HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance No. 20251
CITY OF EUGENE
INTER-DEPARTMENTAL MEMORANDUM
CITY ATTORNEY - CIVIL DEPARTMENT
To: Kate Fieland, City Recorder Date: June 12, 2002
Subject: Scrivener Error Correction to Ordinance 20251
Aaa error in the lead-in sentence of Section 2 of Ordinance No. 20251 has been brought to oar
attention. The sentence reads: "Subsection (2) of Section 9.8440 of the Eugene Code, 1971, is
amended to provide:". Since the intent was to amend only Subsection (2)(a) of Section 9.8440,
leaving subparagraphs (b), (c), (d), and (e) intact, the reference should have been to "Subsection
We concur that this was a scrivener error, and pursuant to the authority' of Section 5 of
Ordinance 20251 you are authorized to make the corrections noted to EC 9.8440(2)(a), and to leave
in the Code subparagraphs (2)(b), (c), (d), and (e) as they currently appear.
Please append this memo to the original of Ordinance No. 20251 to reflect the lead-in
sentence of Section 2 of the Ordinance is administratively corrected to read: "Subsection (2)(a) of
Section 9.8440 of the Eugene Code, 1971 is amended to provide:".
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
HARRANG LONG GARY RLTDNICK, P.C.
CITY ATTORNEYS
Emily N~'rome
ENJ:jw
ORDINANCE NO. 20251
AN @RDtNANCE c@NcE~ING LAND USE ~GULATIONS, AMENDING
SECTIONS %8320 AND 9.8440 OF THE EUGENE CODE, 197i; PROVIDING
A SEVE~BiLITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that:
A, On February 26, 2001 Ordinance No. 20224 was passed by the Cky Council and
approved by the Mayor, adopting a new land use code for the City (Chapter 9 of the Eugene Code,
1971). Section 7 of that Ordinance was subsequently amended on May 29~ 2001 by Ordinance No~
20229 to provide an effective date of August 1,2001 for Ordinance No. 20224. Some corrections
and minor amendments to some provisions of Chapter 9 were effected by Ordinance No. 20235
pasSed bY the City Council and approved by the Mayor on October 8,2001 and Ordinance No. 20238
paSSed by the City Comacil and approved by the Mayor on December 10, 2001.
B. The adoption of Ordinance No. 20224 was appealed to the Land Use Board of
ApPeals (LUBA) on March 19, 2001. On February 28, 2002, LUBA issued its decision remanding
the adoPtion of Ordinance 20224 back to the City. LUBA's remand of the new land use code was
based on its dete~6nations that: l) some sections contain standards or criteria for "needed housing"
apPliCatiOns bm are not "clear and objective," 2) some sections decrease or increase the level of
protection fb~ areas on the City's acknowledged goal 5 inventory but the City has not yet shown that
those chSaqges are consistent with State-wide Planning Goal Five; and 3) some sections could decrease
the City's supply of commercial, industrial or residential land but the City has not yet shown that
those sections are consistent with State-wide Planning Goals Nine or Ten. The effect of LUBA's
remand is to render Ordinance 20224 ineffective.
Ordinance- 1
]In response to LUBA~ s remand, the City will be adopting a series of ordinances which
address issues raised by the LUBA remand. Together, the ordinances will result in the readoption
of the provisions of Ordinances No. 20224.20235, and 20238 with deletions and changes necessary
to comply with LUBA's ruling and the reinstatement of some provisions from the old
(acknowledged) land use code to fill in regulatory gaps caused by such deletions.
The City held a public hearing on April 8~ 2002 to receive comments on the
ordinances (Ordinance 1 · Ordinance 2 and Ordinance 3 [this ordinancel ). Notice of this public
hearing was mailed to the parties of the LUBA appeal. Testimony was accepted from anyone, but
was limited to those issues on remand from LUBA~ These three ordinances are to be the first three
in the series of ordinances described in Recital C. This Ordinance simply carried forward provisions
from the City's existing, acknowledged land use code in order to fill ~n regulatory gaps left by
deletions or limitations necessitated by LUBA's reman&
Now, therefore~
THE CITY OF EUGENE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1~ Subsection (4)(a) of Section 9.8320 of the Eugene Code, 1971 is amended to
provide:
%8320
Tentative Planned Unit De--merit Approval Criteria- General. The hearings
official shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a tentative PUD application
with findings and conclusions. Decisions approving an application, or approving 'with
conditions shall be based on compliance with the following criteria:
(4)
The PUD is designed and sited to minimize impacts to the natural environment
by addressing the following:
(a) Protection of Natural Features.
For areas not included on the City's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory,
the preservation of significant natural features to the greatest degree
attainable or feasible, including:
Ordinance - 2
a. Sigrfificanr on-site vegetation, including rare plants (those that
are proposed for listing or are listed under State or Federal
law)~ and native plant communities.
b. All documented habitat for all rare animal species (those that
are proposed for listing or are listed under State or Federal
law).
?rominent topographic features, such as ridgelines and rock
outcrops.
d. Wett ands~ intermittent and perennial stream corridors, and
riparian areas.
Natural resource areas designated in the Metro Plan diagram as
'~Namral Resource" and areas identified in any city-adopted
natural resource inventory.
For areas included on the City's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory:
a. The proposed development's general design and
character, including but not limited to anticipated
building locations~ bulk and height, location sand
distribution of recreation space, parking, roads,
access and other uses, will:
(1)Avoid unnecessary disruption or removal of
attractive natmal features and vegetation, and
(2) Avoid conversion of natural resource areas
designated in the Metropolitan Area General
Plan to urban uses when alternative locations
on the property are suitable for development
as otherwise permitted.
b. Proposed buildings, road, and other uses are
designed and sited to assure preservation of
significant on-site vegetation, topographic features,
and other unique and worthwhile natural features,
and to prevent soil erosion or flood hazard.
Section 2. Subsection (2) of Section 9.8440 of the Eugene Code, 1971, is amended to
provide:
9.844t}
Site Review Ap_p_roval Criteria- General. The platming director shall approve,
conditionally approve, or deny the site review application. Approval or conditional
approval shall be based on compliance with the following criteria:
(2)
Proposed lots, buildings, streets, parking lots, recreation areas, and other
proposed uses are designed and sited to minimize impacts to the natural
environment by addressing the following:
Ordinance - 3
(a)
Protection of Natural Features.
1. For areas not included on the City's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory,
the preservation of significant natural features to the greatest degree
attainable or feasibles including:
a. Significant on-site vegetation, including rare plants (those that
are proposed for listing or are listed under State or Federal
law), and native plant communities.
b. All documented habitat for all rare animal species (those that
are proposed for listing or are listed under State or Federal
law).
c. Prominent topographic features, such as ridgelines and rock
outcrops.
d. Wetlands, intermittent and perennial stream corridors, and
riparian areas.
e. Natural resource areas designated in the Me_tro Plan diagram as
"Natural Resource" and areas identified in any city-adopted
natural resource inventory.
For areas included on the City's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory' the
applicant shall show that it has given due consideration to the
preservation of attractive and distinctive historical and natural
features.
Section 3. That the matters contained herein concern the public health, welfare and safety,
and there~bre~ an emergency is hereby declared to exist, and upon its passage by an affirmative vote
of two~thirds of all members of the City Council and approval by the Mayor, this Ordinance shall
become effective on the date of its acknowledgment as provided by ORS 197.625. or the effective
date of Ordinance No. 20249, -whichever is later.
Section 4, If any section, subsection, sentence, clanse, phrase or portion of this Ordinance
is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent j urisdiction, such portion
shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affbct the
validity of the remaining portions hereof.
Section 5~ The City Recorder, at the request of, or with the concurrence of the City Attorney~
~s authorized to administratively correct any reference errors contained herein or in other provisions
Ordinance - 4
of the Eugene Code, 1971, to the provisions added, amended or repealed herein.
Passed by the City Conncil this
8th day of May, 2002
Cit)- Recorder
Approved by the Mayor this
8th day of May, 2002
Ordinance - 5