Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance No. 19882ORDINANCE N0. 4i $ g ? AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE CITY OF EUGENE URBAN FOREST MANAGMENT PLAN AS A REFINEMENT OF THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN FOR THAT PORTION OF THE METROPOLITAN AREA WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS DF EUGENE; AND ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE. The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that: 1. The Eugene Parks and Recreation Plan, adopted by the City Counci l ~ n July, 1989, ~ ncl odes a pol ~ cy cal 1 i ng for development of an urban forest management plan Urban Design, Policy 8, page 16~. 2; In May of 1990, the Eugene City Council directed the city staff to work with lane County to write a comprehensive tree preservation ordinance which was to affect praperti es within the city and the Urban Transi ti an Area BUT} between the city limits and the Eugene Urban Growth Boundary. Lane County adopted a temporary ordinance for the UT area. However, opposition to its approval within the city indicated a broader more comprehensive approach would be warranted. On September ~5, 1989, the City Council directed staff to work with the Eugene Tree Commission to prepare an Urban Forest Management Plan to apply w~th~n the city. Once adopted, the Plan would provide the basis for a tree preservation ordinance that would apply to properties within the city. 3. A questionnaire was sent to approximately 700 citizens and interest groups in March, 1991, asking for suggestions on what should be included in the proposed plan, .what groups should be contacted, and what information pertinent to the plan should be reviewed. Approximately 70 res onses were p received. 4. Based on a ci ti zen involvement program endorsed by the Eugene Ci ti - zen Involvement Committee, the Tree Commission held two widely publicized scoping sessions in April, 1991, to provide the public with an opportunity to participate in the process as early as possible. Advance notice of the scoping sessions was sent to the approximately 700 citizens and interest groups that were mailed the earlier questionnaire. Approximately to property owners and business group and envi ranmental group representatives attended the scoping sessions. Staff and members of the Commission also met individu- ally with 8 special interest groups in the summer and fall of 1991, 5. An Urban Forest Management Plan Committee of the Tree Commission held several meetings to discuss all aspects of the Urban Forest Management Plan throughout its preparation. Likewise, on October 1, 1991, the Tree Comm7ss~on itself reviewed the draft Plan in its entirety at a work session to prepare far a public hearing. 6. On October 10, 1991, the Tree Commission conducted a public hearing to receive comments on the draft Plan. Prior notice of the hearing and a second questionnaire were sent to the 100 names on the interested parties and individuals list. The questionnaire provided an opportunity to comment an various aspects of the draft Plan. approximately 75 responses were returned, Ordinance Page 1 1. Fallowing the public. hearing, the Tree Commission held three work sessions to consider the testimony, questionnaire responses, and prepare its recommendation for Council consideration, S. In addition to a public hearing on December 3, 1991, the Planning Commission held three work sessions to consider the draft Plan. Notice of the public hearing was mailed to all parties who testified orally ar in writ- ing at the Tree Commission hearing as well as to other parties who requested that they be kept informed of the process. 9. The Council Committee on Infrastructure held two meetings to con- sider the Planning Commission and Tree Commission recommendations and to discuss passible additional options regarding policies and proposed actions pertaining to trees on private property and heritage trees, as well as Plan implementation costs. Results of these meetings were forwarded to the City Council far its consideration, 10. On March 4, 199, the City Council held a work session on the draft Plan. The Council held a public hearing on April 13, 199, to consider pub- lic testimony, the record, and the recommendations of the Tree Commission and the Planning Cammi ssi an, as we11 as the Counci 1 Cammi ttee on Infrastructure report. Notice of that hearing was mailed to all parties that testified in writing ar in person at the Tree Commission ar Planning Commission hearings. 11. Both scaping sessions, and al] meetings of the Tree Commission, the Tree Commission Urban Forest Management P1 an Committee, the Planning Commis- sion, the Council Committee on Infrastructure, and the City Council were announced in advance in The Eugene Rego„s„ter-Guard, a local newspaper of gen- eral circulation, and were open to the pub1 i c. 12. Notice was provided tv the Land Conservation and Development Cam- mi ss i on on January 3, 1992 concerning the proposed adoption of the Urban Forest Management P1 an. 13. Based on the public testimony, options developed by the Counci 1 Committee on Infrastructure, the recommendations of the Tree Commission and the P1 anni ng Cammi ssi on, and its own del i berati ans, the City Counci 1 has determined that the City of Eugene Urban Forest Management Plan i s cans i stent with the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan area General P1 an as acknowledged by the Oregon Land Conservation and Development Commission. Therefore, the Urban Forest Management Plan is consistent with applicable Statewide Planning Goals. 14. The Urban Forest Management Plan will assist in implementing cer- tain policies in the Metro Plan as amended through December, 1991. These include: ~a} Metropolitan goals relating to scenic quality, water quality, vegetation and wi 1 dl i fe, open space, and recreational potential shall be given a higher priority than timber harvest within the urban growth boundary. Policy 14, page III-C-9} fib} Natural vegetation, natural water features, and drainageways shall be protected and retained to the maximum extent practicable, con- sidering the economic, social, environmental, and energy consequences in the design and construction of urban developments, and landscaping shall be utilized to enhance those natural features. ~Palicy 2, page III-E-3} Ordinance Page 2 ~c} The planting of street trees shall be strongly encouraged, especially for all new developments and redeveloping areas where feasi- ble~ and new streets and reconstruction of major arterials within the urban growth boundary. Policy 3, page II1-E-3} ~d} Public and private facilities shall be designed and located in a manner that preserves and enhances desirable features of local and neighborhood areas and promotes their sense of identity. Policy 4, page I1I-E-3~ N4W, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF EUGENE DaES oRDAIN AS F4LL4WS: Section 1. The findings set forth above are adapted. Section 2. The City of Eugene Urban Forest Management Plan attached as Exh i b i t A hereto and incorporated herein by reference i s adopted as a ref i ne- ment of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan for the area within Eugene's city limits. Section 3. The goals and policies contained in the City of Eugene Urban Forest Management Plan and dated April, 1982, are adapted as public policy for application within the Eugene city limits. Section 4. The proposed actions contained in the City of Eugene Urban Forest Management Plan and dated April , 1992, are recognized as potential means for ~mplement~ng adapted pol~c~es, but are not adopted as city policy. Section 5, I f any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, ar portion of this Drdinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shat 1 be deemed a sepa- rate, d~st~nct, and independent provision and that holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. Passed by the City Council this J~ day of ~Ydp~~, 1992 Approved by the Mayor this l ~ day of C~.~cl~, 1992 `.- ~' City Recorder lay Ordinance Page 3 DRAFT City of Eugene URBAN FaREST MANAGEMENT PLAN, Gctober,1992 not attached; it is on ale and available by written request to the City Recorder's Gf~ice.