Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance No. 20283 ORDINANCE NO. 20283 AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING THE CRESCENT AVENUE NODAL DEVEL@PMENT APdgA; AMENDING THE EUGENE~SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN DIAGRAM AND THE WILLAKENZIE AREA PLAN LAND USE DIAGRAM FOR THE UNINCO~ORATED PORTION OF THE AREA; ADOPTING A SEVERABILIT¥ 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. Included in the Metro Plan text amendments was the addition of a new section entitled "Nodal Development Area (Node)," and inclusion of"ND - Nodal Development" to the text for the Legend Block onthe Metro Plan Diagram. C. The Metro Plan, in describing the Nodal Development Area Designation states that "Ia]teas ~dentified as nodal development areas in TransPtan are considered to have potential fbr this type of land use pattern." Page II-E-4. TransPlan Map A1 identifies an area north and south of Crescent Avenue as an area for nodal development. See area identified as 6D. The Eugene Planning Commission recommended, and on February 20, 2002 the Eugene City Council approved revisions to the boundary of area 6D to include unincorporated property north of the City limits within the Crescent 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 of the Eugene Code, 1971 (EC). F. 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 and Lane County Board of Commissioners for Type II Metro Plan diagram amendments located between the ~ncorporated city limits of Eugene and the Plan boundary. 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 comment was received in response to the notice. Notice of the public hearing was also mailed on Ordinance 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 owners within 300 feet of the area and notice was published in the Register-Guard. H~ On December 3, 2002, Eugene and Lane County planning commissions held a joint public hearing on the proposed amendments and completed their recommendations following the public hearing. The Eugene Planning Co~ission unanimously recommended (5:0) that the City Council approve the amendments to the Metro Plan diagram and concurrent automatic amendment to the Wi!lakenzie Area Plan to depict the unincorporated portion of the Crescent area as a nodal development area, with strong reservations that this and all future nodes require a currently ur~scheduled nodal planning process to make the goals of nodal development attainable and to make th~s development compatible with adjacent properties. L On Jannary 5, 2003, notice of~he joint Eugene City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners public hearing was published in The Register-Guard and, on January 10, 2003, notice of the joint public hearing was mailed to those who testified before the planning commissions or requested notice in wrking 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 1= 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 9o7750(4), the Willakenzie Area Plan lar~d -use diag~m l°~ated between pages 19 and 20 ofthe Willakenzie Area Plan is automatically amended to apply the ND-Nodal DeveloPment designation as reflected in Exhibit A. S~cfion 3. The above findings, and the Legislative Findings set forth in Exhibit B attached hereto serve as findings in support of this Ordinance, but are not adopted. Seefion 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance Ordinance - 2 is for 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, Se~lion 5, Norhwithstanding the effective date of ordinances as provided in the Eugene Charter of 2002~ this Ordinance shall become effective 30 days from the date of its passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor, or upon the date of its acknowledgment as provided by ORS 197.625. whichever da~e is later, providing that by that date the Lane County Board of Commissioners has adopted an ordinance containing identical provisions to those described in sections 1 and 2 of this Ordinance. Passed by the City Council this Approved by the Mayor this 24th day of February, 2003 24th day of February, 2003 Ordinance ~ 3 Exhibit A Crescent Avenue Nodal Development Area Metro Plan Diagram Amendments Unincorporated Properties Subject to Addition of ND-Nodal Development Designation Map and Tax Lot Number Map 1%03d6~22, Lot 101 Map 17~03q6~22~ Lot 102 Map 17-03-16-22~ Lot 200 Map 17~03-16~22, Lot 300 Map 17-03d 6~22, Lot 400 Map 17~03-16-23~ Lot 100 Map 1%03-16-23, Lot 200 Map 17-03d6-23~ Lot 300 Map 17-03-16-23, Lot 400 Map 17~03d6-23, Lot 500 6-23, Lot 600 MapI7-03-16-22~L°t600 I Map17'03d6'23~L°t700 Lot 800 7-03-16-23~ Lot 900 Map 17-03,16-22, Lot900 [ Map 17-03-16-23, Lot 1000 ot -03-16-23, Lot 1100 ~ 17-03~16-22, Lot 1200 Map 17-03-16-23, Lot 1300 Map 17-03d6-22~ Lot 1201 Map t7-03~16-23~ Lot 1400 Map 17-03-16~22. Lot 1300 Map 17-03-16-23~ Lot 1500 Map 17-03d6-23, Lot 1600 Map 17-03-16-23~ Lot 1700 Map 1%03-16-23~. Lot 1800 Map 17-03-16-23, Lot 1900 Map and Tax Lot Number Map 17-03- i6-23, Lot 2200 Map 17-03-16-23, Lot 2300 Map 17-03-16-23, Lot 2400 Map 17~03-16-23, Lot 2500 Map 17-03d6-23, Lot 2600 Map Map 17-03-t6-23, Lot 3000 Map 1%03M6'23~ Lot 3200 , Lot 3300 Map 17-03d6-23, Lot 3400 Map Lot 3500 Map 17-03d6-23: Lot 3600 Map Map 17-03d6-23, Lot 3800 > 17~03-16-23~ Lot 3900 Map 17-03-16~23~ Exhibit A - 1 Crescent Avenue Nodai Development Area [~tro P~a? Diagra ~m and Wi~a~(enzie P~an Diagram Amendments (MA 0::2-9) AddND Development Symbol Nodal (Unincorporated Area) Crescent Nodal Development Area Exhibit B Findings of Consistency of Crescent Avenue Nodal Development Amendments w~th Metro Plan Amendment Cnten cThe Eugene City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners w41t apply the following riteria bom E~gene Code Section 9.7730(3) and Lane Code Section 12.225(2) to the propo;ed Metro Plan amendment: (a) The amendment must be consistent with the relevant statewide planning goals adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Connnission; and (b) Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally' inconsistem. Findings of n~y with M~ro PlanAm Criteria: (a) The amendment must be consistent with the relevant statewide planning goMs adopted by the Land Conse~ation and Development Commission. G~al 1 - Citizen Involvement: To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the °PPortuniry for citizens to be in¥olved in att phases of the Plannin~g process. The City has acknowledged provisions for c~tizen involvement which ~nsure the opportunity ~br citizens to be ~nvolved i~ all phaSes of the planning process and set out requirements for such involvement. The action taken did not mend the citizen involvement program. The process for adOpting these amendmems complied w4th Goal 1 since it complied wkh~ ~md surpassed the requkemems of, the citizen involvement provisions. The Metro Plan amendment application ~s subject to the public notification and hearing processes adopted by the C~ty (jf Eugene in E~ 9.7720 a~d 9.7735 and by Lane Count37 in Lane ~ode Section 12.23~, as modified the Eugene City Council for mis Counc~Mnifiat~d amendment under EC 9.7750(1), an~ in EC 9.7520. On October 18, 2002, notice of ajoint public hearing to be held 'by the Eugene.and Lane County pIann~ng commissions wkh maps depicting the proposed amendments was totaled to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development as required by ORS 197.610. No comment w~ received ~n response to the notice. On November I, 2002, notice of the public hearing was mailed to property owners and occupants, to persons who requested notice and to Eugene neighbor~)od as~oc~m~ons. On November 13, 2002, notice Was mailed to property o~¢ners within 300 feet of the area and notice was published in The Register~Guar& On December 3, 2002, the and Lane County planning corrmfissions held ajoint public hearing on the propOsed amendments and completed their recommendations following the public hearing. Exhibit B - 1 On January 6, 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 of the joi~t public hearing w~s mailed to those wl~0 testified before the planning commissions or requested notice in writing and those v,;h° had requested to be placed on the interested parties list for these amendments. On January 22, 2003, the elected officials held a joint public hearing to consider approval, modification, or denial of the arnendment. These processes affbrd ample opportunity for citizen involvement consistent with Goal 1. Therei~bre, the amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 1~ Goal 2 - Land Use Planning: To establish a land use planning process and policy pamewOrk as a basis~for all decisions and actions related to u~-e of land and-to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. requires. base to support this ordinance as Goal 2 plans be for Lane Transk and are no Goal 2 Excepfiom, Goal 3 - Agricultural Land: To preserve and maintain agric~dtural la~ds. The amendments are for prope~y located within the ~b~ gro~ bounda~' and do not aflkct ~Y land desigmated fbr agiCulmral use. ThereGre~ Goal 3 is not applicable or relev~1 to the Goal 4 - Forest L~d: To consem, e ~brest lands by maintaining the jbrest land base and to protect &e state s forest economy ~Y making possibIe econo~ical~l; e~Jcient forest practices that assure the continuous growing and harvesting oZibrest tree species as the leading Use °n fi2rest land c°nsiste~t ~ith sound management of soiL air, waWr, andfish and wildt~e re}o~rces and to provide fbr recreational ~pportimities and agriculture. The amen~ents are fbr prOpeay located Mthin the urb~ gro~h bound~~ and do not affect any land designated for forest use. Therefore, Goal 4 is not applicable or relevant to the mendments. Goal 5 - Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resonrces: To conseme open space a~d protect natural a~d scenic resources. Exhibit B - 2 These amendments do not create or amend the area's list of Goal 5 resources, do not atmend a code Provision adopted in order to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address speCific requirements of G(Jal 5, do not alto~ new use~ that could be conflicting uses with a significant G~al 5 resource site and do not amend the acknowledged UGB~ There~ore~ Goal 5 does not apply. Goal 6 ~ Air, Water and Land Resources Quality.' To maintain and improve the. quality of the alt; water and land resources of the xtate. The nodal develoPment concept is an approach to integration of land' tse and transportation planning that see~s to increase the use of alternative n~°des oftranspc Xation, and reduce demand ~or autOmobile-related transportation facilities. Increasing the use ;f ltemative modes of transpOrtatiOn wilt help t° i~prove regional and local air ~tualitw'. The refore, the amendments are consistent with Goal 6. Goal 7 - Areas Subject to Natural D~sasters and Hazards: To protect life and property pom natural disasters and hazards. The subject parcels ~ :e not located within known areas of natural disasters or hazards. ~e ske is outsic ! the 500-ye ~r flood zone and is not subject to hazards normally associated with steep slopes,, ~ldfims, or sunamis. Other hazards, such as e~quakes and severe wimer storms ~an be miti~ ~red at the ti 2e of development based on accepted building codes and build~ng teC~i~ :s. BaSed On these facts, the proposed design~ttion will n(~ result in development in areas n mally associated with natural disaster or fhe damage and loss of life normally associated therew ~ Therefore~ the amendments are Consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 7~ Goal 8 - Recreational Needs: To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the st'ate and visitors and Where appr°Pri~te, to provide for the siting of necessarY recreational facilities including destination resorts. Goal 8 ensures provision of recreation facilities to the citizens of the state. The proposed designation Mil not impact provision of recreation facilities. Access to recreatic~n opportunities, inClUding a future City' bark located immediately west of Grand Cayrnan, will not b~ ~ff~cted as a result of the proposed amendment. Therefore, the amendments ~re consistent with StateX~4de Planning Goal 8. Goal 9, Economic De, velopment: To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for, a variety of econo~ic activitiei-~ vital to the health, ~ve~fare, and pro~eriO/ of oreg° ~ s citizens. Application of the ND Nodal DeveloPment designation depicts an area as a nodal development area, but does not change the Underlying Metro Plan diagram designation for the proPerty' or aftbct the uses alloWed within the underlying designation. The unincorPorated portion of the Crescent AvenUe nodal development are~ ~;ludes one lot (approximate¢ 12,5~)0 square feet) designated on the Metro Plan c~iagram fOr commercial use. 2~t~ere are no lots within the Exhibit B - 3 m~incorporated portion of the Crescent Avenue area designated in the Metro Plan for industrial use. Tl~e applic~tion °fthe Nodal DeveloPment designation will have no direct impact on the existing commercially designated land. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with statewide Planning Goal 9. Goal 10 - Housing: To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. . area as a nodal development property or by two public agenc]es~ Eugene School District t~e residenfi~i bufldable lands no direct knpact on Goal 11 - Public Facilities and Services: To plan and develop a timel)6 orderly and efficient arrangement of pUblic facilities and services to serve as cframeWork f~r urban and rUral deve-lopment. ptann]ng Goal Goal 12 - Transportation: To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation ~3-~stem. Goal 12 in 2001. TransPlan Land Use Policies 1 and 5, which were also adopted as Metro Plan Transportation PoliCies F,i and F~5, SPecifically relate to nodal development and are listed below With findings following each: Exhibit B - 4 Land Use Policy t: Apply the nodal development strategs, in areas selected by each jurisdiction tho; have i[te~tified potential J~r this ~pe of kanSP ort~tion <ffici~nt land use pattern. parcels are located Gardens nodal and renamed the node. Land Use ?olicy 5: Within three years of TransPlan adoption, apply the ND, Nodal measures to ProteCt des~nated nodespom i~comp~tible devel°Pmeht and a schedule~r completion CnodaI dev~2°Pment pl~ns and implementing ordinances. Development the City. Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 660-0 t 2-0060) contains the follow4ng requirement: accomp This shall be Limiting allowed land uses to be consistent with the planned function capaci~; and perf°rmance standards ofthe transpo;tation f~cility; Amending the TSP to provide transportation facilities ad. equa~e 'to support the Propoxed land us~k consistent With the requirements o~this divisfon; Altering land use designations, densities, or Clesign requ#~ements lo reduce demon[l for automobi~-e ~avel and meet travel ne~& t~rough other mo&s; or Amending the TSP to modi~ the planned function, c~paciO, and pet~fbrm ance ston&rds, as needed to accept ~eater motor vehicle congestion to promOte mixed use, pe&stri~n~iendly &veIopment where muItimodal ~vel choices are Exhibit B - 5 X plan or [and t~se regulation amendment significantly affects a tran~ortationfaci[i~.~f it: (a) Change~ the f~nctiona[ classification of'an existing or planned transPortatiOn facility; (b) Changes standar& implementing a functional clasx~cation ~):s'~em; access which are inconsistent with the functionaJ class~cation era transportation faciliO;; or (4) [fbuid reduce ;he pe~/ormance standards of the facilia, below the minimum acceptable level i~en~Jed in the 7JP, ~ on, will not result in arkv Major Arterial Avenue is classification of these streets will tO ransPlan was not : with 10% area Metro Plan not the proposed amendments to apply the ND Based Exhibit B - 6 Therefbre, the amendments are consistent with StateMde Planning Goal 12. Goal 13 - Euergy Consem~ation: To conserve energy. Goal of Goal 14 - Urbanization: To provide for an orderly, and efficient transition/bom rural to Urban land use~ - fashion Goal 14. Goal 15 - Willamette t~Aver Greenway: To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural, scenic, historical, agricultural, economic and recreational qualities qflands not Goals 16 through 19 (Esmarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean ResoUrceS): :Goals. and acknowledged by the state. proposed Metro Plan amendment is cc~nsistent vdth E:~hibit B - 7 EC %7730(3)(b) Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan ~ of land uses. The Diagram does not affect these base an overlay to the base land. use make the nt Au~ to a pla~ D~agram Section 12.245(4) that the Metro Plan B~8