HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem B: Jefferson-Westside Options for Immediate Protection
ECC
UGENE ITY OUNCIL
AIS
GENDA TEM UMMARY
Work Session: Jefferson-Westside Options for Immediate Protection
Meeting Date: August 16, 2006 Agenda Item Number: B
Department: Planning and Development Staff Contact: Susan Muir
www.eugene-or.gov Contact Telephone Number: 682-6077
ISSUE STATEMENT
On July 24, 2006, the City Council requested a work session on this date to consider short-term options
to pause/mitigate the negative effect of inappropriate infill in the Jefferson-Westside Neighborhood
(JWN). As part of the preparation for this work session, staff was directed by the council to work with
JWN to consider ways to address the JWN concerns with respect to potential upzonings in that area
from R-1 to R-2.
BACKGROUND
The Jefferson/Far West Refinement Plan (JFW Plan) was adopted in 1983. Excerpts from the JFW Plan
are included as Attachment A. The JFW Plan includes a Land Use Diagram showing the intended land
use pattern for the plan area. The residential land use designations used on the JFW Plan diagram
include Low Density, Low-Medium Density and Medium Density Residential designations. The area of
concern to the Jefferson-Westside Neighborhood Group (“the neighborhood group”) is identified in the
JFW Plan as a portion of “Area 15.” The JFW Plan diagram designates Area 15 as Low-Medium
Density Residential. In addition, the plan text sets out three policies to specifically address development
within Area 15. The first such policy is:
“This area shall be recognized as a low- to medium-density residential area. The City
shall explore methods of encouraging an increase in residential density yet maintaining
the character of the area. Residential densities beyond ten units per acre shall be allowed,
subject to an approved block plan or rezoning to R-2 in conjunction with site review.”
The Metro Plan and neighborhood plan were amended simultaneously in 1983 to enable R-2 zoning,
consistent with the policy above. The attached memorandums dated April 27 and May 24, 2006,
illustrate how the Metro Plan and Refinement Plan fell out of alignment, which necessitated the
housekeeping amendments to the Metro Plan.
The Metro Plan housekeeping amendments prompted concern among some Jefferson Far West citizens
about the negative effects that medium-density infill could have on their neighborhood. Primarily, the
neighborhood group wishes to prohibit “inappropriate infill” or zone changes that would allow more
density under the City’s current infill standards in the area located generally between the County
th
Fairgrounds and Lincoln Street, Amazon Channel and 18 Avenue (see map at Attachment A).
Per the council’s direction, Planning and Development Department staff have met and corresponded
with representative(s) from the neighborhood group to explore options to address the neighborhood
L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060816\S060816B.doc
group’s concerns. Three such meetings have occurred since the July 24, 2006, City Council motion. At
these meetings, the neighborhood group has clarified its concerns and the parties have considered
numerous options and the timeline involved with each option.
The neighborhood group initially proposed, through written petitions and several letters and emails, that
the City adopt some type of moratorium in order to delay the City’s consideration of any proposed zone
changes in the area until a comprehensive set of regulations is adopted to ensure compatibility of new
infill development with the existing neighborhood. In some states, putting a moratorium in place can
happen quickly, with quick results. This is not the case in Oregon. In Oregon, the process for adopting
a moratorium requires at least one public hearing with at least 45-days notice of that hearing. Further,
the City would need to show that the current regulations are inadequate to prevent irrevocable public
harm from development in the area. Particularly due to the time it takes to adopt a moratorium, City
staff and neighborhood group leaders have now agreed that a moratorium would not fully address the
neighborhood group’s concerns. The City Attorneys’ Office has concluded, and the Planning staff
supports this conclusion, that there is no quick way for the City to temporarily prohibit upzonings in the
subject area, as the neighborhood leaders proposed.
At the meetings between City staff and representatives from the neighborhood group, a very wide range
of other options were discussed. Many of these options were unworkable from the perspective of the
neighborhood group, Planning staff and/or the City Attorney. For example, the City Attorney advised
against an option that the City simply refuse to process upzoning applications in the area and accept the
risk of legal challenge.
Some of the options considered by the parties are, in no particular order:
1.The City Council could adopt a moratorium.
2.The Planning Director could issue an official interpretation of the Area 15 policy of the JFW Plan,
which is incorporated into the Land Use Code at EC 9.9580(17).
3.The Planning Director could request that the Planning Commission issue an official interpretation of
the Area 15 policy of the JFW Plan, which is incorporated into the Land Use Code at EC 9.9580(17).
4.The City Council could amend the JFW Plan to define the Low –Medium Density Residential
designation differently than the Area 15 policy implies.
5.The City Council could amend the code to adopt a definition of “character” and “compatible” as
those terms are used in the site review criteria for purposes of the subject area.
6.The City Council could adopt code provisions or apply a different zone to impose development
restrictions to the area.
7.The City Council could amend the JFW Plan and Metro Plan to apply the Low Density Residential
designation to this area.
8.The City or neighborhood group could purchase properties that are likely to seek upzoning.
9.The neighborhood group could attempt to enter into private agreements with property owners in the
area (akin to CCRs for the neighborhood).
10. The City could do nothing, anticipating that the issue of compatibility will be sufficiently addressed
when the JFW Plan policies are applied in the context of site review applications.
Based on the discussions between staff and the neighborhood group, the focus has narrowed down to a
few options worthy of further consideration. After the meetings, it was clear that the neighborhood
group is in favor of the City taking the action described in Option 7 above, to amend the JFW Plan and
Metro Plan to apply the Low Density Residential designation to this area. The neighborhood group
L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060816\S060816B.doc
views Option 7 as a fix only until the City has adopted standards to address infill compatibility.
However, the group is concerned about the time it would take for the City to take the actions under
Option 7 and requests that a shorter-term action also be taken to ensure compatibility in the interim. To
accomplish this, the options that seem most efficient are those described in 2 or 3, above, which utilize
the City’s process for issuing code interpretations.
Options 2 or 3 would utilize the Land Use Code process by which the Planning Director or the Planning
Commission can issue an official interpretation of a provision of the Land Use Code EC 9.0040.
Although the neighborhood group agrees that an interpretation under EC 9.0040 is its preferred option, it
has not yet determined which process under EC 9.0040 would most effectively meet its needs. The
neighborhood group and staff have discussed that, under options 2 and 3, there is uncertainty as to the
outcome. It is possible that the neighborhood group will be dissatisfied with the interpretation that is
issued. Since these options involve a land use decision, the outcome of the interpretation cannot be
predetermined. In addition, options 2 and 3 may not accomplish much more than the “no action” option
set out as Number 10, above. Whether or not an interpretation is issued pursuant to option 2 or 3, if the
City receives an application for an upzoning in the area, the City decision-maker (Hearings Official)
must issue an interpretation of the Area 15 policy of the JFW Plan as part of the decision on the
application. Nevertheless, the neighborhood may see some benefit to getting the interpretation prior to
submittal of future zone change applications.
RELATED CITY POLICIES
The city’s Growth Management Policies (1998) contain the following direction:
Policy 1 Support the existing Eugene Urban Growth Boundary by taking actions to increase density
and use existing vacant land and under-used land within the boundary more efficiently.
Policy 2 Encourage in-fill, mixed-use, redevelopment, and higher density development.
Policy 4 Improve the appearance of buildings and landscapes.
Policy 5 Work cooperatively with Metro area partners (Springfield and Lane County) and other
nearby cities to avoid urban sprawl and preserve the rural character in areas outside the
urban growth boundaries.
Policy 6 Increase density of new housing development while maintaining the character and livability
of individual neighborhoods.
Policy 7 Provide for a greater variety of housing types.
Policy 8 Promote construction of affordable housing.
Policy 9 Mitigate the impacts of new and/or higher density housing, in-fill, and redevelopment on
neighborhoods through design standards, open space and housing maintenance programs,
and continuing historic preservation and neighborhood planning programs.
L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060816\S060816B.doc
Policy 10 Encourage the creation of transportation-efficient land use patterns and implementation of
nodal development concepts.
The Jefferson-Far West Plan (1983) contains these policies for Area 15:
This area shall be recognized as a low-to medium-density residential area. The City
shall explore methods of encouraging an increase in residential density yet maintaining
the character of the area. Residential densities beyond ten units per acre shall be
allowed, subject to an approved block plan or rezoning to R-2 in conjunction with site
review.
The City shall encourage block planning, infilling, and shared housing, in this area.
Access to housing units off of alleys shall be accommodated when not in conflict with
other policies and goals.
The City shall encourage the rehabilitation of the existing housing stock through both
public and private reinvestments.
COUNCIL OPTIONS
While council could consider the other options listed under the ‘Background’ section of this AIS, staff
has worked with the neighborhood group and has narrowed that list down to the following options to
consider:
First, the City Council could initiate amendments to the JFW Plan, Metro Plan and Land Use Code to
apply the Low Density Residential designation to this area (Option 7);
and
in the interim, either:
The Planning Director could issue an official interpretation of the Area 15 policy of the JFW Plan,
?
which is incorporated into the Land Use Code at EC 9.9580(17) (Option 2);
The Planning Director could request that the Planning Commission issue an official interpretation of
?
the Area 15 policy of the JFW Plan, which is incorporated into the Land Use Code at EC 9.9580(17)
(Option 3); or
The City could do nothing, anticipating that the issue of compatibility will be sufficiently addressed
?
when the JFW Plan policies are applied in the context of a site review application (Option 10).
If the council chooses to take the action described in Option 7, at this time, staff would also recommend
the council amend the Planning Commission work plan to show this as a high priority work program
item. Through that amendment process, staff will do the necessary analysis and provide a
recommendation on the technical merits of such an amendment, and move that through the public
process. If the council initiates the amendments, and revises the work plan, staff will then adjust the
other high priority work program items, such as the South Ridgeline Habitat Study or the Opportunity
Siting program to pull resources from those items to accomplish this task. As previously noted, staff is
trying to respect the process and integrity of the City-wide prioritization system that occurs annually and
ensure tracking of amendments to those priorities.
L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060816\S060816B.doc
CITY MANAGER’S RECOMMENDATION
The City Manager and staff have previously recommended no action be taken on this matter for the
following reasons:
1.Timing – Moratoriums or other similar tools, in the short term, do not appear to save any time
nor do they immediately provide the type of protection that is being sought.
2.Legal challenges – The risk of trying to prevent, in any way, implementation of an existing
Metro Plan and Refinement Plan are great.
3.Equity – from a citywide perspective, most if not all neighborhoods will, at some point, be
bumping into the infill question. The City Council has directed staff to develop a toolbox to deal
with this issue citywide. That action is a high priority work program item with resources and
funding and is already in process.
4.Work Plan – Annually the Planning Commission asks the council to adopt a work plan for it.
That work plan is the basis for the work that is brought to the council for consideration; it is a
very helpful tool for staff to be deliberative about how it plans, the priorities staff sets, and to
allow staff to have a citywide perspective on all of the work.
5.Process – the original community planning process that listed this area as ‘Low-Medium Density
Residential’ went through a significant public process, with input from many stakeholders. The
action taken through the housekeeping amendments upheld and continued to implement that
community effort.
However, it is clear, via the 6-1 vote on July 24, 2006, that the council wants to consider taking an
action on this matter. Therefore, the City Manager is recommending a motion consistent with the July
24, 2006, motion for the council to consider. If councilors would like other motions to consider, please
notify staff and they can be prepared in advance of the August 16, 2006, meeting date.
SUGGESTED MOTION
Move to initiate amendment of the Metro Plan, the JFW Refinement Plan and the Land Use Code to
limit the subject area to Low Density Residential development. In addition, direct the City Manager to
make this task priority #1 on the Planning Commission work plan and pull resources from the other high
priority work program items to accomplish this as quickly as possible within the parameters of the
amendment process.
Further, move to request that the City Manager direct staff to begin the process of issuing an official
interpretation pursuant to EC 9.0040(1) or (3) to interpret the Area 15 policy of the JFW Plan, which is
incorporated into the Land Use Code at EC 9.9580(17).
ATTACHMENTS
A. Excerpts from Jefferson / Far West Refinement Plan (including map of subject area)
B. Previously-issued memos relating to this matter
C. Planning Commission Work Plan
L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060816\S060816B.doc
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Staff Contact: Susan Muir, Planning and Development Executive Director
Telephone: 682-6077
Staff E-Mail: susan.l.muir@ci.eugene.or.us
L:\CMO\2006 Council Agendas\M060816\S060816B.doc
...........c
ccnca
OCD-
~;t D.
CD.....
'l-caC
'l-u.CD
~ E
CD
c
.-
'I-
CD
II:
ATTACHMENT A
...11_111111111111111111.11
(ij
p
c:
Q)
"C
'Vi
Q) Q)
0:: u
> nos
0.
+J Vl
'Vi V)
c: (ij c: Q)
Q) 'C Q) ~
C +J 0.
.c: Vl 0 'u
:::J
C1 "C ~ nos
:f & LL
Vl Vl
~ ~ Q) :::J
~ 0
(ij (ij :~
'u 'u Q) 'u
L- L- V) nos (jj
Q) Q) :::) LL 0::
E E "C ,~ L-
E E Q) :c 0
X '~
0 0 ~ :::J
U U Q. ~
. . ~
[ i
[ t
.. g ~
*[~;~
o
[ ~
( At
1,
'1
\1\
V1
C ~
fa ~
c:: ~
V1
::)
~ U
C ~
Q) Q)
E ~
Q) ~
C '~
._ c
~ ~
~:2:
~<(
~f3
><(
-
teC
~w
CfJ)
O::J
V)
L.C
&2
.03 <(
....., ....I
(ij
p
V1 (ij c: (ij
Q) [
Q) P "C p
"i:: c: 'Vi c:
Q) Q) Q)
0 "C 0:: "C
Cl 'Vi 'Vi
> Q)
Q) Q) +J 0::
....., 0:: 'Vi
ctJ > c: >
+J Q) +J (ij
U 'Vi C 'Vi 'u
c: c: L-
Q) Q) E Q) Q)
V1 C :::J C E
::) 3: =c .c: E
Q) C1 0
0 :f u
.
111111111111.11.111111111111
---
.8
~
o
'+-
en
Q)
:~
"0
B.
Q)
+-'
crJ
.~ ..;
o C
t- Q)
o..E
0.0..
crJ 0
cn-
crJ~
"OQ)
Q)-O
N-
.- ro
C.-
o)+-'
OC
O~
Q).-
~ en
Q)~
..0>,
- +-'
~ .w
..c.C
enQ)
co "0
~E
CO::J
en:.o
.- Q)
~E
CD
.c
....
....
o
.c
....
:J
o
en
I
as
~
<t
(ij
;::
c
Q)
~
-(ii
Q)
a:
~
....
-en
C.CI)
Q)~
cc
~5
0-
..J~
CW'im
,...LL
I'-
N
~.~
-"."~ ~_a
'<- -".~ ~ "" ......~- - -~--
. .~.""'...-
..1.-J---'L..----J L-----J L
1I1od
ii
I:
aa
CJ
~
Q)
~
en
en
c
:c
c
u:
C
Q)
..co2t-
u ~ 0
.- CO :.c .-.
..c ~ t- CO
~ (i5 . E
en+-'"O'+-
Q)roQ)O
en E.-
::J.- Q.-o
ox::JQ)
..c.ooQ)
~ 0 C
>.0.0
==Q.~C
E CO Q).-
ro - C Q)
,+-co~~.c
~~oenu
gco~~:5
.w ~ CO .2 i5
.....-+-'enoQ.)
oc~::Jc
~E~~o
.~ :> - - en
roE :::> .~ .~ Q)
+-'---"0
._ en C C ::J
o.o.gs~u
en ~ .00 .00 .s
(j),.-(\)Q)co
-- ~ ~ Q)
enQ)Q)Q)~
f55..c..cco
o (1)::: ::: .~
co _S 0 0 ..c
~::;cc~
co "0 Q) Q).:::
en~OOCO
E .S Q5 CD g-
I- ..0 0.. 0.. ~
=
co
?-
<cro
CI:~
-oco~
~ .~ ~ .
o ..c. +-' Q)
N+-'oE
(/)000:;:;
cocoz---
~~~~
co ro---
~ .s ~ Q)
co-o Q) g
(/) Q) -0 .-
.- (/).00 (/)
~ .S; Q) ~
ai~a: ~
O(/)~ro
c ro-- en
co ~ E.-
c ro-E
=OQ)l..L.c
~ () cb.-
o @ 0,"0
g>.S .s ~
.c ~ (f) :s
oO~ g
N O)CI: 0
CO.S 0 Q)
~c--->
0)0-0 co
"-N<D..c
Q.) Q) C (/)
..c..coo>
---___NC
<D C ~ .c
-oQ)enO
c..c. co N
:J s,~ ~
OLO ~
LO('f)t-Q)
o .+-'
~. "0 .__ro E
-_cro
.~ 2 ro E .x
cE-o.....-e
~ ._ .~ 0 a..
._ x a.. -0 c..
~o::J(l)ro
~a.oQ)en
a.. u c.-
~ 4: ~ .~ ~
EdQ)Q)~
roLOc~ro
d;O)~roQ)
_-r- (/)..c.
g-o ~ ~ ~
.w ~ ro .2 .-
.....- Cf)uG)
o 0 =: ::J .~
~~5~~
.~ ,.- co ~ ~
Ea5~:;=;tti
-~ Q.) a5 a5 a.
0.. ~ "0 -0 Q)
Cf) +-' .-.- 0>
___Q)Cf)enro.....;
.~..o ~ ~ t- ~
en=::Q)Q)Q),+-
f5E..c...c.~Q)
u ::::Q)~
en roenoo..c.::J
C) Q) ~ ---, +-' t-O" en
C ~::Jcc.
-"0- ro +-'u Q) Q) .::: co
en .0 u COr-
e ._::J ~ t- a. N
i.i: ~~~~~cO
as
!
<
ca
=
c
Q)
"C
-en
G)
a:
~
-en
c
G)
c
E
~
:s
C1)
:e
o
....
3
o
..J
iii
.....
en
Q)
:~
o
B.
~
.2Q.)
wE
~'O
~~
ro~
-co
~5-
C
Q)Q)
-o..c
. en -;
~ >
~e
:'!:::o.
~E
Q)~
~c
~ ro
.2c
co-ca
CC~
.ro -cu g
EErn
~ .8 0>
- C
CO.g.en
~co5
roE..c
~O)o>
co..o c
en = .~
.- ro .-
..c...cx
l-enQ)
-0 ~
C .-
Q)a)co ~
uu~ 0)
.~ ~ = ~-o
encEG~
(ij =0 ,~ 0) .Q
.- ~ u.. ..c
cOcb+-' 0
0) 0> 0.. ~.....-
:Q c.~.c co
en .- -S -0 0)
~ 5 ~.~ ~
~N-oa3O)
==~2-O~
~ O).E C 0)
LL -r-._ Q) >
LQ)--lQ)Q5
~..cN..oen
g::d:~~
.- Q) co Q.
(f)-o.8..co
,.-c(/)_---
I::JO)CO+-,
a:-oo>CC
"0 Q) C .Q Q)
Q):'= l"O Cf) E
C a...c (j):!:::
.ca a. '-' 2 E
EcoQ.)eE
O)~f5a..o
~~N(ijUaj
en ~.- co en
~gEc.....-::J
co .c en -8 0 ~
~ 2 en .w ~ C
co 0) Q) ::J Q)
en ~ 5-0: ~:Q
:.c~0)a..0)(f)
I- .s CI: 0: ..0 ~
J
--, I
,.IOd
[
r
-g"O.8~
coCt-t-
uOOct1
._ ,-,.c
~ ~ o.E ~
uO)~I-$
co ..c: +-' . C
+-,enCOQ)
Q) C .x ~ E
-goO)~.92
uenO)cQ)
.~ C ~.- OJ
0) ..c: 0).-
~s-ag-5
I"I"'Ct-CCUO
\,u CU co C ~
Q) 0.. .- co
..c co g> ~ 0..
...... ..c . - 0 Q)
C ~ E '""'. C
..:: ~ t- C' 0
en 0 .- -0
-- ..c. C C C
~o82t"O
co ..0_ C: (ij ..c
.c+-'o:;:;e
+-' ~ C.c :J
Cf) ~ .- ..c
Q)CO~Q)U
~Ero.cO)
.- +-' C
co-g~'Oo
~Oen en
c.c.:JCO)
0) o~ ..c. .Q -0
-0 .......+-':J
.- ..0 0 0..-
~..cCDog~
~ 0> -0._ 0
c:.Qi ~ CU 0
oc8Q)gf5
Zro;;::~aien
as
!
c(
:!
....
c
CD
"C
-(ii
Q)
a:
~
-en
c
CD
c
E
~
:s
CD
:i
o
....
'+-
o
en
0)
Q. - .
':>..~<D--
~- Q) ..c. Q)
~-E1-2
::J Q) . 0)
+-'>-o~
() Q).~ co
E (f) g- 5-
en~,-,en
- .m 8 0
.~ Q. I 0')
C ~ QiCO_
Q) cO
:2o~"-
~ .co 0 ~
~E~2
'O""'-coco
o E
>. en .-
m-g:g~
.~ CD ::J 0..
co c_ 0..
> C.~ co
co .- +-'
'+- 0) a5 .~
O~UQ)
en .- N
+-' +-' en.-
encO)(j)
.- 0) ~
enUO)Q)
C~..c()
OQ)+-,~
u Q. '+- co
CONOo.
~Nc ~
co ..c Q) co
.Cf2.~ e co
..c..c.Q)>
t- ~ a.cu
~
o
..J
-:i
~
en
en
c
:g
c
u:
".~
U)
CD
]~
o
B.
~
.w
C
0)
-a
E'+-
::JO
.- en
-g-g
E..c
om
......E
~ 0)
o t-
-0
roo..
enX
cu Q)
-oCij
O)..c
.~ en
c~
8>.-
uO
Q) 0)
~..c
Q)I-
..0.
co
-Q)
co ~
~ro
co~
O)+-'
~C
rom
en~
.- en
..cO)
I-t-
NO+-,
,+-'c
CI:(50)
0> .,.: .~ ~
.s d: -g =0
~oenco
N+-'CQ)
co-gCD~
~~O).c
O):5..o~
u~~
0) U ..c. >.
~o......c
~Q)co
Q.)><>>E
"'OC\jE~
c ..c Q. <<I
::leno..!:
4: 0>(i5 C
a:.~ > 0
CQ)cn
-00) 2 "0 .Ci)
cO)(ijcu
o~:;::..c
N-CQ.
~ro 0) E
=Q)~O)
.~ ,.... ~ c:
:gO)~coen
._ 0 ~ ..c co
(j) .s ~ =: ~
ro CJ) 0> ~ ro
~<riI~~
mg. .~ .~
~coC)>O)
rocO:~-o
.Cf2 :.a -0 Q) 3
~o@~g
CD
:N
~
'00
..:x:::
'-
co
a.
-g
o
..c
'-
o
...a
..c
0>
'CD
C
CO
E
en
ct1
en
Q)
-0
.2
()
C
o
en
CO
CO
~
CO
en
:.c
r-
-0 a)
Q) '-
o>U
Q)c CO
U co'-
~x.c~
C Q) U
0- - C/) en
-0 a. C .~
'- ::l 0 C
o "'0.- :::J
0> -0 co (Q
Cc-s~
.c co 0> 0
o~~......
N .- a.
coEu:::J
~ CO'i::
0)............-0
~ cb o~ S
- -0 \,u
CD g> CX) ~
:S '00 (Q C
'- ~ 0) Q)
Q)-~E
-occa.
SO_.Q
C\J-g~~
f?:CQ)
O:OQ)-o
-o=E~
Q) co 0.. ==
5t3..QE
NE~~
~ o~ -8 E
?: -0 :::J
coCti~E
~:Sc~
coc~g
Q) Q).- CO
..c..c~o
t-3='-......
Q)
.~ tj
C C 0
~~:O
C~-o
oEm ~ ~ ~
~o.-
...... Q) a. >
~..Qa.~
~C/)coQ)
~J5c~
en 0_ ro C/)
c~o:S
Q) Q) ...... 0 _
"'0-0......3=
- U
o~ co Q) 5
c 0';:: :.0.-
Q)C::J(5
-oQ)C/)c
o Ci5 :g -0 ::J
~ ~ Q) 'c
co:sg
0- 0
", cO = c
us Q) roo-
~ro~<;J
'-Q) 0:
gE~.8
0- ..c
c 0 en g>
co '- Q)'-
o>Q)'-C
c......UO
0_ U co ~
g>~'-,-
,-co Q) '-
::J..c Q. 0
OUenc
U Q)'~ co
a5:S5a.
II
--
II
(ij-o
-o..cC
Q) en co
'- en (/)
co ~ Q)
..r::. (1)0-
(/) _ U
-octio
c ...... a.
co 0 '-
- - CD
go E
~~o
- 0 - ..r::.
cc......
0__ :::J o~
0> 0> ......
"~ .~ U
C(/)=
c:::J.......
co 0 5
o...c U
..:x:::Oc
U ...... "-
0(/)......
-(/)0
..QQ)C
Q) U C
O>UQ)
co<(..c
:; cO ~
OQ)-o
U'-Q)
cco......
Q) (/) co
.- -0
=..co
co ...... E
..cc
(/).- E
co)o
.- c U
0.- u en
Q)~COro
..cOQ)O
I- ..c ..Q 0>
II
E
::l
:0
Q)
E
o
.......
U)
CD
:~
o
0..
Q)
ro
.~
o
a.
a.
co
(/) .
co '1-'
C
-0<1>
~ E
.- a.
c 0
0>-
00)
U >
CD Q)
,--0
Q)(ij
..0 .-
-c
-Q)
~-o
(/)"00
co~
~~
co.~
(/)(/)
0_ c
..cQ)
1--0
II
c
o
~
-u
.~ 0
-eID
0) '-
-0'-
"00 0
Q) -
,-0>
C
0>==
o~ ~
......c
en.-
'x -
Q) C
o 0
Q):;:;-O
..ccoo
.......~ 0
Q)==-C
2: ...a '-
Q)~.8
enQ).!:
Q)'-O>
0. o>.m
o.~ c
...... 0> Q)
CDCUL
"O:s~
co 00_
EU.c
c.~
CD CD ~
.o~
=..o~
co(/),-
LQ):::J
(/)'-u
~.22
'-u......
O:::Jen
....... '-
wcno
...L.L-.-.J L..-J L--J ~
'IS 8^UO
jSL ~
'ill .1 .,pr
j[]~ Ir-
.' UlOou"
lrCJ.! !~
u:i
C
O>Q)
o~ E
~Ci)
x Q)
Q) >
Q)"~
..cQ)
........ "-
'02
C ~
O'i::
~a.
.~ -0
._ C
..a co
~ ()
m-
,-.0
Q) :::J
..co.
+-' .c
0)........
0>0
co..o
'--C
:::JO)
o ::J
U 0
C "-
IDE
(Un
~.9
~U)
~O>
Oc
Q) Cf)
..c:J
f-2
II
II
II
II
II
r
ft1
!
<C
m
=
c
CD
'"C
-en
CD
a:
~
-c;;
c
CD
c
i:.
_2>>
J:
r--:
'r'"
III
U)
C)
c
:s
c
u:
0> 0>0
C ~,~
~ ~ en,cD
- Oi:: ~'oo
g .c .2,--
.- 0> U; co
(/)-E. 2:~
Q)co......co
:J (/)00
...... -0 - .-
u C .~ ,:5
2cocc
en rn ~ .-
- c'- Q)
-~ Q) ~.~
cE'-:::'
~t~~
. en ~ ...... '-
~coo~
ornc~
~,E Q) CO
Q)(/)~Ci;
0- en 0> >
~ Q) a. co
>E~CD
COO~L
en ..c ~ t-
co~2-o~
..c 0- CO ~ Q)
coEE.~2
Q) CO._ c
~d;~~~
enc;,a.enco
-- c .o:::J
~ 'w ~ ~ g
a1
!
<C
.!
....
c
CD
'"C
-u;
Q)
a:
~
-en
c
CD
c
E
::s
=c
Q)
:E
..
U)
~
w
cd
,...
fn
C)
c
:c
c
.
II
.8 ~
-o.c ~
co>coQ)
CO.- Q) Q)
-..cent..,....c
O(/)co(j)t-
0..3=(1)Q)"";
.- 0 ~ ...... (/)
.:=~Q)Q)Q)
en \,u en E 3=
~~.8~~
t: ..c -0 .- ......
~ ~_~~E
Q)~a5022
:5O:cenc
-0 .- Q) (1)
~Q)(/)~E
CcCO a.
co23=Cij.Q
.~ en'u Q)
-0 Cf) -- >
,-co.cCi;Q)
03:~E~
gQ)~E:m
.- Q) en 0 c
C:':=:::J()Q)
~cn-c-o
Q)"~ Q)"OO
CX)>......CDQ)
~==c~'-
O)O~Q)~
T'- ....... " Ci5 .0 "00.
Q)oQ)cc
::5+--'-0Q)
'- ~ c~ "9
Q)Q)'oo"w Q5
-gQ)cc3:
:::>:5~~.Q
~
CO
:::J
C Q) (ij <l> 0-
:J-c:;:;.c(/)
-co......C......N
~~O~O)~
c c ......._ c _
Q) Q) c (/)'i:: I.{)
",o:-gQ)~:::J........
'w CJ) U -0 ~
Q)Q) Q5Q) '-2
'-~o..E~co
~CD _coE
== .c ~ 0 - .-
E......('t) ,-x
coo~cnoe
....... -0(/)0.
d>c2~oo..
"5>a>co C\JCO
c () E .:: 0) CJ)
"- '- .- CO ~ .-
enQ)~o..Q)Q)
....... c.. '- Q)..c N
o r'- a. '- ...... . Ci.i
~N a. "- 0>_
== COOCQ)
'- ~ .-...- ()
coQ5.cco:;~
E......~E-oco
.~ CO 3:....... +-- Q.
o.E-o 0= Q)
(/)'x Q) ~ :::J 0>
...... 0'- \oJ .0 CO
(/) "- a. (1) ,-.
.- a. :J (1) Q.) Q)
~a.ucQ5>
8~~.~?:~
co en Q)(/) (/)..c
Q)~c'~~t-
'-:J:>:J:J '
CO ...... ~ +- '...... CJ)
(/) () () UO 0
0- 2 Q.) 2 2 ~ CD
..c......'-............O)Q)
r-(I)COenen,.-.......
"~
--
II
II
CD
Lt)
c
CO
Q)e..
(i.i..r:::.0)
O)........r:::.
>'+-......
::>O~
rocE
u..Q)c
--Eco
CO)-
oca..
C/) .- _
~ '+- CO
O)O)~
:::::~O)
O)COe
-,C/)O)
O)coC.9
~-oco
cO)~
.- 0. <3:
-coe
t-oco
o CO......
=~~
Q).o 0.
C/)~O
C/)O)~
0) ..c 0)
'0 0) ~
.- ~
om-o
o.c]2
0) CO'+-
..r:::. - 0>
t- CL .~
-r-Co.
O)U)
gEcb
._ Q) c:
...CO) .
(,);:;:: 0> CO
(l)0):J~
CJ)a:LJ.JCO
co
cD
c
(I) ..
C)C/)
::::J ~
W.Q
....0
o'+-
~C/)
...CO
OC
(1)0
.cO>
...~
'00
'+-
.- 0
UO)
c......
~co
0......
OW
CD
~.c
.... ......
0'0
Q) e
.r:.o
... .-
~ro
.c~
o
-co.
Q)~
> 0
-0
0_
u)co
<Do.
.... .-
... . S2
.- e
Q) ::J
I:D~
(J)
CO .cC
C/) ~~e
CO O).i:: Q)
-0 CO O>~ ~
O)Q)cc..>
....... ;;; . - en Q)
0) g." ~ CO .c
..r:::."O~~"O::
......CO......C/)O> 0
e __:= ,- N
.- E 0 -0 'c C
-g ~ g-x O>~
"OO);o.>oe
:J -C Q) ...... ~ .-
uC/)~~~Q)
C .- 0 en E
.- c -0 ...... .-
E~~~Eo
coa..1;.cocoe
~ "JI - ~ 0
~ c.~ ~ ~.+:;
.- 0) 0. Q) .- CO
OEU)Q)O~
Q)~cb..r:::.Q)a.
C/) ._ e t- Cf) X
:JQ5 Q) .:J Q)
-0 a: g>E-o ~
e.......LJ.J~c~
CO Cf) 0> CO
~Q)O)co....Jt
Q)~E:OQ)2
..r:::. ..r:::. 0> .
t-rooe......cE
. u.. CO '+- .- CO
NCCC:O:2o,
COO)-c>m
o Cf) E ~ Q) e.-
.- ~ Q) 0) E 0.-0
"'O)e c
U ::t::;:;:: e 0> -0 CO
(I) 0) Q),~ Q) c:-
CJ)J~'-'Cf)COCL
<D
:S
~
Q)
.0
E--=
Q) c U
> 0 c;:
0(j):J
zQ50
'+-t)
cQ5~
O"J......
cO)G
. Q..r:::. 0)
u=.c
COO......
.:::t:'.c~
00.0
0.- C
.....~o
eO)+:
0>0-
.- 0
(/)"0-0
.~ 0) CO
E.~ ~
E>o
o)'+-
o ~
t)co~
0>"0 0:
ec......
cO)C
cEO)
~EE
CLoO)
0) U.~
..r:::.~CE
....._ 0 a:
~..... ......
c - (/)
ON 0)
.~~S
~ ,-- ~
......,-u..
0>
CO) 0>
-0 . C ..r:::. 0) C
0) C ...... -C
~Q)co""""""O)C
O)..r:::.-co..c..cC
. 5> ...... a.. :S ~ ...... ~
Q) c CD (j) ~ - CL
~O-5"O......~O)
~-gQ)~a3a::Q
CO(j)~-"""-~
..c: co E .- .~ co Q)
.DCDUC/)~"""
U _.o5C~~
c-q~OOo)U)
:JCcOU(9O)
o co 0 __.~ ..c
OcEC co......
co ,-'- c CD -0
~n w 0 .EQ <(~ c
.- u- 0) 0) a.. co
() ...... ...... ..r:::. ...... c -
-ocu+-*c:coC/)
e Q) :..= -=- O):~ CD
co E .0'0 E 0 ~2
c Q) :J C 0> 0.-
O.~ o.::J c: 0 0
.- '+- CD 0.- ~ a..
~CD..r:::.OQ)Q)"O
.- a: ...... Q) a: ~ c
Ew-o..r:::........ co
EQ)c......(/):QCf)
O>CO-OO)Q)-
:::> c $ .- co
o ~.~ co 0, 0
0> co ~ c ro .~ CJ
.S LL Q) 0 LL '- ~
c: _ ..c: .- __ a. ~
c c ...... en c U) C
co 0 (j).f!2 0 <b::J
o:~g>E~cEen
Q)2:aE2~E(ij
..r:::.Q3cOQ5:JOO
r-"J;:;::O-,wO(9
N
co
(j) 1i5
Q) .
CY5 sg
,- 0> '- ..Q
......~eco:J
~ 0) 'c u.. a..
~.oe Q)
"OE.!QQ)..r:::.
0'>Q)a..:S......
~~O)enO
coEo(/)
oCE.oCi>
0>00-5>.0
.S c ~'Qj E
~ .EQ C/) z o.>E
Q) a.. c
..c......oco-o
oe:;:::~c
:=Q){g<3:co
-gEcc -
a. .~E g ,9
cUQ5Emrri
:Q a: 0:::::'0
0).....00)0
..c(j)0)"J(f)
Q) ~ C/)
~~-o~<3:
c O)"!-'-o
gU5mc8
o ~ 32 .Q ..r:::.
c C/) Cf) '-
.~ g 5 ,f!2 .8
o '- () E ..r:::.
0) 2 -0 E .52>
.cmcOO)
t-"JCOOZ
(5
Q) C
-5~~
.~ -0 co
..r:::.0).....
t .~ ..5
E~C/)
00>
1D O.u
Cf) 0).-
Cf)~O
.9! ~ 0.
o>co-o
Q)ea>
co coo.
~a:.g
ccco
00>0>
+::Ee
,~ Q)'W
'ccCl)
Q)~- Q)
EID-o ~
0) a: "0 0
o.......co:=
E~o8.
.~ ~ 00 ~
..r:::.~~~
t-COO)O
u..ECf)
cw:)- co
e-
cOCO"O
o (j) '';= Q) ,
.- '- C ......
C:;228-
CDmO"'O
tn "J a.. co
(f)
0>
e
=0
e
;:;::
Q)
>
o
.0
co
Q)
-S
c
o
-0
Q)
(j)
co
.0
ai
o
'+-
~
Q)
:S
~
o
Z
Q) .
=~
(j)
c,-
o
O>~ 0
C .-
''::: ~:c
coQ)::l
Q) .0 0.
..r:::..9Q)
uO.r:.
==0......
.oc'"O
:Joc
a. co
COCe
"OlQco
(UCLa.
.ceQ)
c:Q)..r:::.
.Q E:
(1)Q)Q)
.~ .~ -0
E .... .-
EQ)~
0:0
0......0
()~o
g>~ ;
'c ro 5
c LL .-
co __ (j)
-coo
c..0Q)
Q)(j)en
CQ)~
Q) '+- ~
0> '+- 0
::lQ)~
UJ"J
...... ~
Q).... Q)
.r;CO+-'
I-~=a:
c -
N "OQ)~
COc ~ oE"'-
o .-,.... ~ Q) CD
~ ~ c: cO = '- .S .0 ......
Q) co co 'S; 0 Q) ,g co
==-g-o Q) >:@ ~ 0-0
co :J Q) .0 c 0>;:= 0
E 0 .c E ~ ~ 'Q5 ~ c: ~
en.o en Q) 0 0. Z "0 0 ......
roc: ,-+-'.0......
> 0 Q..c e +.J Q) >.9
> ~ .0 Q) 0> Q) (j)..c :;::;
c a...c en '0) E ~ :: C ~
~ Q) .2> C Z Q) :::> ~ ~ 0
Q....r:::. Q) 0 c ~ 0 -,.-
...... Z ro.- co 0. 0- 00
...... e c: Q) Q3 LL a. Q) 'S;
c._ co co '- '- ::J (j) Q)
Q)..r:::.Q)Ci4:......Q)en..c~
~ ~ ~ ~ C co ~ .9 ~.~
C(f)c~g-oen-o-o.s
~Q)g-oQ)Q)c2~Q;
a: ~ .~ Q) :::: .r:. .Q 0 0
Q)Q)..r:::.Q)+-'.....>N",o
+-' ~ '+- +-' ..., '+- co ex> C
~ -0 CD e Q) 0 .~ ~ 0) Q)
>-O'"JO..r:::.C~co,-E
:::> ct1 Q) ...... 0 '"'0. _
~ "0 ..c g - +--0.- oE"O 0) E
co C ...... .- N Q) ~ 0
~co'"'OQ)~.g"O~Q)o
c e Q) VJ "" . Q)..c Q) .
o ~ co E ,.... I.V 2.s; E ~ C
(j) Q) _ --0 (j) Q) Q) 0 co
'- C N - <0 Q) Q) ~ ...... ,....... Ci
Q) ~ ex> co \-"0 :J e 0.'0
~ 0 Q) 5 ~ e g.Q Q) .$ c
....., ,....:+::;oQ)~......enoQ)
+-,~",:aj......Eccoe>E
m m 00 E 00 E ';;;C.O 0 - Q)
'- a.::J ~ O~ 0 cN c:
"OOO>OeO~CJ)ct1CX);;::
<( Q.~ ~ 0 ~ ~:e c.~ ~
~
.D
g>-o ~ Q) ~ co
'c 2 .0 ..c 0 ~
c . ~ -0 ...... C/)'0,.E
co 0 Q) (f) 00 .- ~
c - Q....... -0 0) Q) '-'0)
.- a. Q..S C .~ '- ......
::::: 0), ro 0 :J (f) -0 co
~=~8:Q)e.5~~
Cf)cQ)coc~c _u
?:- 0 .0 00 0 'OJ 0 C en
.- 0. E ~ -0 LL (/) ,- co
OEQ)~e ID5~
E ~ E E ro_ -E'::t:: E 5 .
>Q)Q)O)C::lQ)E:;:+-'
>.0 > E 0 0 -, .- 0
~ E;:;::, Q)'~O~ 8 ~'~
o Q) 0) '0 Q) ..... (f) Q..-
~~(j)~oe--:Cf)OO
o . 5 ~ ~ j g ~ :~ (5
...... ~ ~ en <( ..c 'w::::: 0
"0 -0.. Cf) ~ Q) 0 :J 0 ..r:::.
Q) oO-O:SU)..oxU
E +-'e Q..o 00 ~...... Q) en
~ ..r:::. E ...... CJ) 7
o Q) 0> o>.c 0 .-c Q) C
.... E c.- '- ~ > ro ~
en Q) +: 0) 0 '+- :J:::>
rocoZ:2.cE~c~
~;;:: > co 0> 0 E co. Q ......
~ ('f") Q) '0) co 0 LL =: ....
,E "'-4:zQ)OQ)'"Oo
co Q) -0 Q).c -0 Q)
Q)..cQ)c......>c......co>
+-'...... -0 0 CJ) +: 0 - :;:
CJ)O>:J (j)~ co ~~E co
.~ .S (3 Q5 :::> C o.>.c en C
c a. c:::: ~ Q) ::= :J 0) Q)
C 0'- 0) co C/) co E.- 00
co(i)E'"JLLQ)Q..E=:Q)
Q..a; co Q) Q) a. co 0 ~ Ci
<3:-o~-E~~32o~~
co Q) Q)
coco~::= ~EQ).8
cQ)(l)ct1Q)ai Q)e~Q)
co~..c.eE:J >'+-.......:J
0> <3: ...... co co c ...: <( ...... (/) c
J5c-oo.=~~.r:.~~~
c ~ ~ Q) S <( .::: ~ .::: .~ <(
oo-o..c 0.cfJ) -C/)t:.c
'w a.. 0 t- :: (;) ~ gs :Q co ;::
.~ e ~ -0 Q) r- Q) C 0) (!J .,.-
E03,-o~o.o~tEE
E-c::::oo.............E<(coo
o~"O-EC/)Q)co (!J~e
o u -5> 0 ~ ::J..r:::.:s - ::
O>~ 'ID .0 .~ a3 0 I'- Q) ~ Q)
c'+-z-5>>>ooQ)cO)
, - 0> . - <(...... ...... .:::' Q) ..:::
~ .~ co zQ) E .c 03 Q) U) ~ Cf.)
coQ.~ O.......Q):J-o >
-w<(...... OJ'-C-..r:::.>
a.. I Cf) E ~ w...... Q) 0) ...... . ~
Q) Q) >.-.,.-
Q)c5~oEQ)<('t:.,.->
~ Q) (f) .;: 0 ~ ..c. c3 ai ~
0) 0> Q; ~ Q.) ~ Q) ...... :J G
W::J ~ ~ LL ::J ......Q) E ~ .8 c ~
(l) e l'O Q) '-'
Q)Q)-'~O)~=EQ)>C:
.r;:SQ)......3......>oQ)<{ct1
...... ..r:::. " (f) :::> '- '-..c -
oo......o..r:::.CDE'+-W.......Ci)
co ~ ...... ...... 03 ,- Q)
(j)c.E5~Q)eQ)~.,.-.:=
.,.-~.:;:: E-":::Q)OCf)
"+- a.. C ~ ~ co Q) (/) .0 ...... > a)
o.......~o'O=:J EQ)>:J
_ e D... a. u .-. c (f) ::J Q) C
ro Q)- C Q)S Q) Q5~ c> ,0)
'+-Eco~c >.oU<D >
0) 0) <0 ~ ;;:: w- <( E 3 E<(
..ccc.......Q.)Q)..c:IT'CE~o..c:
...... . - Q) ~ u ~ ...... I, v ..c. +-'
cm oCf)......(Y)..c:o.......oco
_ '- C.9 c ._ (f) ,- 0 .::: I'- ....... ,-
~
:S
Cf)
-0
C
;;::
....
o
CD
3:
'-
cu
u..
C
o
fn
'-
CD
....
....
Q)
...,
Q)
.c
....
0)
c
Q)
0)
:J
W
'0
~
+-*
G
Q)
E
15
CJ)
~
"-
~
o
z
c
o
+=
~
-
o
en
Q)
IX
C)
C
;:
Q.
o
-c
<t
c:
o
:;:
::J
o
fn
Q)
a::
'0
C
:J
o
o
C
<3
0)
.r:.
t-
..~"'... . .
CI'J-o
ctS'Q)
Met; c::
<0 '-8. ~
~'- C-
.. 8 Q)..-
~ c..c 55
-- OE
~-g -;;; ~
~ca5~
ct1 0 -- Q)
J 05 -~ a:
~ ..... > ..-
OQ>Q)cn
.J::.....CJ)
ctS . CI'J ;=
e i co ~ .....
......c-Oca
Q) 0 Q)u..
-o~a.c
~ Cti .g'~
'. en <( as <D
5E~::::
.CiS (1) Cd ~
-s: E Q) (l)
(l) .J::. 0 '.c
.....Oc..-
Q)ca~c
.c. :t:: Q) .-
t-cd::'(D"C
· C .... Q)
~ -- ~ C6
C .J::...c .....
ot:O
= 0 ~5; e-
u'+- Q) 0
G)..-....o
o m~._5
......
II)
(1)
.s:::.
..-
"0
co ~
5~c
.- - ccs
=6~a:
"0........-
ct1 -0 C
'Cl'Jc <l>, x
ct1ct1E=o
Cl'Juf~C
c..c.- Q)
OQ.'Q)Q.
"Oea:~
co 0) Ci.) C
~ufQ)CO
~ g-~ a:
~ECtic
.. lL. Q)
-...... E
.0 ~ C Q)
c:......oc
:::J . C'> CI'J ~
8 _~ ~ ~
~t......
.~ 8. ~ Ci5
() Cl. (l) Q)
Q):::J.c;:
.cen...........
t-Q)Cct1
· .c ..... u..
It)......-cc
Cuf~O
o 0>..... en
=cC'O.....
U -- ..- Q)
CD -g 5~
tn ~, 0 J
,+-0
0"""
~.~
Q.O>
0....
00>
.c
CO-c
.cO>
0......
(tjCl.
......0
......-0
coct1
OCI'J
......(\3
-cc
2ct1
0-
Q)Cl.
=61:
Cl'JO>
.- E
.....(1)
Q)e
-0 --
aID
ua:
0>......
c:en
Q)
~~
0....
0> ct1 .
_lL. c
""--0
t- c._
.0 s
U)~o
c 2 CI'J
o '+- Q)
=~a:
U en
CD Q).-
,,. .c .c
v, ...... ......
--
o
>.
ftS
~
.z::..
...
N
....
CD
.z::.
....
'C
Q)
....
Q.
o
"
as
c
o
i
o
en
CD
a:
~.
-I
&....
!~
0",
..~
.c
4::ca
1--,
'-
0.>
~
o
()
0>
a:
~
......
(3
iilllr -
!i ,/".
',I"" i"", I, II I ' -:.., '
'1\ ~
;,11111,1111, =
)
"1
~
i
.~
\'
~
~~
~
p~
~
.....
ATTACHMENT B
c
Planning & Development
Administration
MEMORANDUM
City of Eugene
99 W. 10th Avenue
Eugene, Oregon 97401
(541) 682-8817
(541) 682-8335 FAX
www.eugene-or.gov
Date: April 27, 2006
To: Mayor Piercy and City Council
From: Emily Newton Jerome, 683-5080
Harrang Long Gary Rudnick PC
Susan Muir, 682-6077
Planning and Development Executive Director
Subject: CITY COUNCIL ASSIGNMENT RESPONSE: CHANGE. IN JEFFERSON WESTSIDE
ZONING AND LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
On April 9, 2006, Councilor Bettman asked via e-mail:
Please provide an explanation of the situation that has emerged in the JWN neighborhood now
that appeal of the Metro Plan amendments has resolved. Can you tell me please under what
circumstance it is legal or appropriate for zone changes to be processed as uhousekeeping?"
The request was also made verbally at the Council's meeting the following day by Councilors Bettman and Kelly.
The cities of Eugene and Springfield and Lane County adopted a package of "Housekeeping Amendments"
pursuant to Work Task 17 of the area's periodic review. The Work Task 17 Housekeeping Amendments were
adopted by the Eugene City Council on April 21, 2004, after numerous hearings before the Eugene Planning
Commission and the City Council. It is our understanding that a concern has arisen in the JWN neighborhood
that properties in that area were "rezoned" as part of the housekeeping package. In fact, no zone changes were
included in that action. However, as part of the Housekeeping Amendments, the Metro Plan diagram was
updated. Probably, the Metro Plan diagram changes are the actual cause of the neighbors' concern.
\
Work Task 17 required the jurisdictions "to review and revise, as appropriate, Metro Plan chapters and elements
that are not updated as part of separate [work tasks]." To address Work Task 17, the Metro jurisdictions updated
the Metro Plan diagram to reflect the actions taken by the jurisdictions since the last periodic review that changed
an area's designation, but that were not yet reflected on the Metro Plan diagram, such as adopted amendments to
refinement plan diagrams or formal interpretations of a Metro Plan designation for an area that was unclear on the
previous diagram.
The Jefferson/Far West area can provide an example. In 1983, the City Council adopted the Jefferson Far West
Refinement Plan. In that refinement plan, a large area located east of the fairgrounds is designated as "Low-
Medium Density Residential" (subarea #15). Policies in the Jefferson/Far West Refinement Plan applicable to
this Low-Medium Density Residential area include: "[t]he City shall explore methods of encouraging an increase
in residential density yet maintaining the character of the area. Residential densities.beyond ten units per acre
shall be allowed, subject to an approved block plan or rezoning to R-2 in conjunction with site review" and "[t]he
City shall encourage block planning, infilling, and shared housing, in this area."
Contrary to this later-adopted refinement plan language and at least.one zone change request in the area that
reflect the Council's policy choice to (carefully).increase density in the area, the Metro Plan diagram still
appeared to designate much of this area as Low Density Residential. Additional information can be provided on
the zone change history in the area if the Council desires. Through the Housekeeping Amendments, the Metro
Plan diagram was updated to reflect the policy choice made when the refinement plan was adopted. The revised
diagram depicts this area as Medium Density Residential (there is no "Low-Medium Density Residential"
category available in the Metro Plan).
The Homebuilders Association of Lane County (HBA) appealed the Task 17 Housekeeping Amendments to the
Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). DLCD reviewed the action and the
adoption process and upheld the local governments. HBA then appealed DLCD's decision to the Oregon Land
Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC). In an Order dated May 3, 2005, LCDC specifically
addressed the propriety of making Metro Plan diagram amendments as a "housekeeping" matters. LCDC
supported the City's adoption of an updated Metro Plan diagram, stating that the local jurisdictions "have taken
the acknowledged plan map and updated it based on parcel-specific information from recent locally adopted plan
amendments, refinement plans, functional plans and inventories. Task 17 is a housekeeping assignment that
provides enhanced clarity to one of the local jurisdictions' planning tools, the generalized regional land use map."
Part of Councilor Bettman's question asks "under what circumstances it is legal or appropriate for zone changes
to be processed as 'housekeeping.'" The term "housekeeping" is not a legal term. For purposes of Work Task
1 7, LCDC used the term as "to review and revise, as appropriate, Metro Plan chapters and elements that are not
updated as part of separate [work tasks]." Based on LCDC's definition, it is appropriate that the Metro Plan
diagram update was referred to as "housekeeping." However, referring to a zone change or a Metro Plan
amendment as a "housekeeping" matter does not relieve the local government from the legal requirements
applicable to its adoption. In adopting the Metro Plan diagram updates described herein, the City complied with
the legal requirements applicable to a three-jurisdiction Metro Plan amendment.
.
Planning & Development
Administration
City of Eugene
99 W. 10th Avenue
Eugene, Oregon 97401
(541) 682-8817
(541) 682-8335 FAX
www.eugene-or.gov
MEMORANDUM
Date:
May 24, 2006
.
To: Mayor Piercy and City Council
From: Susan Muir, 682-6077
Executive Director
Subject: COUNCIL ASSIGNMENT RESPONSE: JEFFERSON WESTSIDE ZONING AND
LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
This memo will answer the assignment to "Provide details on the Jefferson-Westside
Neighborhood concerns regarding rezoning. Also include options for concrete steps that
could be taken to either place a moratorium on the rezoning or reverse it altogether".
A map of the subject area is attached as ATTACHMENT A; it includes properties between 13th and 18th
Avenue generally between Jefferson and Lincoln Streets (subarea #15 of the Jefferson/Far West Refinement
Plan).
There have been several emails and other correspondence to the Council, Planning Commission and staff
from the Neighborhood on this matter. Staff will put a file of them in the Council Office if anyone wants
additional background or if a Councilor wants copies, we would be happy to provide them upon request.
Staff provided a response last month to a Council assignment which addressed the Metro Plan
Housekeeping Amendments that were recently completed. One of the primary purposes of the
Housekeeping Amendment process was to ensure that the City's adopted neighborhood plans remain a
viable tool for guiding land use decisions. The amendments that were made to the Eugene portion of the
Metro Plan Diagram were limited to changes that aligned land use designations with previously adopted
neighborhood plans. All changes made to the Metro Plan were therefore based on the previously
established policy direction reflected in the adopted neighborhood plans. It should also be emphasized
that this amendment process did not result in the rezoning of any property.
In the case of the Jefferson neighborhood, a little more detail on that refinement plan is needed to
understand the situation. The Jefferson/Far West Refinement Plan, since 1983, had reflected the
geographic area, described above and in the attached map, as appropriate for R-2 zoning (medium density
residential), with the application of site review (the exact wording from the plan is in ATTACHMENT
A). Some neighbors have expressed concern that the recent amendments changed city policy regarding
this neighborhood.
Page 1 of 4
The information in this memo will explain that:
· In 1983 the Metro Plan and neighborhood plan were amended, through a public process
and it is clear through the legislative history that both plans encouraged medium density
residential housing in this subj ect area.
· The Metro Plan and Refinement Plan fell out of alignment due to changes in the legal
framework, which necessitated the Housekeeping Amendments in order to maintain the
policy intent of the 1983 amendments.
· If the Council wants to change the intent of the plans, just as in any other area of the
City, public processes are available to do so (outlined below).
Back!!round/Historv
There has been a notable change in the way neighborhood plans were adopted and applied over the years
since the City of Eugene began neighborhood plans. The Jefferson/Far West Refinement Plan provides a
typical example.ofthis history. During most of the 1980's and into the 1990's, the adoption process for
refinement plans (neighborhood plans) was handled differently than current day. Refinement Plans by
their very name were considered refinements of the Metro Plan. As such, they were considered
extensions of the Metro Plan, or from a legal perspective, an amendment to the Metro Plan. Under this
approach, the neighborhood-specific land use diagram clarified the intent of the Metro Plan, essentially
replacing it as the legally effective diagram. As such, one would only need to rely on the refinement plan
diagram for direction.
In the case of the Jefferson area, the Metro Plan showed low density residential for the area in question
prior to the adoption of the Jefferson/Far West Plan. When the refinement plan was adopted in 1983, it
specifically changed this subarea from low density to medium density residential with the requirement for
site review of future development. State law required that this change adopted in the refinement plan
could only take place if the Metro Plan was amended as well. The resolution that adopted the
Jefferson/Far West Plan (Resolution no. 3739) specifically verifies that the Metro Plan diagram was
amended as follows:
"The Land Use Diagram included in the Jefferson/Far West Refinement Plan is hereby adopted
as a refinement of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan diagram. The
explanatory text discussing each segment of the Land Use Diagram is recognized as clarifying
and providing furth er explanation of the intent of the Metro Plan diagram. " (Section 2,
Resolution No. 3739)
It should be noted that the adoption process for the refinement plan included an extensive public
involvement process. Most notable was the establishment of a citizen task force which helped develop
the refinement plan. Several informal public meetings were held with the neighborhoods which
eventually led to formal recommendations from the neighborhood organizations requesting adoption of
the refinement plan. Following that, the Planning Commission and City Council held public hearings to
consider these recommendations before .ultimately approving the refinement plan.
Since the adoption of the Refinement Plan in 1983, five zone changes have been approved in the subarea
in question, changing the affected properties from R-1 to R-2/SR. In order to be approved, all of these
zone changes were required to demonstrate compliance with the refinement plan and Metro Plan. What's
important to note is tbat over the last 20+ years, the City's procedures for plan amendments have evolved,
along with City code criteria. Based on court decisions regarding the relationship between the Metro Plan
and the City's refinement plans, the city beganto change the way neighborhood plans were adopted
during the 1990's. Rather than adopting neighborhood plans as guiding documents or extensions of the
Page 2 of 4
Metro Plan, recent procedures established a more rigid hierarchy. This shift created significant problems
for implementing neighborhood plans adopted years earlier.
As was noted above, many refinement plans in the past adopted new land use diagrams which provided
more specific direction, thereby replacing the more general information provided in the Metro Plan
diagram. Through this process, there was no need to rely on the Metro Plan diagram for those affected
neighborhoods, and therefore, there was no need to make changes to the Metro Plan diagram (the changes
were already made on the refinement plan diagram).
Under the current system, the City's criteria now state that if there is an inconsistency between the two
plans, the Metro Plan prevails. In many cases such as the Jefferson/Far West Refinement Plan area, the
Metro Plan still showed (prior to the Housekeeping Amendments) the original low density designation
(for the reasons discussed above), while the neighborhood plan and legislative history clearly reflects
medium density residential. The current zone change criteria make it very difficult to rely onthe original
adoption process, as evidenced in a recent denial of a zone change request in this neighborhood. That
decision relied on the simple fact that the two maps (regardless of their history) did not match each other,
thereby requiring that the Metro Plan prevail.
It is worth noting that the staff, many neighborhoods as well as the Planning Commission have been
increasingly frustrated that these legal interpretations have made it more difficult to carry out the intent of
these adopted neighborhood plans. One purpose of the Housekeeping Amendments was to ensure that
the policy direction previously adopted for various neighborhoods plans could be legally implemented. In
the case of the area at issue, the Housekeeping Amendments revised the Metro Plan diagram to allow
medium density h~using as the neighborhood plan, adopted through a public process, intended.
Possible Options
Councilor Bettman has also asked what concrete steps can be taken to prevent rezonings in this area, or
reverse this action altogether. There are a variety of options which the city could pursue, if the Council so
desires. Following is a list of possible options which could be considered.
1. Metro Plan and Refinement Plan Amendment: This option would formally address possible
redesignation of the subject area from medium density to low density residential. Process requires
Planning Commission and City Council action.
2. Code Amendment: In order for zone changes to be approved, they must demonstrate consistency
with "siting criteria" established in the Land Use Code. While these siting requirements are
intentionally broad, the City could consider modifications to the siting requirements for the R-2 zone
to limit future rezonings. Requires Planning Commission and City Council action.
3. Moratorium on rezoning: A short term option would be for the City to consider a moratorium on
zone change applications in this area. This option would provide a limited window of time in which
to take some long term action. The statutory process for adoption ofa moratorium would require at
least 45-days notice to the state prior to the Council's final hearing on adoption and the moratorium
would need to be limited to a 120-day duration (with extensions possible). Such a moratorium could
only be justified if, among.other things, the City could demonstrate that the moratorium is needed to
"prevent irrevocable public harm from development in the affected geographical area." Any
consideration of this option should involve a thorough discussion of the legal limits and other
associated factors. The Council has discussed moratoriums previously, most recently related to 'big
box' stores and cell towers.. In both cases it was decided that the costs of defending a moratorium did
not justify the action.
Page 3 of 4
Further Ootions
In addition to the options outlined above, there are other options, which do not necessarily prevent the
ability to rezone property, but could help address neighborhood concerns associated with future zone
changes.
4. Site Review: The neighborhood plan calls for the application of site review for zone change requests
within this neighborhood. This provision helps ensure that future development address neighborhood
compatibility through a public process involving affected neighbors. If the Council felt this tool was
not adequate, they could consider undertaking code amendments to the existing site review criteria
(see options below).
5. Opportunity Siting/infill Standards: As part of this high priority work task, the City will be
addressing infill standards for neighborhoods such as Jefferson Westside. Council will have the
opportunity to decide how site specific this effort should be at their joint session with the Planning
Commission, currently scheduled for June 28, 2006.
6. Future Code Amendments: The second phase of code amendments will begin soon. Planning
Commission and Council will have the opportunity to prioritize the focus of these amendments,
which could involve some form of infill standards.
7. Special Area Study: The Council could decide to modify the Planning Division work program to
develop a comprehensive set of regulations for th~s portion of the Jefferson neighborhood (similar in
scope to the CAFHN project).
If the Council decides the policy direction given through a public process in 1983 to allow medium
density housing in this subarea needs to be revevaluated through one of the options above, the
discussion about prioritization of the reevaluation could occur at the annual joint meeting with the
Planning Commission in the context of all of the planning projects occurring around the City. Staff
would emphasize that each of these options identified above would require more in-depth
consideration, including legal considerations, timing and resource implications if Council were
inclined to pursue any of them.
Please contact me at 682-6077 or bye-mail (susan.1.mllir(Q)ci.eugene.or.us). if you have any questions.
ATTACHMENT A: Sub-area Map with text from Jefferson/Far West Refinement Plan
cc: Eugene Planning. Commission
Page 4 of 4
c
ca
-
A.
..
C
~
E
~
c
.-
....
~
~
..
en
~
3=
~ ..
c ca
~LI.
en..........
~ c
w 0
....~
o ~
~=
.- ~
u.,
ca
!
c(
a;
;:
c
CD
"
.;)
CD
D::
~
....,
.;)
c
CD
C
I
E
~
:s
CD
:E
o
....,
~&
o .5
...I"
ItS .5
~LL
Attachment 'A'
U) ~
~ 2 g> co (J) -c
...... :J C co 'c c ..c _ n, 5
- .- E 0 0 ...... .... 'I' \U
'5 co (J) .- N 'w (J) (5 :5 ..c
.c+:iL..X (J)U)~ 0)'1-0
U) C co e co c ~ 5:> 0 "L..
(J) (J) U) e. +:i 0 0 U) co s...: C :J
!:; ~ ~ e. 'c N L.. ~ 0 0 ..c
~ U) :J co .- a.. - -c 0 .- 0
g ~ 1) .~ ~ ~ (ij ~ fij ~ g. ~
..b (J) 2 co . ~ U) +:i ...... 0 c -c 0
_U) :5 ~ ~ U) en c...... 'c 0 co U)
VI - - (J) (J) c == 0 (J) (J)
:m 0 ~ co :m:JtT:g (J)E 0 (J) ..c -c
(J) _ V I 1ft U) ...... :J
5j C .c ..c Q) (J) (J) ~ ~~ (J) 0 (3
-c(J)(J)...... -co::::O::::E 'I'..c......c
'w ~ ~ .~ 'w. Q. E ~ ~ .Q '0
~~~~ ~~0::::8 goa.~
~ 0 (J) 'iii ~ ~ "5 ~ 'n; ~ i :
'E LO :5 (j) E .- \U 0 (J) (J) ...... (J)
co ~ 'I- 0 co ~ ~ (J) ro E .x~ ro
'+f JB 0 ro I.L 0 .E U) (J) t (J) U)
~ COc e. cb C)CO ~ cD..c [(J):.c
g> . ~ (J) (J) - c I.L 0 U) ...... > t-
.- x ~ 0) C) .- I (J) :J C co co .....:
U) 0 (J) co i~ 5 ~ .c n; := :5 ..c ex) 8
o a. e. CD "'~ N e. \U U) .- v ..c
e. LO > ~ co E ~ ~ 'x ~ -g 0) 0
~ <( M co I V :J 0 (J) (J) ..c co ~. U)
ro . "C (J) 0:::: 0) ~ (J) ~ 10 (5 O).~ ~
Egc~ -C~-c..cU)..c.cC(J)CO
. - 0) co ~ (J) (J) ~ ~ ...... ....;-. E 0 c
e.L.. ~ ~ s...: .- ~ ~ " ~ U) (J) L.. C n,
'-' . - co - E ...... +,.. (J) ~ 0 co 'I'
!l -c .~ [...; E CD .- -c 'w U) ro ~ .~ ~
U)ce.Q)Q)Q)"C-lQ)c::JEo"C'I'
'w CO ::J L.. ~ L.. C C\I 'c Q) - 0 L.. (j)
c~8oQ)u)::J~(J)-c:m-CTO-
o m 0 .~ L.. co -c "C::L C 0 5 C).~
o I co co ..c n\ 0 _ ;> Q) 0 _ C ..c
co ~ Q; E ::J co ~ ...... Q) .Q ~ of ... .- 0
(J)cc'l-tT(J)e.U)(J)L..U)o~5e
L..Q)~OU)L..e.Q).cOQ).cCONCO
COG);> coCOCOC) ~~..c -e.
U)~o-CI'-U)U)C(J)COcC)U)CO
.- .G (J) Q) C\I .- co co > (J) 0 .- Q) +:i Q)
~ ~ ro ~ ro ~ ~ i3 ~ ro z ~ ~ :~ 5
co .~ ~
~ c ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~
C .- -c C 's; U) -c
~ Q) .w co ~ 5 0 g>
.- U) Q) 0 ..c E 'M
U) co 0::: ...... (J) v,
p>(J) ......~-cE :J
- 0 cd 0 U) Q) 0 0
~ C Q) .(J) ..c L.. 0 ..c
.- .- L.. :is...... co 0 C)
~ C co ::J .~ ~ co C
Q)COQ)U)c-c(J) ti
V g>:5 -c".Q c ~ 'x
E .- 0 Q) 1) CO (ij Q)
.~ f6> L.. ~ C cl..c en Q)
-CL..Q)O::JcU)-..c
(J) ::J ...... = . c == U) co ...... en
Eo 0 co olE ~O'l-"""
ocoQ)ocQ)O)oc
o c ro .c .- = -c c Q)
...... (J) ..c -.~ .. co c 0 E
~'Q OCOC\l g>'Q co~en
o U) Q) ~ ~ .c ~ ~ ~ ~
- -c :5 c 0 .- :c c
co ~ C) ~ .9 J2 U) ~ co 'm
U) ...... c co C) e. ~ 0 ..c L..
co (J) 'c c ~ c e. Q) Q)
..,!. E . - L.. . - 0 :J L.. L.. ......
'-' coQ)co Q)Q)CO
(J) Q) ce.o - C)..c..c >
.~ L.. .- . U) N .c .~ ......0 ...... 'c
coco......Q)Q)U) Q)e.
0) 0.. E . C L.. C) ::J ..c C)-c
ox......::Jocoo~COc
~Q)Q)c :;..c~:;co
L.. = ~ Q) fij 0 0 ...... 0 0
(J) co ~...... - 0 ...... .2 0 ==
.c.c~"C Q.c U)q:: c.c
_U)U)c~Q)mcQ)::J
co~coo-oo_e.
..c .- Q) ~.Q (ij 0 0 (ij ..c
U)U-cQ).c..c<(c.c......
Q)(ij.c U).:= U) 0
CO..c +:i U) -c ~ co 0 ~.c
~ t- c .~ ~ ~ (J) c ~ ..c
co .~~eOrocOg>
.~ co .- c e. Q) U) Q) Q) 0
..c ~ U) Q) e...c . - ..c ..c L..
t-co~-ccot-:5~t-:5
c
co
a::.-
-0::
c<(
Q)c
E 0
~ Q)
,+=C>
Q) -
0::f3
- c
'" Q)
~~
>~
~ Q)
<<J ~
u.-
co
....... ~
c Q)
o c
.. '" Q)
"'~C)
~ ~ c:
:;] Q) co
o ..., E
"'C"'i-
Q) co Q)
1Um~
C~-
I I
fn
CD
:~
(5
a..
ATTACHMENT C
FY '06 Planning Division Work Program
Approved by City Council on July 27, 2005
On July 27,2005, the City Council approved the Planning Division Work Program for FY06. The
following table reflects the Council's action to articulate 'high priority items' for the Planning Division,
as well.as ongoing tasks, and other potential work tasks. Over this past year, the high priority items
have been used to determine the majority of the Planning Commission's agendas. Similarly, these high
priority items, along with other mandated responsibilities, help define the focus of the Planning Division
staff for the coming year.
HIGH PRIORITY
1 Mixed Use Centers ~
· Opportunity Siting: Primary strategy for achieving density targets in mixed
use centers. Combine opportunity siting with city-wide estimates of future
population which will be approximately allocated to mixed use districts and
other areas in the city.
· Advise staff, public, and prospective developers regarding previously master
planned nodes (Royal, Chase).
. Site specific planning.
. Chambers Reconsidered (provides localized infill standards).
· Public outreach, property owner collaboration, develop info materials.
. Code assessment and amendments, inc. /ND overlay.
. Zone changes
. Incentives and 'New Tools' for implementation.
. Identify infill tools which could be applied outside ofMUC's
. New zone that provides/requires master plan prior to significant development
in potential mixed use centers.
2 Minor amendments to Land Use Code ~
Since adoption of LUCU (Land Use Code Update), many major and minor
amendments have been identified by numerous stakeholders. Task includes
gathering all comments, prioritizing, and processing those that are considered to be
'minor'. Include review of medical facilities provisions.
3 Downtown & Courthouse associated projects
· Follow-up/implementation from the Courthouse District Concept Plan. Work
includes coordination with GSA and courthouse architect, meetings with
developers interested in area development, and technical expertise to other
staff (e.g., street improvements,).
. Downtown Zone - Phase 1 involves research and outreach to determine if new
or modified zone is appropriate for downtown area. Phase 2 will include code
adoption and rezoning of properties.
· Great Streets: Implement Downtown plan provisions by adopting special
desi standards or uidelines.
4 GoalS (Natural Resources) associated projects ~
. Eugene Goal 5 Process
o ESEE analysis (COMPLETED)
0 protection program (COMPLETEDl
0 Formal adoption and State Acknowledgement (PENDING)
. ESNSalmon Strategy Implementation Includes development of strategies and
adoption of implementation measures, oversight of several staff teams and
multiple products. (UNFUNDED)
. West Eugene Wetlands Plan policy issues (WEWP is complete, but requires
periodic updates and review)
. Goal 5: Update Goal 5 inventory/regulations to include Wildlife habitat in the
South Hills.
5 Emerging Issues (Funding/resources to be determined) Some,
a) River Road/Santa Clara Transition Project (PDD staff advisor for report to not all
explore financial feasibility, service provision, and possible transition of River
Road/Santa Clara area and potentially update existing Refinement Plan)
( ONGOING1;
b) Buildable Lands Supply issue (Commercial/Industrial study underwayl
c) Economic Development, Hospital & other major projects;
d) Civic Center (could also be included under 'downtown associated projects').
e) Bus Rapid Transit: Greater coordination with L TD/ PW and MU program
(Planning role currently unfunded)
6 Cell Tower Ordinance Update (Initial step done; City Attorney to provide scope of
workfor comprehensive update)
7 Investigate an alternate path review process parallel to the prescriptive code ~
(PC and Staff investigating options)
ONGOING
8 Implement Land Use Code ~
Process applications
9 Provide public information ~
Public Information Center staffing from 1 :00-5 :00 daily.
10 Vision Implementation Tools: Urban Renewal Plan Review
11 Implement Zucker Report (General Admin.) ~
. Training for staff
. Develop email file to distribute code interpretations
. Perform detailed analysis of planner case loads
. Improve PIC service time to 15 minutes
12 TransPlan implementation report
Provide report to state on TransPlan implementation.
13 GIS evaluation and coordination
Coordination with other divisions, PW and LCOG
14 Historic Program ~
. Administer SHPO Grant - Eugene is Certified Local Government.
. Staff Historic Review Board - HRB is a subcommittee of Planning
Commission.
. Process applications for all new historic properties and alterations.
. Complete River Road Historic Context Statement and Multiple Property
Submission to the National Register
. Complete 100 surveys for historic structures in River Road
15 Annexations
All annexations must be approved by City before Boundary Commission will accept.
16 University and community outreach ~
Includes subcommittee of Planning Commission, meets quarterly
17 Census
Respond to state and federal data needs, census, and population estimates.
18 Neighborhood Meetings
Attend neighborhood meetings upon request and available time to facilitate
discussion about Metro/Community Planning issues.
OTHER
19 Service provision/special districts issue (Lead by Central Services and CMO.
Investigate effects of shifting City services to county-wide special districts. Fire
district discussion leading the way on this);
20 Stormwater Development Stds.
21 South Hills Study: Update South Hills refinement plan to clarify regulations and ~
strengthen environmental protections.
22 Big Box ~
23 South University Historic District
24 Millrace
Work has focused on framing the possible Millrace options and ensuring that the
Millrace implications are considered in planning and transportation concepts
25 EWEB Master Plan
Exploring grants and other funding opportunities to create master plan for EWEB
properties. May require joint applications.
26 EWEB Service Extensions
Advise EWEB re future growth areas, facilities needs, land use coordination.
27 2050 Plan
Member of technical advisory team that supports Policy Team. Exploration of
regional growth strategy. Draft scenarios recently released for public review.
28 Park and Open Space Master Plan
Member of technical staff group charged with drafting comprehensive Parks,
Recreation, Open Space Plan. Project updates the 1989 plan. One year into
project, draft plan still & 3 months +/- away.
29 Willamette Greenway Updates
Staff advisor to LCOG.
30 Wellhead protection
Advisor when Springfield created regulations for wellhead protection. EWEB
now testing Willakenzie area for similar use of groundwater for back-up supply.
Could have large land use implications if groundwater pursued.
31 Conduct comprehensive review of the city's zoning map in conjunction with asset ~
mapping.
32 Deal with LUCU LUBA remand concerning Goal 9, Goal 10, and the Chapter 6 tree ~
prOVISIons
33 Refinement Plan Review & update - check for inconsistencies and obvious problems ~
in existing refinement plans.
Approved 7.27.05