Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance No. 20282 ORDINANCE NO. 2~)282 AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING THE CRESCENT AVENUE NODAL DEVELOPMENT AREA; AMENDING THE EUGENE-SPRiNGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN DI[AGRAM~ THE WILLAKENZIE AREA PLAN LAND USE DIAGRAM AND THE EUGENE OVERLAY ZONE MAP FOR THE INCORPORATED PORTION OF THE AREA; ADOPT[NG A SEVEI:~kBILI[TY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. The City- Council of the City of Eugene finds that: A, On September 10,2001, the City Council adopted Ordinance No~ 20234 that effected amendments to the transportation element of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) and related changes to the Plan text, and adopted revisions to TransPlan, a refinement plan to the Metro Plan. B, ]Included in the Metro Plan text amendments was the addition of a new section e~atitled "Nodal Development Area (Node)," and inclusion of "ND - Nodal Development" m the text for the Legend Block on the Metro Plan Diagram. C. The Metro Plan, in describing the Nodal Development Area Designation states that "[a]reas identified as nodal development areas in TransPlan are considered to have potential for this type of land use pattern.' Page II-E-4. TransPlan Map A1 identifies an area north and south of Crescent Av'enue as an area for nodal development. See area identified as 6D. D, The Eugene Planning Commission recommended, and on Februa~ 20, 2002 the Eugene C~ty Council approved revisions to the boundary of area 6D to include unincorporated property north of the City limits within the Crescent Avenue nodal development area. Chapter IV of the Metro Plan sets forth procedures for amendment of the Metro Plan, which for the City of Eugene are implemented by the provisions of Chapter 9 o£the Eugene Code, ~ 971 (EC). These proceedings have been initiated by the City of Eugene pursuant to procedures fbr amendment and refinement of the Metro Plan, which requires approval of the Eugene City Council for Type II Metro Plan diagram amendments located inside the incorporated city limits of Eugene. G, On October 18, 2002, notice of a joint public hearing to be held by the Eugene and Lane County planning commissions with maps depicting the proposed amendments was mailed to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development as required by ORS 197.610. No Ordinance- 1 comment was received in response to the notice. Notice of the public hearing was also mailed on November 1~ 2002 to property owners and occupants, to persons who requested notice and to Eugene neighborhood associations. On November 13, 2002, notice was mailed to property owT~ers within 300 feet of the area and notice was published in the Register-Guard. H. On Decernber 3, 2002, Eugene and Lane County planning comxrfissions held a~ioint public hearing on the proposed amendments and completed their recon~mendations following the public hearing~ The Eugene Planning Commission unanimously recommended (5:0) that the City Council approve the amendments to the Metro Plan diagram and concurrent automatic amendment to the Wil~akenzie Area Plan to depict the incorporated portion of the Crescent area as a nodal development area and approve the amendments to the Eugene Overlay Zone map, with strong reservations that this and all future nodes require a cm~rently unscheduled nodal ptmming process to make the goals of nodal development attainable and to make this development compatible with adjacent properties. On January 5, 2003, notice of the joint Eugene City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners public hearing was published in The Register-Guard and, on January 10, 2003~ notice o£the j oint public hearing was mailed to those who testified before the planning commissions or requested notice in writing and those who had requested to be placed on the interested parties list for the amendments. On January 22, 2003, the Eugene City Council conducted a joint public hearing with the Board of County Commissioners on these amendments and the Eugene City Council is now ready to take action. K. Evidence exists within the record and the findings attached hereto indicating that the proposal meets the requirements of Chapter 9 of the Eugene Code, 1971, and the requirements of applicable state and local law. NOW, THEREFORE THE CITY OF EUGENE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section L The Metro Plan diagram is amended to add the ND-Nodal Development designation to properties identified and described on Exhibit A attached hereto. The underlying designations for these properties shall remain unchanged. Section 2. Consistent with the provisions of EC 9.7750(4), the Willakenzie Area Plan land use diagram located between pages 19 and 20 of the Willakenzie Area Plan is automatically amended to apply the ND-Nodal Development designation as reflected in Exhibit A. Section 3. The Eugene Overlay Zone Map is amended to add the/ND Nodal Development overlay zone as reflected in Exhibit B. Ordinance ~ 2 Section 4. The above findings, and the Legislative Findings set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto serve as findings in support of this Ordinance~ but are not adopted. Section 5.. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is fbr any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions thereof. Section 6. Notwithstanding the effective date of ordinances as provided in the Eugene Cha-rter of 2©02, this Ordinance shall become effective 30 days from the date of its passage by the City Council amd approval by the Mayor, or upon the date of its acknowledgment as provided by ORS 197.625, whichever date is later. Passed by the City Council this Approved by the Mayor this 24th day of February~ 2003 Deputy* City Recorder day of Februar3~, 2003 Mayor Ordinance - 3 Exhibit A Crescent Avenue Nodal Development Area Metro Plan Diagram Amendments Incorporated Properties Subject to Addition of ND- Nodal Development Designation Map and Tax Lot Number 17-03-16~21, Lot 100 17~03-16-23~ Lot 4000 17-03-16-23, Lot 4100 17-03-16~23, Lot 4200 17-03~ 16-23, Lot 4700 17~03-16-23, Lot 4501 17-03-16~23, Lot 4900 17-03-t6-23, Lot 5000 17~03-t6-23~ Lot 5100 17-03-16-23~ Lot 5200 17-0346~23, Lot 5300 17-0346-24, Lot 2200 17~0346~31~ Lot 100 17-03-16-31, Lot 501 17-03-16~31, Lot 502 17-03d6~31, Lot 503 17-03-16-32, Lot 1100 17~0346~32, Lot 1200 Ex~h~bit A ~ 1 ~Add ND Nodal Development Symbol (Incorporated Area) Crescent Nodal Development Area Exhibit B Crescent Avenue Nodal Development Area Zone Change Incorporated Properties Su~ ect to Addition of/ND Nodal_ Development Overlay Zone and Tax Lo Numb ............... Current Zoning Proposed Zoning 00' I%034 6-23, Lot 4000 1%034 6-23, Lot 4100 17-034 6-23, Lot 4200 R-2/PD R-t R-1 R-2/PD/~D R4/ND R4[ND R4/ND 17-0346-23, Lot 4700 1%0346-23, Lot 4501 17-0346-23, Lot 4900 17-03-16~23. Lot 5000 t %03~ 16-23. Lot 5100 1%03-16-23, Lot 5200 I7-03~16-23, Lot 5300 1%03-16-24, Lot 2200 1%03-16-31. Lot 100 1%0346~31, Lot 501 17-03~16-31, Lot 502 17-03-16~31. Lot 503 1%03-16-32, Lot 1100 17-03-16-32, Lot 1200 GO/SR C-2/SR C4/SR C-1/SR C~ 1/SR C-1/SR C-1/SR R-4 R-2/PD Lt/SR L1/SR L1/SR GO/SR/ND C-2./SR[ND C-1/SR C-i/SR Exhi-bit B ~ 1 Crescent Avenue Noda~ Development Area . Eugene Overlay Zone Map Amendments (Z 02 12) :Area ~ncorporated Area) Exh~bR C Findings of Consistency of Crescent Avenue Nodal Development Amendments with Metro PLan Amendment and Zone Chang~ Criteria The Eugene City COuncil Mil apply the following criteria from Eugene Code Section 9.7730(3) to the prOPosed Metro Plan amendment: (a) The amendment must be consistent x~4th the relevant statewide planning goals adopted by the Land conserVatiOn and Development Comm/ssion; and (b) Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. sol C_ousistenc~..~i..~h ~Metr_____~.P!..an Amendment.Crt The amendment must be consistent with the relevant statew4de planning goals adopted by the Land Conservation and Development CommissiOn. Goal 1 - CR4~zen Involvement: To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the °PPortunityjbr citizens to be involved in ail phases °f the planning process. The City has acknowledged provisions for citizen involvement Which insure the opportuni~ for ck~zens to be involved ~ all phases of the planning process and set out requirements for such invOlVement. The action taken did not amend the citizen involvement program. The process for adopting these amendments complied Mth Goal 1 since k complied Mth~ and surpassed the requirements of, the ckizen involvement provisions. The Metro Plan amendment apPlication is subject to the public notification and hearing processes adopted by the City of Eugene in EC 9~7720 a-nd 9.7735, as modified by the Eugene Cit~~ coUncil for ~s C;unciMvitiated ~endrnent under EC 9.7750(t), and in EC 917520. On October 18, 2002, notice of a joint public hearing to be held by the Eugene and Lane CoUnty Planning commissions wSth maps depicting the proposed amendments was mailed to the Oregon Dep ent of Land ConserVation and DeveloPment as required by ORS I97.610. No cogent was received in response to the notice. On November 1, 2002, notice of the public hearing Was mailed to property o~mers and occupants, to persons x~;ho requested notice and to Eugene ne~ghbOrh°od associations. On November 13, 2002, notice was mailed to properVy o~vners witch 300 feet of the area and notice was published in The Register-Guard. On December 2002, the Eugene and Lane County planning commissions helc~ a joim public hearing on the proposed amendments and comPleted their recorrmaendations followSng the public hearing. Ex,bit C - 1 On December 31~ 2002~ notice of the public heating on the ordinance amendk~g the Eugene OVerlay Zone Map was mailed to the °x~mer of each lot proposed for rez°ning ~s requi~ed by ORS 227.286(4). On January' 6, 2003, notice of the joint Eugene City Conn~il and Lane C~unty Board of Commissioners public heating was published in The Register-Guard and, on January 10, 2003, notice of the joint public hearing was ma/led to those who testified befbre the planning commissions or requested notice in writing and those who had requested to be placed °r~ the intereSted parties list for these amendments. On January' 22, 2003, the elected officials held ajok~t public hearing to Consider approval, modificafiOn~ or denial of the amendment. These processes afford ampie opportu~ty for citizen inVolvemem consistent with Goal 1. TherefOre, the amendments are c0nsist~nt witl~ Statewide Plannkng Goal 1. Goal 2 ~ Land Use Planning: To establish a land use planning process andpolicy pamework as a basis for all decisions and actions related to uJ-e of land and io as~sure an adequate factual baSe for such decisions and actions, The record shows that there is Conservation Goal 2 Exceptions Goal 3 - Agricultural Land: To preserve and maintain agricultural lands. The amendments are tbr property located within the city limits and do not affect any land designated for agricultural u~e. Therefore, Goal 3 is n(~ applicable or relevant to t~e amendments~ Goal 4 - Forest Land: 7b conserve forest lands by maintaining the forest land base and to Protect the state's fbrest economy by making po'ssibIe econ°~iC al~y efficient forest pr-actices that assure the continu°~s ~rowing a~d harvesting °f fOres't t~-ee spe~}es as the leading use on foreSt land consstent ~with s;'und management ~¢'soil, air, w-ater, and fish and wildlife re'sources and to providefbr recreational -opportunities and agriculture. The amendments are for property located Mthin the ciD' lirrfits and do not affect any land deSignated for forest use. There~bre, Goal 4 is not applicdt>le or relevant, to the amendments. E~bit C - 2 Goal 5 - Open Spaces~ Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources: To conserve open space and protect natural and scenic resources. These amendments do not create or ~xnend the area's list of Goal 5 re~ur,~r ~-,~,~ ~o .~, .~.~.~n. ~- code prov~s]on adopted ~n order to protect a sig~fic~t Goal 5 reso-~ce or to ~a~;~} sp~cific requirements of G~~ 5, do not allow new uses that could be conflicting uses wire a s~fic~t Goal 5 reso~ce site ~d do not mend me ac~owledged UGB. There~ore~ Goal 5 do;s not app¢. Goal 6 - A~r, Water and Land ResourcesQnali~.. J~ mainta'm and improve the quailS, of the air, Water and land resources ~f the state. The regulations ~br the Nodal Development overlay zone implement ~e nodal development conce~t; ~ approach to ~ntegration o~ l~d use an~ transpon~tion pla~ing that seeks to increase the uS} of ak~atNe modes of transpo~ation ~d reduce dem~d ~br automobile-related ~spo~ation facilities. Increasing the Use of alternative modes of ~spo~ation wSll help ~o improve regional ~d local air qualiD~. Therefore, the amen~ents ~e consistent ~th G~al 6. Goal 7 - Areas S~bject to Natural Disasters and Hazards: To protect ~ and propertyj~kom natural disasters and hazards. areas of natural d~s~ters or h~ds. %e site is StO~S can ~e consistent Mth StateMde Piing GoM 7. Goal 8 - Recreational Needs: 7b satis~ the recrea~onal needs of the citizens of the state and visitors an~ where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts. Goa~ 8 ensures provision of recreation facilities to ~e cifize~ of the state. The proposed designation ~11 not impact provision of recreation facilities. Access to recreation ~PPo~ities, inclUdMg a ~t~e Ci~~ park located i~ediately west of ~d caS~ ~11 not be ~ffeCted as a result of~e proposed amendment. ~erefore, the amen~ents are consistent Mth State,fide Plmming GoA 8. Goal 9 - Economic Development: To provide adequate opportunities throughout t~Se state~/br a varie~ of economic activities vital to the health, web~are~ and pro~eri~ of Oregon ~ citizens. Ex~h]bit C - 3 property or nodal development fbr a variety been approved for development of the Nodal Development designation planning Goal 9~ Goal 10 ~ Ilousing: To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. or property lands supply and · Goal 11 ~ PubI~c Facilities and Sera, ices: Toplan and develop a timely, orderly and e~fficient arrangement of public,facil#ies and services to serve bs a fi~amewor&f~r Urban and rural dev~lOpmentl The ~ea affected by tkfis ord~n~ce ~s locmed in ~e city limits ~d se~ed by public fhc~lifies ha Whch the ex, stag level of se~ice is adequate to se~e ~e needs of ex~sfing and ~mre development. ~erefore~ the mendments ~e consistent wkh StateMde plar~g Goal tt. Goa 12 Tra~sportatmm To prowde and encourage a safe, convement and economic transportation ~¢em. Goal 12 is implemented through the Tr~Po~ation Pl~ng Rule (TP~ O~ 660-12). The Eugene-SPr~gfield Me2oPol~tan ~ea Transpo~fion PI~ (Tr~sPl~) provides the regional policy ~mework t~ough whiCh me TPR ~s ;nacted at me 1;cal level. ~he addition of ~e "ND Nodal Development Metro PI~ Di~rm designation implements policy direction in the TransP1an. ac~owledged for compl]~nce M~ ~oal 12 in 200i. Tr~sPlan L~d Use Policies 1 ~d 5, which were also adopted as Me2o PI~ Tr~spo~afion P°lic~es F-1 ~d F-5~ spec~fic~ly relate m nodal development ~d are listed below ~5~ findings foll°wSng each: Land Uxe Policy J: Apply, the no&[ development statutes, in areas selected by each jurisdicaon that have i~ent~ed potential f~;'this tYPe e~;ran~portaaon ~ffici~nt [and E~bit C - 4 p~[tern. TransPlan identifies the area within w?fich the subject parcels are located as having potential for nodal development (Node 6D). In FebrUary 2002, the Eugene City council selec~}~ node v~th rewsed boundaries as recommended by the Eugene Planning Commission and renamed as one of eight neW nodes~ in addition to the Royal Avenue and Chase it wanted to designate and zone for nodal development in /ND Nodal Development Overlay' Zone to the Crescent nodal The Metro Plan amendment facilitates the application of the nodal strategy outlined in the policy above and the Cky is further encouraging nodal ir~ tiffs area by applying ~he MD nodal development overlay zone t0 in~;rporated the node. Land Use Policy 5: ~thin three years of TransPlan adoption, apply the ND, Nodal Development d~signation to area~s selected by eachjuriS~tiction, a-d[2pt and apply measures to prote~t designated no&s from iJ, c°mpatible development and a-dfo~t a schedule for completiOn of nodal devei°PmentP lans and imPlefnenting ordinances. The amendments specifically addresses this policy by applying the ND, Nodal Development Metro Plan diagram desigrmtion and the ~1~ Nodal DeTeelopment overlay zone to inCOrporated parcels wkh/n ~ area seibcted by the City of EUgene as a phor ty nodal ~eVetopment ~ea. The /ND Nodal Development overlaY zone w41I be apPlied to the currently uninco~orated portion of the Crescent AVenue nodal development area as that property is annexed to the City. The City of Eugene has adopted the/ND Nodal Development overlay zone to protect desi~ated Land Use Policy 5 and the all new structures on already on or ' of 8 upAts per net acre in acre in R~ 25 urfits/acre), thereby encouraging loyment and retail activity that is essential for the development Exhibit C - 5 of the node. The floor area ratios for commercial and industrial development are intended to aC~eve the employment density assumed in the TransPlan modeling (~9 employees/acre). Trarisportation Planrfing Rule (OAR_ 660-012-0060) contains the following requirement: Amendments to functional plans, acknowledged comprehensive plans, and land use regulations which significantly affect- a tranSportation facility s,halt assure that allowed land uses are consis[eh} with the ident~ed f~nc~on, C~aci& and peCrmance standards ¢.g. level of se~ice, volume to Capaci~ rati;, et~.) of t~e f~ciliV, mS shall be accomplshe~ by eithJr: (a) Limiting allowed land uses m be consistent with the planned fimction, capacity, andpe~formance smn&rds of the ~anspormtion fa~ili¢,; ~) Amending the TSP to provide ~ansportation facilities adequate to support the proposed land uses consistent with the requirements of this division; (~) Altering [and USe designations, densities, or design requirements W reduce demand fi.,r automobde t%veZ and meet ~avel n~eds t~rough other modes; or (d) Amending the rsv to modify the plann e d fi~nction' capaei~, and performance smn&r&; as needeg W accept ~eater moWr vehic[~ congestion w promote mixed use, pedes~ianpiendl}, ~velopment where multimo&[ tr~el choices are provide~ plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation fi~c#ity ~£ it: (a) Changes the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facili02; ~) Changes standards implemen~ng a~nctiona[ class~cation .~ystem; (c) Allows O~es or levels qf land uses which wouM result in levels of travel or access which are inconsistent with the functional class~cation ora transportation facility; or (d) t,[%uM reduce the pe(formance standards of the Jgcility below the minimum uses. provide commercial and industrial Exhibit C - 6 In the Eugene A~erial and Collector Street Plan, Coburg Road is classified as a Major Arterial up to Crescent Avenue and as a Minor Arterial north of Crescent Avenue. Crescent Averme is classified as a Minor Arterial. No change in the functional classification of these streets will result bom this amendment. In addifion~ no changes are proposed to the standards which implement the fimctional classification system~ the Lane Cotmcil of Governments (LCOG) conducted modeling using t~ntial Nodal Development to for nodal development implementation. The updated model adding the one hi~h-priori¢ node in Eugene that was not use with /ND riot ~ Based on the findings above and these model results, the proposed amendments to apply the ND Nodal Development Metro Plan diagram designation and to apply the/ND Nodal D;¢elopment overlay zone to the portion of the node within the City limits will not significantly affect ~ tranSportation facility. Based on these factors, the mmendments are in c0mPtianc~ with OAR 660-012~0060. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 12~ Goal 13- Ener~T Conservation: To conserve energy. Goal 13 maxim-mn extent possible, combine to achieve of intent. As noted sty Goal t3~ l~;xltibit C ~ 7 Goa 14 - Urbamzatmn. To prowde for an order[)~ and e',ffitc~ent transttion fr'om rural to urban land use. For all of the properties affected by this ordinance, all necessary urban services are in place. Therefore~ the amendments are consistent With Statewide planning Goal 14. Goal 15 - Willame~e l~3ver Greenway: To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natura[, scenic, historical, agricultural, economic and recreational qualities of lands along the I~rillamette River ~ the I¥i[[amette River Greenway. The sub~ect sites are not wSthin the Willamette River Greemvay. Therefore, this goal is not relevant and the amendment Mil not affect Metro Plan compl~mce Mth Goal 151 Goals 16 through 19 (Estuarine Resouxces, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean Resources): There are no coastal, ocean, esmafine, or beach and dune resources related to the property or hwolved ~n the amendment. Therefore~ these goals are not relevant and the amen~lm~nts will not affect Metro Plan compliance with Goals 16 through 19. address potential nodal state. Metro Plan is consistent with (b) EC %7730(3)(b) Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. parcels for a vafievy of land uses. The Use Diagram does not affect these base land use designation. C-8 consistent with the Metro Plan. that the proposed G~ven these findings and the fact that no modification to the Metro Plan tex~ is necessary or proposed, the proposed amendment -will not make the Metr° Plan internally inconsistent~ Concurrent Automatic Amendment to Willakenzie Area Plan Diagram Eugene Code Section 9.7750(4) pro-~ddes that the Metro Plan diagram amendment automatically amends the refinement plan diagram if no amendment to the refinement plan text is involved. No amendment to the text of the Witlake~ie Area Plan is proposed in these amendments. Adoption of these Metro Plan diagram amendments, therefbre, automatically amends the Willakenzie Area Plan diagram~ Change Criteria.' EC %88~5(1): The proposed change is consistent w~th applicable provisions of the Me~ro Plan d~agram where apparen~ conflicts or ~ncOns~stene~es ex,st. The proposed ZOne ch~ge ~s consistent ~Sth both the Me~o Plan L~d Use Diagrm and text as deschb~d below: The Metro Plan Diatom designates ~e subject p~cels ~r medb~ and Ngh density residential, com~erq~ and campus ~ndustfial develOPment. The establis~em of the ND No~al Development Designation on the Me~o P1~ L~d USe Diagrm w~ll not Change those desi~m~ions. Me~o EC 9A290(1)(~),/ND Overlay Zone, requires a mNimmm de~ity of 15 urfits per net acre for ~e R-2 zone, 25 ~its per net acre for R-3, ~d 30 ~its per net acre for R-4. These mi~ densi~' requiremems ~e consistent Mth ~e Medim Density Residenfi~ desi~ation in the Me~o PI~ which specifies a density r~ge of 10-20 uNts per acre, ~d ~e High Densi~ Residemial designation wtfich specifies ~ density range of over 20 ~5ts per ac}e. The foll Metro PI~ policies ~e applicable to the proposed zone ch~ge: Me~o Plan Element & Policy A. 11 spec~cally states: Ge~eratly ~ocate higher densi~ residential development near employment or commercia[ service& in proximio~ to major transportation systems or within ~-ansportation-efficie~t nodes (Ch. III-A, as amended 1999). Exhibit C - 9 res the above policy by allow4ng an increased level of Chad Drive which provides prox~ity of the subject parcel to Metro Plan Element A, Policy A. 17 states: Provide opportunities for a full range of choice in housing type, density, size, cost and location. The establishment of the/ND overlay zone will provide additional implementation tools which prOmOte development patterns offering a variet~~ of housing tyPes and development patterns. Metro Plan Element A, Policy A.35 states: Coordinate local residential land use and housing planning with other elements of this plan, including public facilities and services, and other local plans, to ensure comdStenc3 among policies. The application of the/ND overlay zone is itself, an acknowledgment that the subjeCt sites should be developed in a mariner which more efficiently utilizes the existing infrastructure and services in the area. The subject properties were identified as sites which possess these characteristics. The proposed zone ~hange Will therefore help to achieve this policy. Metro Plan Element F, Policy F. 1 states: Apply the nodal development strate~ in areas selected by each jurisdiction that have identi~qed potential for this 05~e of transportation efficient land Use pattern. The Exhibit C - 10 in FY03. In March Metro Plan diagram outlined , is further encouraging nodal development in this area by ~ zone to incorporated property within the node, Metro Plan Element F, Policy F.5 states: ~'~thin three years of ZransPlan adoption, apply the ND, Nodal Development designation to areas selected by eachjurisdictio~, adopt ~.d apply measures to protect desi~ted nodespom incom)atible develOpment an~ adopt a sc}edule for completion qf nodal The amen~ ~ms specifically addresses ~is policy bY applying the ND~ Nod~ Developmem ~4~o p~ ~ ~g~ de~g.~t~o~ and the m~ Noda~ Ve¢e~opme~t o~e~y Zone to ~n~;mor~ted parcels w~~ m ~ea selected by the City of Eugene as a priority no&l developmem area. Under ~he Me~o PI ~, a~exafion is ~equired prior ~o ~ew dev~lopmem. The ~D ~'od~ Development oVer~ay Zone ~ be applied to t~e cu~nt~y minco¢orat~h pon~on of the Crescent noda~ developmem ~ea as that Prope~y ~s ~ex~d to ~e ~ity. R~e, of 30% or Land Use Policy 5 and the be occupied by retail uses. zone. of an existing stracture for land zoned commercial and apply in addition to the requirements of the base acre in net acre in R-2; 25 units per net acre in R- de~mifies in the residential densities assumed in the TransPlan encouraging that is essential for the development Therefore, the proposed zone change wStl be consistent w~th applicable provisions of the Metro EC %8865(2): The proposed zone change is consistent wRh applicable adopted refinement plans. In the event of inconsistencies between these plans and the ~{~ro Plan~ the M~tro Plan controls. The Willakenz~e Area Plan is the applicable refinement plan for this area. The base zoning Exhibit C - t 1 districts of the subject properties coincide with the plan's land use diagram designations. Application~ of the/ND overlay zone on these properties supports the plan's land use designations. There are no policies that directly relate to the nodal development concept. The;~fore, the addition of tile/ND overlay zon; is consistent with the Willakenzie Are~ Plan. EC 9,8865(3): The uses and density that will be allowed by the proposed zoning in the location ;f the proposed chang; can be served througti the oCde;ly extensio~ of key urban facilities and services. All utility services (water, sewer and electricity) are currently available to the subject sites. Wastewater serwice is currently available to serve the Properties wa an 8 line in Grand Cayman~ a 15" line in Crescent~ and an 8" line in Coburg Road ~vh~re it terminates South of Kinney Loop. storm water systems are also provided in Or along these streets. Water and electrical ser~dce, telephone and other utilities are also provided. T~e City also ovms an 8.24 acre park site ~ Lane Fire, EMS and police ~ available ~o extension of said process. Based on these factors, the EC %8865(4): The proposed zone change is consistent with the applicable siting requirements set on~ for the specific zone m..~ · There are no specific siting requirements ~br the/ND Nodal Development overlay zone. C %8865(5); In eases where the NR zone ~s apphed based on EC %2510(3), the prope~ owner shall enter into a contractual agreement w~m ~he ci~ to e~ure the area ~s mainta~ed as a natural resource area for a minimum of 50 ~ears. TMs application is not proposing application of the NR, Nat~al Reso~ce zone to the subject prope~'. As such~ tMs criterion d0~s not app¢. Exhibit C - 12