Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance No. 19726ORDINANCE NO. 19726 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION R OF CHAPTER III OF THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN TO REPLACE THE METROPOLITAN AREA PLANNING ADVISORY COMMITTEE WITH THE JOINT PLANNING COMMISSION COMMITTEE. THE CITY OF EUGENE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section K of Chapter III of the Metropolitan Area General Plan is amended to read and provide: K. Citizen Involvement Element. Active, ongoing and meaningful citizen involvement is an essential ingredient to the development and implementation of any successful planning program. Citizens in the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area have participated in and articulated their concerns on planning activities and decisions as individuals and through various private interest groups, community and neighborhood organizations, and citizen advisory committees. A citizens' advisory committee was established for the 1990 Plan and was an integral part of that plan's development. The adopted 1990 Plan included a recommendation that a permanent "Citizens Advisory Committee" be established. That recommendation was implemented by the three governing bodies when the Metropolitan Area Planning Advisory Committee was established. ~MPAC consisted of 21 members, seven from each jurisdiction.} MAPAC's responsibilities have included monitoring the use and implementation of the General Plan, service as the L-CCG advisory committee on natural resources, and reviewing and commenting on planning issues of metropolitan-wide significance. MAPAC's responsibilities for conducting a citizen involvement program for the Metropolitan Plan were transferred to the Joint Planning Commission Committee ~JPCC} in 1990, In recent years, citizens' advisory committees have also been established to provide the citizens' perspective on a wide variety of specific planning issues ~e.g. Transportation, Greenway, Solid Waste Management } . This emphasis on citizen participation has been recognized at the state level where the Land ordinance - 1 Conservation and Development Commission adopted citizen involvement as a mandatory statewide planning goal. Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County, in accordance with LCDC's Citizen Involvement Goal, have each appointed committees for citizen involvement whose responsibilities include developing, monitoring, and evaluating the citizen involvement programs in their respective jurisdictions and recommending programs and techniques which will increase citizen participation. For the purposes of future updates of the Metropolitan Plan, the three governing bodies designated JPCC as the citizens' committee for coordinating and soliciting citizen input on the update process. JPCC's functions also include the monitoring of the citizen involvement process regarding amendments to and the implementation of the Metropolitan Plan. Find,n,gs . 1. The Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area has a history of encouraging and recognizing citizen involvement as an essential element in its planning program. 2. Citizens' advisory committees have been established to provide the citizens' perspective on a variety of metropolitan-wide planning and related issues. 3 . Springfield, Lane County, and Eugene each use either their local planning commission or a committee for citizen involvement in monitoring citizen involvement in the planning process. There are also several citizen advisory committees involved with individual components of the process, such as housing and transportation planning. 4. JPCC has been designated as the citizen organization for developing and conducting a citizen involvement program for the Metropolitan Plan, including update processes. 5. The governing bodies have furthered their efforts at citizen involvement through the development and support of community neighborhood organizations, community surveys,r citizen involvement advisory committees, and various media techniques for citizen involvement and education. ordinance - Z 6. How effective the General Plan will be depends to a large extent upon haw much support is provided by the metropolitan area residents in seeing that the Plan is implemented, 7. Successful plan development and implementation is dependent on a joint effort of citizens, public semi-public agencies, and elected officials. 8. Benefits of an on-going metropolitan area planning advisory committee to provide citizen perspective include an accumulation of knowledge and experience in the planning process. 9. In 1984, an on-going metropolitan policy committee, the Metropolitan Planning Committee, was formed to provide policy direction for the Metropolitan Plan 2-1/2-Year-Mid-Period Review. It was comprised of two elected officials and one Planning Commissioner each from Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County, and one representative of the metropolitan citizen committee participates as a non-voting member. 10. In 1987 the Metropolitan Planning Committee was replaced by the Metropolitan Policy Committee ~MPC3 . The MPC is comprised of two elected officials each from Eugene, Springfield and Lane County. The chief administrative officers of the three jurisdictions serve as non-voting, ex-officio members of MPC. G~hen the MPC is considering metropolitan transportation matters, the General Manager of the Lane Transit District and the Director of the Oregan Department of Transportation shall also serve as non-voting, ex-officio members of MPC. Goal. Continue to develop, maintain, and refine programs and procedures that maximize the opportunity for meaningful, ongoing citizen involvement in the community's planning and planning implementation processes consistent with mandatory statewide planning standards. objectives. 1. Promote and strengthen communication and coordination among various citizens' organizations; business, industrial, and other groups in the community; and between these groups and government. 2. Insure adequate opportunities and provide adequate support for citizen involvement in metropolitan Ordinance - 3 planning and related issues. 3. Insure that roles and responsibilities of the various citizen advisory committees remain effective and responsive vehicles for citizen involvement. 4. Maintain a permanent citizens' advisory committee to monitor the adequacy of citizen involvement in metropolitan-wide planning processes. Policies. i. Maintain an ongoing citizens' advisory committee to the governing bodies of Springfield, Eugene and Lane County to monitor the adequacy of citizen involvement in the update, review, and amendments to the Metropolitan Plan. Z. Maintain and adequately fund a variety of programs and procedures for encouraging and providing opportunities for citizen involvement in metropolitan area planning issues. Such programs should provide for widespread citizen involvement, effective communication, access to technical information, and feedback mechanisms from policymakers. These programs shall be coordinated with local citizen involvement programs and shall be prepared on the metropolitan level by the Joint Planning Commission Committee, a committee composed of two representatives from each of the three metropolitan planning commissions. 3. Improve and maintain local mechanisms that provide the opportunity for residents and property owners in existing residential areas to participate in the implementation of policies embodied in the Plan that may affect the character of those areas. 4. Maintain an ongoing metropolitan region policy committee, known as the Metropolitan Policy Committee ~MPC~, to provide policy direction on major Plan updates, Plan amendments, and special studies. MPC shall resolve land use issues and other disagreements among the two cities and the county and fulfill other intergovernmental functions as required by the three metropolitan governments. 5. In addition to its citizen involvement responsibilities, JPCC shall provide guidance for intergovernmental studies and projects and shall provide a forum at the planning commission level for resolving intergovernmental planning issues, ordinance - 4 including proposed Metropolitan Plan amendments. Section 2. The above Plan amendments control aver any other inconsistent textual provisions of the Metropalitan Area General Plan. seotion 3. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance 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 hereof. Section 4. The findings contained in the attached Exhibit A are adopted in support of this ordinance. Passed by the City Council this 29th day of octoberf 1990 ~.. ,~ ~' City Rec der Approved by the Mayor this 29th day of oataber 19 0 ,,. .~~ ,~ ,- ~..r t ,~ f ayvr Grdinance - 5 EXHIBIT A Findings in Support of Ordinance 19726 Amending Section K of Chapter III of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan. 1. The Plan amendment is consistent with applicable Statewide Planning Goals. The following are the applicable Statewide Planning Goals: Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement. Goal 1 is intended to ensure that citizens are involved in all stages of the planning process. Citizens have been involved in all stages of the development of these proposed amendments . The following summarizes the major citizen involvement opportunities in the development of the revisions tv Section K of Chapter III of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan and demonstrates how the revisions enhance citizen-initiated amendments tv the Plan: 1. In August of 1984, Chapter IV of the Metropolitan Area General Plan was amended to provide far a semi-annual plan amendment process. This process provided that all citizen-initiated amendments, regardless of scope, could be initiated twice each year. 2 . In June of 1987 , the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan was subject to a semi-annual plan amendment process. During this amendment process, proposed amendments to the Metropolitan Plan were subject to public hearings before the Metropolitan Area Planning Advisory Committee ~MAPAC~ and the planning commissions and governing bodies of the three metropolitan governing bodies. One of the proposed amendments concerned a small-acreage, Plan Diagram change to property located within the corporate limits of Eugene. 3. Following the conclusion of the semi-annual amendment process, elected officials voiced concern over the number of hearings required of a proposed amendment to the Metropolitan Plan. 4. In October of 1988, the Metropolitan Policy Committee ~MPC} directed metropolitan staff to draft changes to the Metropolitan Flan to streamline the plan amendment process. This direction included replacing MAPAC with Exhibit A - 1 a committee composed of planning commission members from the three jurisdictions, called the Joint Planning Commission Committee ~JPCC}, and eliminating the mandatory review of substantive Plan amendments by a citizen involvement advisory committee. 5. Proposed revisions to the plan amendment process were developed by staff and reviewed by MAPAC and the three metropolitan planning commissions during the spring and summer of 1989. These meetings were noticed through mailouts to interested parties and by news releases to local newspapers. 6. Dn October 11, 1989, the Eugene City Council the Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of County Commissioners reviewed proposed revisions to the Metropolitan Plan amendment process at a joint public hearing. The elected officials reached consensus on guidelines for the preparation of revisions to Chapter IV of the Metropolitan Plan and implementing code language at this public hearing. The proposed revisions tv Chapter IV implicitly acknowledged the elimination of MAPAC and the removal of mandatory substantive review of Plan amendments by a citizen advisory committee. This public hearing was noticed through mailings to interested parties and through news releases to local newspapers. 7. on April lb, 1990, the Joint Planning Commission Committee ~JPCC~ reviewed and approved revisions to Chapter Iv of the Metropolitan Plan and implementing code language based upon the Dctober 11, 1989 consensus guidelines. This meeting was noticed through mailings to interested parties and by news releases through local newspapers. S . Dn May 2 4 , 19 9 0 , the Eugene, Springfield and Lane County planning commissions, at a joint public hearing, considered and recommended approval of the proposed revisions to Chapter IV of the Metropolitan Plan. The three planning commissions considered and recommended approval, with slight modifications, of the implementing code language. Interested parties were notified of this meeting, a display ad was placed in the Register Guard newspaper 30 days prior to the public hearing, and a legal advertisement of the public hearing was placed in the Register Guard newspaper ten days prior to the public hearing. 9. On September 5, 1990, the Springfield Planning Commission, at a public hearing, considered and approved a proposed amendment to Section K of Chapter III of the Metropolitan Plan. This amendment dissolved MAPAC and Exhibit A - 2 delegated MAPAC's authority to monitor the citizen involvement process regarding amendments to and the implementation of the Metropalitan Plan to the Joint Planning Commission Committee. Interested parties were notified of this hearing and a legal advertisement of the public hearing was placed in the Springfield News newspaper ten days prior to the public hearing. iD. .on September 18, 1990, the Eugene Planning Commission and the Lane County Planning Commission, at a joint public hearing, considered and approved a proposed amendment to Section K of Chapter III of the Metropolitan Plan. This amendment dissolvedNlAPAC and delegated MAPAC's authority to monitor the citizen involvement process regarding amendments to and the implementation of the Metropolitan Plan to the Joint Planning Commission Committee. Interested parties were notified of this hearing an a legal advertisement of the public hearing was placed in the Register Guard newspaper twenty days prior to the public hearing. 11. The revisions to Section K of Chapter III conform tv the requirements of Goal #1 in that the JPCC has been selected to replace MAPAC as the Committee for Citizen Involvement ~CCI} for the Metropolitan Plan. The JPCC is composed of two planning commissioners from each of the three jurisdictions . Members of each of the planning commissions are selected by an open, well-publicized public process. 12. The planning commissions for Springfield and Lane County have been designated as the citizen involvement committee for their respective jurisdictions. The City of Eugene has a citizen involvement committee that is separate from its planning commission, Goal 2^'- Land Use Planning. Goal 2 states that "opportunities shall be provided for review and comment by citizens and affected governmental units during preparation, review and revision on plans and implementation ardlnanCes." 1. The initial responsibility for determining whether amendments to and the implementation of the Metropolitan Plan conforms to the opportunities guaranteed by Goal 2 has been delegated to the JPCC. 2. The Springfield Planning Commission, the Eugene Citizen Involvement Committee, and the Lane County Planning Commission will continue to have responsibility for monitoring the adequacy of citizen involvement at the Exhibit A - 3 local level. 2. The plan amendment is consistent with the fundamental principles and applicable policies of the Metro Plan. Section A of Chapter II of the Metropolitan Plan, "Citizen Involvement," provides that the development, maintenance, and refinement of programs and procedures that maximize the opportunity for meaningful, ongoing citizen involvement in the community's planning and planning implementation, consistent with the standards of the statewide planning goals, shall be continued. 1. MAPAC's responsibilities regarding the monitoring of the citizen involvement process for amendments to and the implementation of the Metropolitan Plan had been transferred to the JPCC. 2. The mandatory substantive review of amendments to the Metropolitan Plan have been restricted to the planning commissions and governing bodies of the three metropolitan governments. 3. The plan amendment is found to address ane ar more of the following: 1. An error in the publication of the plan; or 2. Circumstances have changes in a substantial manner that was not anticipated in the plan; or 3. Incorporation rota the plan, following acknowledgment, of newly inventoried material which relates to a Statewide Goal; or 4. A change in public policy. The amendments proposed by the draft revised Section K of Chapter III reflect a change in public policy. The new policy calls for streamlining the Metropolitan Plan amendment process to shorten the review time for plan amendments. Exhibit A - 4