local streets between Howard and Beltline. Streets gradually become more curvilinear and “contemporary” (e.g.: more cul-de-sacs and grid-like with fewer perfectly rectangular, 2:1 ratio lots) the further north one goes in Santa Clara. There is also a high coincidence between these more contemporary subdivisions and incorporation into the City. While there appear to be more undeveloped tracts than in River Road, the neighborhood is still relatively close to build-out, at least based on the parameter of platted lots. Generally, the contrasting pattern of development between the two neighborhoods may have the practical implication of making preservation of local streetscapes more of an issue in River Road than in Santa Clara, in the sense that there appears to be a greater number of “rural” street sections left in River Road . Transition and Heritage Options Transition Options Other than continuing to sustain the current cooperative efforts between the City and Lane County with respect to road jurisdiction, maintenance, and improvements, there are no “transition” options in Santa Clara and River Road as such. Potential standards and programs below all address heritage options (e.g.: those that will help to sustain aspects of the neighborhood’s historic rural character). Heritage Options ? Option No. 1: Street Tree Preservation - When existing rural streets are upgraded, the City could develop a suite of options that help to preserve street trees and vistas. These options can apply to arterials and collectors as well as local streets. Such accommodations could include offsetting street sections within the right-of-way, reducing lane width, eliminating or reducing sidewalks on one or both sides, or building the street section closer than normally permitted to existing developments if the expected life span of the trees is greater than that of the existing development (e.g.: when the older structures are replaced, preferred setbacks can be re- established but the longer-lived trees will still be there). Advantages: Preserves a very significant streetscape element; addresses a specific and significant issue of concern for many neighborhood residents; the City Code already includes provisions for designating and preserving “heritage” trees Challenges: Available right-of-way and age and/or location of abutting development may make such accommodations difficult; could involve significant variance from City standards; probably needs to be implemented as a City-wide option ? Option No2: Leave Local Streets “As-is” - . If residents on local (and perhaps minor collector) streets express a clear preference for open ditch drainage, no sidewalks, narrower sections and/or other “historic” characteristics of the street, the City could let matters remain as-is. This could be relatively straightforward action where lots abutting a residential street are essentially built-out. In such cases, the City would simply be continuing the status quo. In other cases, where continued infill or redevelopment increases densities, surface water flows, or traffic levels, conventional upgrades standards (and connectivity requirements) could be triggered when pre- determined thresholds are reached. Presently, the City of Eugene’s backlog with respect to paving unimproved streets and replacing worn infrastructure on other local streets is so great that “as-is” is in effect the City operational policy. Local streets are typically only upgraded in response to resident demand. 36 River Road/Santa Clara Transition/Heritage White Paper DRAFT 11-24-05 Service provider Review