HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 3700RESOLUTION NO. Sn 80
A RESOLUTION ADOPTING THE LAUREL HILL PLAN
UPDATE.
The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that
The Laurel Hill Neighborhood Plan was adopted in 1974 and was
the City of Eugene's first neighborhood ref inement plan, Since
that time, major policy documents affecting the plan area such as
the South Hills Study and Metropolitan Area General Plan have been
adopted, and in January of 1981 the City's Planning Commission
initiated the Laurel Hill Plan Update to respond to the need for
the neighborhood plan to reflect and be consistent with these
broader policy documents.
In February of 1981 a letter was sent by the Eugene Planning
Department to all residents, property owners, and businesses in the
Laurel Hill area inviting them to participate in the Laurel Hill
Plan update process, and in March of 1981 a planning team composed
of 13 residents and property owners within the plan area was formed
to begin review of the update.
The plan area includes all land south of Franklin Boulevard
and Interstate 5 bounded by Hendricks Park and the City limits on
the west, 30th Avenue, and a ridge line ( urban growth boundary) on
the south and southeast. This area represents an expansion of the
original plan area which encompassed the developed area within the
Laurel Hill valley. The new plan boundaries include undeveloped
land and areas east of Laurel Hill Drive, and two major tasks of
the Laurel Hill Plan Update involved this area: (1) location and
refinement of. a commercial /residential development node; and ( 2 )
general location and design considerations for the Glenwood collec-
tor, a major new access road to serve the largely undeveloped por-
tions of the plan area.
In June of 1981 the City's citizen Involvement Committee ' re-
viewed and approved the update process. The planning team has - met.
with City staff on at Least a monthly basis throughout the update
process in developing the plan draft.
After the first draf t of the plan update was reviewed and
agreed upon by the planning team, the draft was mailed and distri -
buted to all residents and property owners of the plan area on May
3, 1982. On May 20, 1982, the Laurel Hill Citizens Association
considered and adopted the draft.
The Eugene Planning Commission held two work sessions on the
plan prior to a public hearing on June 1, 1982. The Commission
took action on the plan draft on June 14, 1982 and recommended its
approval of the plan update draft with revisions to the City Council
for adoption.
Resolution - 1
3"100
The City Council held a public hearing on the Laurel Hill Plan
Update on July 26, 1982 and considered the recommendations of the
Planning Commission, the Laurel Hill Citizens' Association, and
members of the public.
The Planning Commission and City Council have reviewed the
Laurel Hill Plan update. Based on the findings therein and the
public testimony before the Commission and the Council, the City
Council finds that the Laurel Hill Plan Update is consistent with
the Eugene - Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan, the 1974
Community Goals and Policies, and the Statewide Planning Goals.
Now, therefore ■ based on the above f indings ,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EUGENE, a
Municipal Corporation of the State of Oregon, as follows:
Section 1 . The policies set forth in the Laurel Hill Plan
Update are hereby adopted as a refinement of the Eugene - Springfield
Metropolitan Area General Plan for the Laurel Hill Plan area, and
the explanatory text following the policies is recognized as clari-
fying and explaining the intent of the policies.
Section 2 . The Land Use.Diagram included in the Laurel Hill
Plan Update is hereby adopted as a refinement of the Eugene -
Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan diagram.
Section 3 , The Proposals set forth in the Laurel Hill Plan
Update are hereby recognized as potential means of reaching or im-
plementing adopted policies, but are not adopted as City policy.
Section 4 . The neighborhood Goals set forth in the Laurel
Hill Valley neighborhood section of the Laurel Hill Plan Update
are recognized as statements which describe the hopes of the Laurel
Hill Valley people for the future of their neighborhood, but are
not adopted as City policy.
Section 5 The
forth in Attachment
ence , are adopted as
Hill Plan Update,
Section 6 The
ings, the supporting
Hill Plan Update.
revisions and errata of July 26, 1982, as set
k, attached hereto and incorporated by refer -
revisions to be incorporated in- the Laurel
City Council hereby adopts as additional find-
text, data, and maps contained in the Laurel
Section 7 . As adopted herein, the Laurel Hill Plan Update
replaces and supercedes the prior Laurel Hill Plan,
The foregoing Resolution adopted the 26th day of July, 1982.0
City Recorder
Resolution - 2.
3700
ATTACHMENT A
LAUREL HILL PLAN UPDATE
REVISIONS TO MAY 3, 1982, PLAN DRAFT
JULY 26 1982
Deletions are shown in [brackets], Additions are un derlined, p Page and ara--
graph references are to the May 3, 1982 , draft • A other portions of the draft
remain the same.
I. TABLE OF CONTENTS:
• Introduction [and Preface].
• 1974 Plan Pref
I. LAND USE AND FUTURE URBAN DESIGN:
• Land Use [Map] Diagram
II. INTRODUCTION:
•
In March 1981, a c i t i z e n s group composed of residents and property owners
in the Laurel H i l l area began work on a three -fol d ro •ect . The g
p J
goals were to update the Laurel Hill neighborhood plan to comply with the
Metropolitan Area General P l a n (formerly 1990 Plan) , to locate the Glenwood
collector road, and to provide guidelines on development of a commercial
residential node noted in the Metropolitan General Plan adopted in March
1982.
These considerations were to occur within an overall planning area that
includes land east of [Laurel] Floral Hill Drive, south of Interstate 5,
and north of the ridgeline (urban growth boundary), continuing from the
898 -foot elevation through the 947 -foot knoll, the 983 -foot knoll, and
the 757 -foot knoll to Interstate 5 (see [Contour Map] Topographical Map).
[Thel.Laurel Hill Valley and East Laurel Hill are two distinct geographic
areas within the plan. The Laurel Hill Valley boundaries are defined [in
the "Preface" below] as the watershed bounded by a ridgeline around the
valley that starts at endricks Ra at the west to 30th venue to the
Bout and continues along n . olls ofi $70 feet an eet elevation at
e sout east, an northward to a no o e evation, c ontinuing northwest
and north along Laurel rive to the Glenwood interc ange and Interstate
5. The East Laurel Hill area is that area east of Laurel Hill Drive and south
of Interstate 5, extending [southwesterly] south - easterly to the rid eline.
BE
3700
For the purposes of th1 s p1 an assumptions, oal s, pol ici es, and proposal s
are defined as follows:
A. Assumptions—Findings or statements of fact that provide back round
data for the pol icies and proposals.
B. Nei hborhood Goals—The hopes of the people of the Laurel Hill Plan Area
for their neighborhood. Neighborhood goa fs are not adopted by the
C ouncil and are d i st i n u i shed from communi g oals adopted by the C t �
ounc i l and statewide oa s wh* ch are and --use u idel i nes .
C. Policies ---Are adopted by the City Council as guidance for decision-
making related to the plan area. City programs, actions, and decisions
such as zone changes, traff c pattern char es, and capital improve-
ments, w1 11 e eva uated on the basis of their ability to implement
these p o l i c i e s , as we l as other adopted i ty oal s and policies.
D. Proposals—Are suggestions for impl ementi n the policies of this plan.
n general, they w i l l be further reviewed and studied and may or may
not be implemented in the form in which they appear in the plan. They
are reco n i zed as ideas whi h ave been su este , after some p u b l i c
di scussion, as possible ways to implement the plan.
It is the intention of the planning team that the revised plan represents
the [intent, purpose, and] integrity of the original 1974 neighborhood plan
and is a resourceful document that w i l l aid planning d e c i s i o n s in the
future.] The purpose of the plan update is to maintain the intent of the
1974 Laurel Hill an and to provide d i r e c t i o n for the future development.
a the ast aurel i 1 area. he plan is a product of ci t zens work with
C ity Planning Department assistance and continues to owe its form to their
cooperative efforts. A series of monthly meetings was held from March
1981 to May 1982 to accomplish this work. The review and assistance of
the Laurel Hill Valley Neighborhood As the City of Eugene
Planning Commission, and the Eugene City Council is appreciated.
III. 1974 PLAN PREFACE:
Relocate the Preface to the page immediately preceding page 1, which is
after the Laurel Hill Valley Neighborhood divider page.
IV. PAGE 1:
• B. Neighborhood Goals
-2
3700
• 8. To attain an overall density in the Laurel Hill Valle y of four units
per acre. l thou the ow-- density des i & gnation of the Metro 1 an
would allow up to ten units per acre, the intent of an overall density
of four units per acre is to avert rapid runoff, minimi ze total
roadway areas, preserve land contours, maintain a bal ance of housin
types, reflect sanitary sewer ca ac i t fes , and achieve a bal ance of
homeowners and renters within the va ey. Al - 1 ---- l ow-density areas at
elevations greater than feet are subject to outh ills t udy
development uidel ines. his provision is not intended to preclude
construction of residences on existing lots.)
V. PACE 2
[it i s urged that the overall density of the Laurel Hill Valle should
not exceed four dwelling •y - on of
el 1 ng uni is per acre. The low-density designation
the Metro Plan would allow up to ten units per acre under planned u n i t
development conditions. The four - -unit- per -acre goal is significant, and
should be attained. The intent i's to maintain a balance of housing type,
reflect sanitary sewer capacity, and achieve a 'balance of homeowners and
renters within the valley. All low -- density areas at elevations greater
than 500 feet are subject to South Hills Study development guidelines.]
The appropriate density for residential development shall be determined
based on the prov i s i I on of the Metropolitan rea ener al Plan c a l m
ar an overall density range o one to ten units per acre, and 2) p rov i w
sions o the outh it s turfy, includin those limi n density to five
un ' t s per acre far sites above eet i n elevation.
• c. Dispersal
Planned unit developments composed primarily of multiple dwelling units
[should] shall be separated and dispersed and not abutting,
•
2. [All d] Development proposals, land-use applications, and code
amendments shall continue to be referred to and reviewed by the
neighborhood associations for review and comment within the
existing guidelines of the Neighborhood Organization Recognition
Policy.
• 4. No additional sector of the Laurel Hill Valley [should] will be
zoned for commercial purposes until a public need for commercial
zoning can be demonstrated. [The status of those lots currently
zoned for neighborhood commercial purposes in the valley should be
studied in order to determine the compatibility with the plan.]
Nei hborhood residents and property owners shall work to ether to
determi '
ne the future use of the existin commercially zoned lots
ffC1!
3700
(See provision for the commercial /residential development node in East
Laurel i section.
VI. PAGE 3:
• New land divisions [should] shall be planned to respect the present topography
and ensure solar potential to the extent possible. Developers [should] shall
be encouraged .
• 5. The Laurel Hill plan supports South Hills Study standards. In general,
alteration of land contours [should] shall be minimized to retain views of
natural features and retain as much of the forested atmosphere as possible.
Aside from purely aesthetic considerations, these hillsides demand care 'in
development because the top soil is thin and the water runoff is rapid.
Proposed developments [should] shall respect the above considerations.
•
[B. An average density of less than five dwelling units per acre will be
enforced to avert rapid runoff, minimize total roadway area, and
preserve land contours.]
•
[C-1 B . Considerable latitude [should] shall be allowed the developer in the
shaping, depth, and required stree front ages of lots where it is
necessary to preserve the terrain.
VII. PAGE 4:
•
5. Because of the small-scale nature of the valley, its topography, and
limited vehicular space, [we feel no trailer parks or mobile home
.clusters should be constructed] mobile home parks or mobile home
clusters should be discouraged in the valley.
VIII, PAGE 5:
• B. Neighborhood Goals
IX. PAGE 6:
_ [6. To design a systematic transportation and traffic plan for the valley
as soon as practical.]
• 3. Street design [should] will .Traffic patterns and street standards
[should] shall
4. All future construction in the valley or East Laurel Hill [should]
shall include adequate off - street parking to accommodate not only
permanent residents, but a reasonable number of visitors. Although
on- street parking [should] shall be discouraged, in some areas pull-
out facilities for parking Lshould be] will also need to be developed,
particularly where congestion exists.
5a
3700
• 5 . Some east -west movements [should] will be considered to avoid addi-
tional Yong north - -south corridors west of Laurel Hill DriVe.
• 6. Traffic patterns generated in the southern part of the valley will
be extremely important to the remainder of the valley and, therefore,
careful attention [should] will be paid to the movement of that
traffic to areas outside the valley.
X. PAGE 7:
• D. [Neighborhood] Proposals
5. The exit from Riverview street -to the I -5 off -ramp should be one--
way as it leaves the vaTTeY,
6. The I-5 off -cramp should be one lane from I -5 to the Riverview
exit; wit the second ane be 1nnn at that point, on the left,
or traffic coming out of the v a ley. A d i v T der is suggested to
emp as -e the separation.
7. A merging raffic warning or control light should be installed to
reduce traffic speed on the off - -ramp, before it reaches the
R iverview treet e x i t from the valley 40
8. Bicycle path connections will be i ncreas i n l y important and the
connections should be made l inking loral Hill Drive, endricks
P ark, the l enwood collector, and others. Moved from Urban and P u b l i c
Services e ement, Proposal 6, page 9.)
X I . PAGE 8:
. B. Nei hborhood Goals
1. All new construction [and new land divisions] in newly developin
areas should install underground services. Establis ed areas
should be encouraged and aided in doing so.
XII. PAGE 9:
• [6 . Bicycle path connections will be increasingly important, and connec-
tions linking Floral Hill Drive, Hendricks Park, the Glenwood collector
and others.] (Moved to Transprotati on element as proposal 8.)
• 4 . ' The neighborhood requests that the area along the river at the
valley's northern edge be left in a natural state. It serves a
valuable recreation purpose. [Development should meet Willamette
Greenway standards.] Development within the Wi l l amett.e Greenway w i l l
be required to meet Willamette Greenway standards.
-5-
3700
XIII. PAGE 10:
• B. Neighborhood Goals
•
4. [To continue the Laurel Hi'l l Elementary School as a community
center with more access to the school and its surroundings for
community activities and to encourage community activities.
Expand the use of Laurel Hill School to residents of the neighbor-
hood and fill the void caused by school closures.] To encoura e
continuance of Laurel Hill Elementary School when enrollments
juste y re openin the facil ity, Where feasible, the schoo
district s ou d continue to make a portion or portions of the
school s i to espec i s y the play round ac i i t i es available ai l ab e for
communi-ty activities and neighborhood use so as to fill the void
caused by the closure of the school.
XIV. PAGE 11:
• B. N Goal s
XV. PAGE 12: None
XVI. PAGE 13:
• Introduction
The East Laurel Hill area, as noted earlier, is that area east of Laurel
Hill Drive an south of Interstate extend i n southwesterly tot the
ridge i ne . It is also an area .
• 2. The East Laurel Hill development node shall be established as a
refinement to the Metropolitan General Plan which indicates a floating
commercial /residential node . . .
3. The East Laurel Hi ll development node shall be designed to take into
consideration th exis tin community commercial development and
tourist need s along th e frontage road south of nterst ate 5. t e
enwoo col-lector, the eo rap y and topography of the and,
i nc ng power i ne eas emen t s, and the future nee q borhood commercial
needs of Laurel Hill residents. LThe „ o owing elements suggested y
the Metropolitan Plan are included:]
The fol l owin el ements suggested by the Metropolitan Plan are
included:--
nc uded:
BOT
300
• 8 . Geographi area to be served the entire area of the Laurel Hill
Plan is intended to be served by this commerci al /res dent i al node.
XV I I . PAGE 14:
•
C. Provision for medium-density residential: A medium-density/profes-
sion designation is i)nc uded within the node (This area
should be exempt from low-density residential l im,i t at i on s imposed by
this plan, the Metropolitan General Plan, or the South Hills Study) .
Development in this area should be consistent with this plan, the
M etropolitan General Plan, and the S Hill . . 0 The
P lan states that "whenever posse b e" medium-density residential
development should occur adjacent to or surrounding commercial develop-
ment. Medium -- density development is desirable in East Laurel Hill [in
conjunction with] as a part of the commercial/residential [floating]
node to provide convenient ous i ng for resi dents needing to [reside]
live close to shopping and serve the businesses within the commercial/
res i denti al node.
XVIII.PAGE 15:
• The location of the development node along the Glenwood collector (identi-
fied by the T-2000 Plan) and south of the Interstate 5 off -ramp w i l l
provide excellent access for the commercial /residential node.
4. [3] overall the development mode . . . Five acres . . . east edge of
Laurel [wood] Hill Drive is a low density residential buffer .
• 5. [4.] Development and expansion of park facilities and bicycle
[parks] paths is encouraged.
XIX. PAGE 16:
• The commercial/residenti development node area in East Laurel Hill
[shall] will have t e enwood collector as its primary access, The
exten s i o a7 the proposed Glenwood collector shall be in an alignment and
l ocated to extend southward from the terminus of the Glenwood Boulevard
approach in a southeasterly direction. It [shall] will be aligned as
nearly as possible along the eastern boundary of TaxUot 400 so as not to
negatively affect the Lowe property (Tax Lpt 400) and continue southward
along the boundary of the Merrill property (Tax Lot 1100). It [shall]
will take into consideration the safest and most efficient intersection
w� t Laurel Hill Drive, and be designed sensitive to topography, vegeta-
tion, and safe access.
XX. (ADDITION OF MAP INDICATING THE EAST LAUREL HILL BOUNDARIES)
WRS:pm /PL65a16
-7-