HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance No. 19833ORDINANCE NO. l ~1 S~ 3 ~
AN oRDINANCE AMENDING THE ~ DER
MENT PLAN; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
The City Councii of the City of Eugene finds that:
1. The whiteaker Refinement Plan was adapted by the City Council by
Resolution No. 2899 in May, 1978. an April 13,1957, Ordinance No.1946U was adapted
by the Council and approved by the Mayor amending the Whiteaker Refinement Plan and
repealing Resolution No. 2599, and was subsequently further amended by Ordinance No.
19678 adopted on Apri19, 199D,
2. Dn December 31, 1991, Jenova Land CompanylSpring Holdings, Inc.
(Jenova), requested classification of a proposed amendment to the Whiteaker Refinement
Plan. The Planning Division refereed the request to the chair of the Whiteaker
Community Council for consideration.
3. The Planning Commission reviewed the proposed amendment on January 21,
1992 and classified it as a minor plan amendment. This action allowed Jenova to submit
a formal plan amendment application.
4. A formal application to amend the whiteaker Refinement Plan was
submitted by Jenova on February 13, 1992.
5. Qn February 17, 1992 the Planning Division provided notice of the official
application to the whiteaker Community Council and written notice was mailed to the
owners and occupants of property within 4~ feet of the subject property on February 21,
1992. an March 6, 1992 a display ad appeared in the ,,Rester Guard advertising the
Plannin Commission's ublic hearin .
g P g
6. The Plarming Commission conducted a public hearing an the proposed plan
amendment on March 17, 1992. Based on the written record and public testimony, the
Planning Commission recommended approval of the plan amendment attached hereto as
Exhibit A (7.0).
7. The Planning Commission adopted the findings set Earth in Exhibit B hereto
in support of the refinement plan amendment an March 17, 1992.
S. The City Council held a public hearing on the proposed plan amendment on
April 13, 1992.
Ordinance -1
9. Based upon the written record and testimony at the public hearings, the
proposed amendment is found tv be consistent with the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan
Area General Plan and the unamended portions of the Whiteaker Refinement Plan.
10. The proposed amendment will not affect the overall land use allocations in
the Metropolitan Area General Plan or the Whiteaker Refinement Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE,
TgE CITY OF EUGENE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The above findings and the findings set forth in Exhibit B hereto are
adopted.
Section ~. The text accompanying the Whiteaker Refinement Plan Land Use
Diagram vn page 22 of the Plan is amended as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and
incorporated herein by reference.
Section 3. Except as herein amended, all other provisions of the Whiteaker
Refinement Plan remain in full force and effect.
Section 4. That the matters contained herein concern the public welfare, and in
order to ensure its orderly implementation an emergency is hereby declared to exist, and
this ordinance shall became effective immediately upon its adoption by the Council and
approval by the Mayor, retention by the Mayor for over ten days, or readoption aver a
mayoral veto by two thirds of all members of the Council.
Passed by the City Council this
13th day of Apri1,1992
City Recorder
Approved by the Mayor this
13th day of April,1992
/ ~.
;~
~~
f
,~
ayor
ordinance - 2
EXHIBIT A
The Whiteaker Refinement P7 an Diagram text on Page 22 pertaining to the area
designated as "ILL} LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AREA" is amended to read as follows
I(L)-MU Light Industrial/Mixed-Use Area
An active light industrial area that includes construction-related in-
dustri es, warehousing, and the Southern Pacific Rai 1 road right-of -way.
There is also limited residential development within this area. A
mixed-use zoning designation that retains the industrial character and
allows commercial uses similar to those permitted in nearby mixed-use
areas may be approved for property north of the railroad tracks, between
Washington and Pearl Streets. The property appropriate for mixed-use
encompasses the following parcels: ~a} Map 17-03-30-34--Tax Lots 1100,
1800, 2300, 2400, 2500, 2600, 3400, 3500, 3600, loooo, 10200, and 10300;
fib} Map 17-03-30-43--Tax Lats 700 and 1700; and {c} Map 17-03-30-44--Tax
Lots 9300 and 9600.
March 11, 1992
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE EUGENE PLANNING COMMISSION
RE: RE VEST FOR AMENDMENT TO WHITEAKER REFINEMENT PLAN RA 92-1
I. INTRODUCTION
Back round
In December 1991, the Planning and Devel apment Department rece i ved a l etter
from Jim Saul, representing Jenova Land Company, Spring Holdings, Inc,, and
the Francis M. Hyland Trust, requesting determination from the Planning Com-
mi ss i on that a proposed amendment to the Whiteaker Refinement P1 an was a mi nor
amendment, The Planning Division referred the request to the Whiteaker Cormnu-
nity Council. A letter was sent by Laurie McClain, President of the Whiteaker
Community Counc i 1, indicating that i t daes not object to the amendment being
cl assa f i ed as a m~ nor amendment. The 1 etter did address several concerns
which were going to be discussed with Jim Saul at a special neighborhood
meeting an February 12, 1992.
On January 21, 1992, the request was reviewed by the Planning Commission to
determ~ ne whether the request should be classified as a ma jar or mi nar amend-
ment. It was the determination of the P1 ann i ng Commission that the request
should be cansidered a minor amendment.
The proposed amendment affects approximately 10.53 acres of property located
~mmed~ately north of the railroad tracks from Washington Street east to a
point 1fi0 feet west of Pearl Street see vicinity maps. The area between
Washington and li ncol n streets i s developed by bui 1 di ngs formerly vccupi ed by
the Eugene P1 an i ng Mi 11, a parki ng 1 ot, and several residences . The strip of
1 and east of Lincoln and between the rai 1 road tracks and the 3rd-4th cannector
street i s occupied by Imperial F1 oors, a warehouse formerly occupied by
zel 1 erbach Paper Company, some vacant property, and a parki ng 1 of near Pearl
Street. It is noted that the 3rd~4th connector is not a standard public
right-of -way; rather, an access easement for public use granted to the City by
Southern Pacific. It i s not improved to City standards, i . e. , no curbs,
gutter, or sidewalks. The paving width i s approximately 20 feet, All of the
property is currently zoned I-2 light-Medium Industrial District.
The applicant's statement provides some additional background information,
including a description of the areas currently designated for mixed use in the
Whiteaker Refinement Plan . The zoning and level vpment of areas surrounding
the subject site i s al sa described i n the applicant's statement.
The refinement plan amendment and rezoning process included notice mailed 34
days prior to the public hearing to all property owners and residents wi th i n
400 feet of the site and a display ad in The Re inter-Guard outlining the
proposed change at least ten days prior to the hearing. The public and i nter-
ested parties had an opportunity to submit testimony to the Planning Commis -
s ~ on at the publ ~ c hears ng. A copy of the application was referred to the
Whiteaker Corteunity Council . Several letters were received from nearby prop-
erty owners or occupants and considered .
Findings and Conclusions - ~ Exhibit B
On March 6, 199, the applicant submitted several modifications based on
several issues raised by the Whi teaker Co~nuni ty Gounci 1. Those modifications
were reviewed and considered enhancements to the on gi nal proposal . Staf f
recon~ended different site review criteria which i s addressed herein . On
March 9, 199, a 1 etter was received from the Whi teaker Cammuni ty Cvunci 1
which included several reco~nendati ons, same of which had already been ad-
dressed i n the modified proposal submitted or staff recormnendati on,
Summary of Proposed Amendment
The proposed change involves the name of the area currently described on page
22 of the plan's I ~ L} Light Industrial Area and the accompanying text descri b-
~ ng the area. The ~ ntent of the proposed amendment i s to al l aw industrial
uses to continue and to allow 1 imi ted retai 1 uses already permitted under the
MU-R Whiteaker Residential Mixed-Use District that was created for areas
immediately adjoining to the west and south. The amendment i s specific for
the area involving the 10.53 acres that the Planning Commission previously
c1 ass ~ f ~ ed as a m~ nor ref ~ nement plan amendment .
Creation of a MU- I C Wh i teaker Industrial Commercial Mixed Use District .
This district would be applied to the properties that are involved i n th i s
refinement plan amendment . Rezoning to the MU- I/C district i s part of th i s
appl ~cat~on. It differs from the MU-R Whiteaker Residential Mixed-Use Dis-
tri ct, which emphasizes residential uses and requires conditional use proce-
dures for new cammerci al or industrial uses i n most cases. The proposed
district is characterized by the allowance of 1} industrial uses which are
permitted in the I-~ zoning district, 2} commercial uses, 1 invited to those
currently permitted in the MU-R district, 3} office uses permitted in the GO
General Office district, and 4} single- and multiple-family residential dwell -
ings. The applicant's statement provides additional information regarding the
d~ fferences between the proposed zone ng d~ strict and the existing MU-R di s-
trict.
Development standards depend on the type of development being proposed; resi-
dent~al development coincides with the R-3 provisions commercial development
wi 11 be governed by the C-2 pravi sions,
the I-2 provisions. Special exceptions
i ncl ude a he i ght limitation of 6o feet
specific 1 acct i ons .
and industrial development governed by
or additions to these provisions
and the requirement of 1 andscap i ng i n
A chap a of zone for the sub'ect area from I-2 ~i ht-Medium Industri a1 Di s-
tri ct to MU- I C Whi teaker Industri a1 Commercial Mixed-Use District.
The Eugene Code, Section 9.fi88, provides the opportunity to consider zone
changes i n conjunction with an amendment to a ref i nement plan. The process to
be used i s that of the refinement plan amendment process, which includes a
Planning Commission public hearing and recommendation, fo1 l awed by a publ i c
hear ~ ng and dec i s ~ on by the C ~ ty Council . I f the Planning Commission den i e s
the application, the decision i s final unless appealed to the City Gounci 1.
Eval uat i an of Refinement P1 an Amendment
Findings and Conclusions - 2 Exhibit B
A request for amendment of a ref i nement plan must address the criteria con-
tai ned i n Section 9.145 of the Eugene Code. The analysis presented below
supplements the evaluation provided by the applicant.
Section 9.145~2~ ~a} : The plan amendment ~ s consistent with the Metropal -
itan Area General R1 an.
The Metropolitan Area General Plan i s a metro-wide land use policy plan and
only provides general direction for 1 and use decisions such as this request .
A policy contained i n the Ecanomi c E1 ement of the Metro P1 an has particular
ref evance to this request:
Provide for 1 imi ted mixing of office, con~nerci al , and industrial uses
under procedures which clearly define the conditions under which such
uses shall be permitted and which: ~a~ preserve the suitability of the
affected areas for their primary uses; ~b~ assure compatibility; and ~c}
consider the potential for increased traffic generation. ~Pol icy 19,
page III-B-fi.~
The proposed mixed-use district recognizes the industrial nature which domi -
nates the area, with the provision of limited commercial uses which addresses
the potential for increased traffic i n the same manner as the MU-R district
does. Generally, compatibility should not be an issue given the nature of
surrounding uses. In particular, the western portion largely comprises former
P1 an i ng Mi 11 structures which involved industrial and 1 i mi ted retai 1 uses.
Surrounding this area are primarily industrial uses . Staf f had a concern with
the property east of li ncol n Street which i s situated between the rai 1 road
tracks and the 3rd-4th connector, Compati bi 1 i ty and other issues are ad-
dressed under the evaluation of the mixed-use district, criterion 9.418 ~ b} .
4vera1l, i t i s concluded that the Metropolitan Area General Plan provides
policy direction for cons i deri ng a mixed-use designation for this property due
to its proximity to other mixed-use areas and the property's redevelopment
potential . The establishment of a spec i fi c zoning district wi 11 define the
conditions under which uses shal 1 be permitted, addressing sui tabi 1 i ty, com-
pati bi 1 i ty, and traffic generation . In addition, the text of the Metro P1 an
on ,page I I - E-12 , spec i f i call y recognizes ,the appropriateness of defining cer-
ta~ n areas of m~ xed use through the ref ~ nement plan process .
Section 9.145~~~~b~: The plan amendment is consistent with the remaining
porn ans of the ref ~ nement plan ~Wh~ teaker Ref ~ nement Pi an} .
The Wh i teaker Refinement Plan i s the governing plan far the subject area and
was adopted by the Gi ty Council i n 1918. The proposal to provide for 1 imi ted
mixed uses i n the area coincides with other areas designated i n the plan for
mixed use; specifically, areas that border the subject property on the south
and west. The pi an specifically recognizes the mixed-use character of areas
of the Whi teaker neighborhood under the Land Use E1 ement, General land-Use
Patterns:
Diversity i n type and condition characterizes 1 and-use patterns wi th i n
the Wh i teaker community. There are distinct residential , commercial , and
industrial areas, as well as areas which can only be described as mi xed-
Findings and Conclusions - 3 Exhibit B
use areas. sites and structures are found i n a range of standard and
substandard conditions, Page 4. }
Examination of the Generalized Existing land Use Patterns map on page fi of the
plan exhibits the mixed-use nature of much of the Whiteaker area, including
the subject area. The recognition of the mixed-use concept i s carried further
under the p1 an's land-Use Polices and Proposals section on page 7:
2 . Recognize areas within Whiteaker which have Bevel aped a des i rabl e
mixed land-use pattern by designating them for continued mixed-use
development and preventing them from becoming dominated by a s i ngl e
land-use category.
The mixed-use areas identified by the land-Use Diagram cover areas
where the historic pattern of development has resulted i n a des i r-
abl a combination of residential and non-residential uses . Th i s
combi not i vn contributes to the diversity and variety which i s an
important part of Whiteaker's character.
This plan amendment would extend the area of mixed-use development, part i cu-
1 arty on property once occupied by the Eugene Planing Mill . Redevelopment of
the area for mixed use, or continuation of existing industrial and residential
uses meets several of the Goals for Whiteaker, found on page 3 of the plan:
11. To encourage a vari ety of commercial and industrial uses an an
integral part of the Whiteaker community.
12. To improve the existing character and diversity which has been
created by the variety of 1 and uses throughout the Whiteaker commu-
nity.
13 . Ta increase economic apportun i t i es for Whiteaker residents by Bevel -
op i ng local economic resources .
In conclusion, mixed-use Bevel vpment i s recognized throughout the plan as a
desirable 1 and use. There are few areas i n the city that contain such a
diversity of uses . The Whiteaker Refinement P1 an clearly sees mixed use as a
positive aspect of the neighborhood,
Section 9.145 ~ 2 } ~ c } : The plan amendment i s found to address one or more
of the following:
1. An error i n the publication of the plan;
2. A change i n circumstances i n a substanti al manner not anticipated i n
the plan;
3. ~ncorporati an i n the plan of new inventory material which relates to
a statewide goal ; and
4, A change in pubs is policy.
Findings and Conclusions - 4 Exhibit B
The request appears to address no. 2, a change i n circumstances . There has
been no showing that there has been any new inventory material that relates to
a statewi de goal ono. 3} .
As the applicant points out, the text of the Whi teaker Refinement P1 an empha-
sizes the farmer Eugene Planing Mill and its future expansion, Because the
planing mi 11 has closed, the text i s no 1 onger appropriate and needs to be
amended to give future 1 and use direction for the area. In addition, areas
along the rai 1 road track extending from li ncol n eastward that were once rai 1-
road right-of -way have been sold. This also opens up possi bi 1 i ti es for level -
opment that were not present when the plan was adopted, Thus, i n several
~ nstances, there have been substant~ al changes i n circumstances that were not
previously anticipated.
Conclusion and Recammendati on on Refinement P1 an Amendment
The above analysis shows that the proposal to amend the Wh i teaker Refinement
P1 an to al l aw for mixed-use deve1 opment on the subject site i s consistent with
the criteria for refinement plan amendment. Mixed use i s supported by pol i -
ci es i n the Metropolitan Area General P1 an and i n findings, goals and policies
contained i n the Wh i teaker Refinement P1 an . The proposed text amendment woul d
therefore be appropriate, particularly given the change i n circumstances of
the subject property.
Evaluation of Pro osed Mixed-Use zon i n District
The general description and purpose of the Mixed-Use district i s contained i n
Section 9.476 and i s as follows
Due to historical level apment patterns, certain areas of the city are
characterized by a mi xture of uses, such as residential and commercial or
residential and industrial , which are normal 1 y segregated under standard
zoning districts. In some instances, provision for a continuation of a
mixture of uses wi 11 serve both public interest and al 1 ow a more equi ta-
bl a balancing of private interests than would the uti 1 i zati on of a stan-
dard zoning district.
The criteria for establishment of a Mi xed-Use zoning district are contained i n
Section 9.418 of the Eugene Code. These criteria are listed below, followed
by findings of the Eugene P1 ann i ng Commission .
Section 9.418€a} : The area to be classified as a MU Mixed-Use district
includes the ~ equi val ent of at 1 east one standard block fie, g. , 320' x
X20'}.
The area of this request consists of 10.53 acres. A standard city block i s
approximately 2.35 acres.
Section 9.418~b}: A special study of the area has been completed showing
how the proposed MU Mixed-Use district uses wi 11 be compatible with one
another, wi 11 provi de a functi oval and healthful environment, and wi 11 be
integrated with the surrounding area.
Findings and Conclusions -- 5 Exhibit B
A special study has been completed and i s attached to the applicant's state-
ment. The co~nission concurs with the analysis contained in that study;
however, would add the fallowing analysis concerning the affected property
1 ocated east of Lincoln Street . This area i nvol ves a stri p of 1 and situated
between the 3rd-4th connector street and the railroad tracks and extends
nearly to Pearl Street. Most of this area i s vacant except for two bus 1 di ngs
done vacant} at the west end and a parki ng lot at the east end. Development
i n this area wi 11 thus involve new structures . The concerns that staf f i den -
ti f i ed included the future use of the 3rd-4th connector, compati bi 1 i ty with
property 1 ocated directly north which i s zoned predominately residents al , and
the protection of views of Skinner Butte and the Shelton-McMurphey House.
The future use of the 3rd-4th connector i s of particular concern with the City
Traffic Engineering Division. There are no current plans for this street.
The concerns include possible improvements to city standards, sidewalks, need
far additional right-of -way, and general parking and circulation patterns .
Depending on the type of development proposed, compatibility could be an
issue, parts cut arty with existing multi -family residential development. One
apartment complex is situated very close to the 3rd-4th connector. Noise,
height, and other relative impacts should be considered. ~n addition, the
s ~ to dues conta~ n several 1 arge fir trees which should be given consideration
for preservation. In order to address these issues, Section 3, Development
Standards, of the proposed district should be amended to i ncl ude a new subsec-
tion as follows:
~ ~5} Site Revs ew Subdistrict. Any new devel apment shall be reviewed
under the Site Review Procedures contained in the Eugene Code, 5ectsons
9. fi86-9. fi94 for as amended hereafter} , with the fo11 owi ng specific con-
cerns to be addressed during the site review process
a. compati bi 1 i ty with the surroundings, parts cul arty when residential
in character. Height, setback, and noise are a major concern and
its effect an surrounding residential areas. The issue of height
shal 1 consider the view of the Shelton -McMurphey House, part i cul arl y
views of the structure from Wi 11 amette Street. compati bi 1 i ty shat 1
also address the ref ati onsh i p of new development with the view of
Skinner Butte from the general area, particularly from ~lillamette
Street.
b. Safe and efficient ingress and egress and on-site traffic ci rcul a-
tson. This factor includes the review by the City Traffic Engineer
of the use of the 3rd-4th connector and may include requirements
such as, but not 1 invited to, right-of-way dedication, street im-
provements, and sidewalks.
c. Due consideration of the preservation of attractive and distinctive
natural features. landscaping shal 1 be provided that i s consistent
with the character of Skinner Butte, including street trees along
the 3rd-4th connector.
d. Signs and i 11 umi Hats on i n scale and harmony with the site and area.
Findings and Conclusions - 6 Exhibit B
With the above addition to the proposed Mixed-Use zoning district, the pro-
posed MU- I/C zoning district will be integrated with the surrounding area and
be a functional and healthful environment.
Section 9.418~c}: At least 50 percent of the lots or parcels to be
classified as an MU Mixed-Use District are already developed with struc-
tures .
This request i Wool ves sixteen parcels, i n which ten are developed with struc-
tures. This results i n a f figure of fit percent of the parcels being developed
which exceeds the 5o percent required .
Section 9.418~d} : The existing development has occurred aver a peri od of
years and i s characterized by a mixture of uses.
The applicant's statement provi des a hi start' of the planing mi 11 development
which represents over 45 percent of the area. That use was characterized by
both traditional industrial activities as well as a strong retai 1 aspect.
Other uses include several residences, warehouses, and a floor covering store.
Most of the structures appear to have been bui 1 t some time ago.
Section 9.418~e} : The use and devei apment standards of conventional
residential, commercial, or industrial zoning districts are not capable
of or ~ sui tabl a for promoting the internal compati bi i i ty and integration
with the surrounding area prescribed by the area special study.
Conventional commercial and industrial zoning districts have evolved to a
point of maintaining strict separation of retai 1 and i ndustri a1 uses . Since
the planing mill is no longer in operation, the continuance of the industrial
and commercial mix would not be al 1 owed to be re-established. If the current
industrial designation and zoning were to continue, the structures and res i -
dences would eventually give way to pure industrial uses. Previous analysis
provi des evidence of the des i rabi 1 i ty to provide mixed-use areas i n the
Wh i teaker area based on the historical development of an area.
Section 9.478 ~ f } : The uses permitted and the development standards to be
applied i n the district wi 11 be consistent with the criteria required for
approval of~ a canventi oral zone change.
An analysis of the proposed zone change to MU-I/C follows.
Conclusion and Recommendation on Mixed-Use Zon i n District
The evaluation presented above as well as the applicant's statement shows that
the draft Mixed-Use district would provide reasonable use of the property,
wh i 1 e maintaining the public interest i n protecting the surrounding res iden -
ti al Wei ghborhaod. With the modifications proposed to the draft Mixed-Use
district as 1 i steel under Section 9.478 ~ b} relating to the site review process
for the area east of Lincoln .Street, and the modifications proposed by the
applicant in the revised draft ~recei ved March fi} , staff recommends the P1 an-
n i ng Commission recommend approval of the establishment of the MU Mixed-Use
zoning district.
Evaluation of Zone Chan a Re nest
Findings and Conclusions - l Exhibit B
Based on the information avai 1 ab1 a and the criteria contained i n Section
9. fi18~2~ of the Eugene Code, the co~ni ssi on makes the following evaluation:
Section 9.618 2 a : The uses and density that wi 11 be allowed i n the
1 ocat on of the proposed change I } can be served through the orderly and
efficient extens i an of key urban faci 1 i ti es and services prescribed i n
the Metropolitan Area General P1 an, and ~~ are consistent with the pri n-
ci pl es of compact and sequential growth,
A full range of public faci 1 i t i es and services i s currently avai 1 abl a to serve
the area. A change i n Toning from I -2 to MU should not affect the avai l abi 1 i -
ty or capacity of key urban faci 1 i ti es and services to serve the subject
sites. The proposed MU district wi 11 permit some commercial uses, though not
to the extent allowed under the C-2 or C-3 district. Existing or past uses i n
the area already represents of mix of uses.
The property is located near the geographic center of the city. Encouragement
of new development or redevelopment within the city's core i s consistent with
the pri nci p1 es of compact growth and sequential development, part i cul arl y
given the fact that many of the existing structures are vacant or under-uti -
1 i zed .
Section 9.. fi18~2~ ~b~ : The proposed change i s consistent with the Metro-
pol itan Area General P1 an I ~ applicable text, 2~ specific elements rel at-
ed to the uses 1 i sted i n the proposed zoning districts, and 3} appl i cabl e
land use designations . The written text of the plan takes precedence
over the plan diagram where apparent conflicts or inconsistencies exist.
Previous findings under the refinement plan amendment criteria Sect i on
9.145a} are applicable and are incorporated herein. The applicant's statement
supplements those findings and i s referenced here as well .
Section 9.618~2~ ~c~ : The proposed change i s consistent with appl i cabl e
adopted neighborhood refinement plans, special area studies, and func-
ti oval plans. In the event of inconsistencies between these plans or
studies and the Metropolitan Area General Plan, the latter is the pre-
vai 1 i ng document.
This zone change request is being considered concurrently with an amendment to
the applicable refinement plan, the Whiteaker Refinement P1 an. Approval of
that amendment will allow implementation of this tone change to a mixed-use
zoning designation.
Summary and Conclusions
Based on information provided prior to the public hearing and staff comments
and pubi 1 c testimony presented at the public hearing, the Planning Cori ssi on
finds that the proposed p1 an amendment meets al 1 of the criteria for approval .
The Planning Commission recommends approval of the proposed amendment submit-
ted by Jenova.
P1 an Amendment Implementation
Findings and Conclusions -~ S Exhibit B
Based on the above evaluation that the requested zone change i s consistent
with applicable criteria far change of zone, the commission reco~nends approv-
al of a change of zone from I -Z light-Medium Industri a1 District to MU- I/C
Whiteaker Industrial/Co~nercial Mixed-Use District for Tax lots 1100, 1800,
2300, 2400, X500, 2fi00, 3400, 3500, 10000, 1040, and 10300- -Assessor's Map
11-03-30-3 4; and from I -2 light-Medium Industrial District to MU- I/C SR
Whiteaker Industrial/Co~nercial Mixed-Use District Site Review Subdistrict for
Tax Lots 100 and 1100--Assessor's Map 11-03-30-4 3, Tax Lots 9300 and
9600--Assessor's Map 11-03-30-4 4, and including properties adjacent to Tax
lots 100, 1700, and 9600 which have na assigned tax 1 of numbers . The site
review process sha11 be triggered by any new development, which i s defined as
the development of a new structure on vacant property or on property that i s
developed but involves rep1 aci ng an existing structure wi th a new bui 1 di ng.
The site review criteria reco~nended to be included are as fol 1 aws:
a. Compat i bi 1 i ty with the surraundi ngs, part i cu1 arty when residential
in character. Height, setback, and noise are a major concern and
its effect on surrounding residential areas. The issue of height
shall consider the view of the Shelton-McMurphey House, particularly
views of the structure from Wi 11 amette Street. Compati bi 1 i ty shal 1
also address the relationship of new development with the view of
Skinner Butte from the general area, particularly from Wi 11 amette
Street.
b. Safe and efficient ingress and egress and on-site traffic circula-
tion. This factor includes the review by the City Traffic Engineer
of the use. of the 3rd-4th connector and may include requirements
such as, but not 1 invited to, right-of-way dedication, street im-
provements, and sidewalks.
c. Due consideration of the preservation of attractive and distinctive
natural features. landscaping shall be provided that is consistent
with the character of Skinner Butte, including street trees a1 ong
the 3rd-4th connector.
d. Signs and i 11 umi nati on i n scale and harmony with the site and area.
The findings are adopted by the Eugene Planning Commission this 11th day of
March, 1992.
Findings and Conclusions - 9 Exhibit B