HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance No. 20441 ORDINANCE NO. 20441
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EUGENE - SPRINGFIELD
METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DIAGRAM;
AMENDING THE WILLAKENZIE AREA PLAN PURSUANT TO
SECTION 9.7750(4) OF THE EUGENE CODE, 1971; ADOPTING A
SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE;
RETURNING THE "RIVER RIDGE" SITE TO THE LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL DESIGNATION.
The City Council of the City of Eugene finds that:
A. On May 11, 2009, the Eugene City Council initiated amendments to the
Metropolitan Area General Plan and the Willakenzie Area Plan.
B. The amendments contained in this Ordinance are based on the
recommendation of the Eugene Planning Commission.
C. The City of Eugene Planning Commission and Lane County Planning
Commission held a joint public hearing on the amendments contained in this Ordinance
on August 4, 2009, and the Eugene Planning Commission has forwarded its
recommendations to the Eugene City Council for amendments to the Metropolitan Area
General Plan Land Use Diagram as shown Exhibit A, and the Willakenzie Area Plan
Land Use Diagram as shown on Exhibits B and C.
THE CITY OF EUGENE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Portions of the property identified as Tax Lots 304 and 306 of
Assessor's Map 17- 03 -07 -00 on the Eugene - Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan
(Metro Plan) Land Use Diagram and all of the property identified as Tax Lot 305 of
Assessor's Map 17- 03 -07 -00 on the Eugene - Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan
(Metro Plan) Land Use Diagram, located north of Ayres Road and west of North Delta
Highway, is amended from a designation of Parks and Open Space (POS) to a
designation of Low Density Residential (LDR) as shown on the attached Exhibit A,
which is incorporated herein.
Section 2. Consistent with the provisions of Section 9.7750(4) of the Eugene
Code, 1971, the land referenced in Section 1 above is automatically and concurrently
redesignated from Parks /Open Space to Low - Density Residential on both the
Willakenzie Area Plan Land Use Diagram located between pages 19 and 20 of the
Willakenzie Area Plan, as shown on Exhibit B, which is incorporated herein, and on the
Willakenzie Area Plan Unincorporated Subarea diagram located at page 53 of the
Willakenzie Area Plan, as shown on Exhibit C, which is incorporated herein.
Ordinance - 1
Section 3. The findings set forth in the attached Exhibit D are adopted as
findings in support of this Ordinance.
Section 4. 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 5. Notwithstanding 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 the Lane
County Board of Commissioners has adopted an ordinance containing identical
provisions to those described in sections 1 and 2 of this Ordinance, whichever is later.
Passed by the City Council this Approved by the Mayor this
9 day of November, 2009 10th day of November, 2009
AJ ` rLi //
Actin City Recorder Mayor
Ordinance - 2
Exhibit A
_ _ _
"
-to ), .' ,'
a� a eye "42,4 c r
tz .61,4 a
'S SA t, h,`i
i ., \ - `i-. :i.., q-'.a...C-.rrt...',
�v. n . `, - a Tai �`
t L fi N `'.,- i :<3H 7 b H 5
x Jt �`6t: DIY, . ti
l w �'. s t r � � 5. , �,1y l�Mr`u ,'�` E E �' p . av�.i,I
t`3 'k - : ' p 0 " r l '-f- ' 0 1 ' ��y �J p'�. ?<a"' f
f r: _ �
II
r i r y 3 � t - tSN i r3 IN lawman
gillii
fir �� ��'• 111111...1
, ,. a�� o @� 0
ej di 721111 .-.. /
1 1 119 ./ Iiilii.:0,01,,' IM WIN lei
.11,‘"" 4 4 in illM1111
NE
V9.a.,A, a S ' ° Tir . lrf ...... am& • m a ., s
, %„ r 111 a A eM N El 11 /1. , NE
t l a UM IN AiwIll al RP IN (
,Aw„, `,- y �' c ., , to • -I f i nh > TZ z -, ,,y , '� 1 ■ , 111,
• 4 Y1 lS 1 if o 1 ' --4 S 11/.■ mini
‘` 1 +�ly�'S71�`;�Tr ' „,,, ,,.... ,{r ,' r ?qr.( MINN !'
g . ' " • 6 Jt r ; ,� 4 '{P r • 4 fA A•
N:- f � a J�a e;e %'-'1V1...-.. x4 �rw r , " i `.. ,,, f; . _ � • C< �. � � 1 1' NI NS ti(ii(
c 11 ,! r' S,3 a i 1 4 5 h rCA r Z ) Z P t� • , f ® r
! k t$`.'�' f7l -M11� i w y , f\ t - 4 { . i t r' 1' ,' = lilt
{ n ' rM ' . j"� \ r l ' ! c � R r � p fi S( . r i: j
, , r WWII
f ,1 r s � , � a r v. i Y i f j - 1 , �z,, , , • ,: ♦ '�� ■ •
-5. •• r R� . ,,,N, 4• 51 g• -..{ -S ,... f cr .� S- . fia : **# /�/II i1 II iii I
ap t 7 7a t :i r ` �� /
.i . f ' i+ r 0 ..� tlll(Ill
miiiiiime. M ~'' r1r 5 ' � ' II IRO itit((1((
� � � 5�,, t� �' �>t�� �lll too l(((
� _ /■ _� - .�1,:-.1 _ ":1.C2L- ur I■r_ X1101 1I
Metro Plan D Amendment for
River Midge 1C ty Fite MA.09 -3)
® Property proposed for change from Parks and Open Space to Low Density Residential
N
• Eugene City Limits . • .
as sll Urban Growth Boundary
w yY
$,J Water Bodies Feet
o . 3zo sao . : 3 •
Exhibit B
N i
� ,, F ,,, r„,----,,..,;—,.
pa f � f o t „,
4
S Y 1 ^ iii �. -
a •
� x, ,„.„,„,7„:, ,..,.,.„.....„,d
��� ti s „,..„,,,,,
FF ;..,•.= . c {”' �ti.F iV s'� A''A1
II : ms s „r� r - 4111111111111 f s c. ` al *-3 u� e) ?r'� . II + 1 _ itimi ii .
' ve.: 'A-J. le N. NM •
, i . t:2.4:,..8.,, ' l` .s
y ita rLtr ,. , 9 . t si . x A.m.
■ 11 wi IL II
•
• ,- • hr.1.14.11. fr 4 3 . • '
- P' ,,figk;, iwi lli , IIII 11, Ng i III .
I 11=111M i ii al
t. >r3
.ail r l € �r'} �� w Na
. 1111 to 11111
• rrs 1.+�Ft a }�. rte a.... 11 , I ! 1 J 111! ii . 1'
r s� s
J
h`5 x
II imam Ruh il
,� z ' ,, ,, ,. r„.<r p � ;; t t o 4 � ; ty , �, ` ,,,, h e , ,� f r , !,1 1 . 11, r ;2 111111
fi S .. Y�R'Y ; � L5[ 1 f � f r � 1 : 1 `c � '�11 1# ® r • 1,1t
• f : i $ -1 L ,."�,- k S �, r , �'� f r V A6p.f rfy l v c � E T �.. � • • nil •
e � N 4 � 2 ' a 3 * 1... �ur� . 1 tlllllll • ? -
x . r
tifi s, 111 1111. nnmel •
.4. A is r c t ,i 3 • �� s;1111It1111 _u _
111111 �: = x _, t t . k,:. �■ IV ■111
. � ' � ,li a. _ , - 11 ' i M •i��' ,i
Wittakenz a Area Dian La Use Diagram
Amendment fGrr River Ridge (City File MA OS-3)
® Property proposed for change from Parks/Open Space to Low- Density Residential N
•••■•■ Eugene City Limits
m IN Urban Growth Boundary w ' `
1>
rf - Water Bodies Feet •
0 912.5 B . . -.r_L 1 S
•
•
Exhibit C
1 .�r'f3 ;'�� :.fit-
Fed) Al 'i��a J
f: S t b�h 1t��
AI
.,4z;..,,,,vt, ,zi,:x...:.,:_,,,,,,...
v ., ,, ,.., ,,,73, x `
'S 1 1 4,,-"'-,)7 ' ,„:.:4-,: . ..?2,.1 X, 5= 1.1 \ , e :l i'C. F pK
Mil IIII
`� Wk,..- Z 7A
rr gb t ��r � t � C� . �' � r , �>�, <= j ~ e . 's' j 1 'et. � . , , , il ���..'
i ll
5� ! b t r i y1 ,. 4 Ka 1 v: f
4:# V tit �� rfi .. ti. = 7 E? till. , ��
� � Y, -'i 7' 24C �A .E•� iX}c:L3 • •1'11' l [ y
• •• NM
9� ! !Y:� ... ■
G rp Jib ' id, .'.lJ 4 I F � . .t 1C : .: III
At rAir •
•", me a : Pall i
c Ab il ...4 - - ;4 •11 4, •
ri,,,/
sifr viT ,,,./ 1 a MINI ilk • w • -
Nunn N. li m arl
.,...„,...„,
1
/ 'e , 1/4`, ,..35�+ , , 4414 . .f/,•P',.. XI . willik —al 1 NI
`� iW�xr h, ti �.T 11,2
NO g
n t 7 Y `� } �i (S - S i J
. w 1111111 11%
}� �> Y . � `, 1.i r S ti n • , /
.,
• ;;7 �x`� - `4x � u ' ( )a - r '• - •
! ii I! , by �,
-t` iii r , 1 v � YG ,, n r . '� .. - • J. t s s�. L '11 ,
*': ,
" - -` � } (� ', r tY C- <'ft> r r 7 ,1 R . � * „1 "I
a z E F-f�`' : <��' � �- 1 � � � 111111;
Y7 � i ri l / ,x Of } ',. '" ( ¢E.v. , �Y'� t ey fr� �1 ®� • � 1111 "�% r 3 � xv R� G "r 2v I ` j� r al 1 1 1 1111 P , t t. i L G..Y t r F � � n 8 c„; � r� , ? ,Y' 5.�,✓ A f j � . � � � i n � • � .,, r "� t y r '
� ,<:.,1y " f ew t } p s ' c" - -- ' F � 1.
.r ■ I
i Sr ,,� ,42£- r .J��1111111
11 Ms inmiumommpillIllkm ...di,
III c � c ' ;� .. ® ism re 1111111111 st f .faf1111lll
da al
i as it Ey IN mini •
WWWWakenz a Area Plan Unincorporated Subarea DiagFam
Amendment for River Ridge (City File MA 09-3)
® Property proposed for change from Parks and Open Space to Low Density Residential 11
- Eugene City Limits
w � (► . � - -
mom Urban Growth Boundary ,r
1 ,Feet
Da' ., Water Bodies
o 30o s00 , 1 1 8
•
•
EXHIBIT D
Findings of Consistency
Metro Plan Diagram Amendments Eugene Code Section 9.7730(3) requires that the following •
criteria (in bold and italics) be applied to a Metro Plan diagram amendment:
(a) The amendment must be consistent with the relevant Statewide Planning Goals adopted by the
• Land Conservatlon.andDevelopment Commission;.and
•
• Goal 1 Citizen Involvement: To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity
for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process.
The City has acknowledged provisions for citizen involvement that ensure the opportunity for
citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process and set out requirements for such
• involvement. The action does not amend the citizen involvement program. The process for
reviewing these amendments complies with Goal 1 since it complies with, and surpasses the
requirements of, the citizen involvement provisions.
The City of Eugene land use implements Statewide Planning Goal 1 by requiring that notice of
the proposed amendments be given and public hearings be held prior to adoption. Consideration of
the amendments begins with a joint City of Eugene and Lane County Planning Commission public
hearing on August 4, 2009. On June 19, 2009, the City mailed notice of the proposed plan
amendments to the Department of Land Conservation and Development, as required by the Eugene
Code and in accordance with State statutes. Referrals concerning the.pending applications were
sent to the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), City of Springfield, Lane County, the
• Cal Young Neighborhood Association and to City departments. On July 13, 2009, notice of the
Planning Commission public hearing was mailed to the property owners and occupants of property
within 500 feet of the subject property, Cal Young Neighborhood Association, interested parties
who requested notice, and other community organizations requesting such notice, which is in excess
of the requirements of the Eugene Code. On July 15, 2009, notice of the Planning Commission
public hearing was published in the Register - Guard, in accordance with the Eugene Code. In
addition to public meetings and mailed notices, printed materials related to these proceedings were
made available at Planning and Development Department offices, and provided via the City's •
internet site at www.eugeneplanning.org.
•
The process for adopting these amendments complies with Statewide Planning Goal 1 since it
complies with, and surpasses the requirements of the State's citizen involvement provisions.
Goal 2 - Land Use Planning: To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a
basis for all decisions and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for
such decisions and actions. •
The Eugene - Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) is the policy tool that
provides a basis for decision - making in this area. The Metro Plan was acknowledged by the State
in 1982 to be in compliance with statewide planning goals. These findings and record show that
•
there is an adequate factual base for decisions to be made concerning the proposed amendments.
Findings of Consistency
Page 1
•
•
•
• Goal 2 requires that plans be coordinated with the plans of affected governmental units and that
opportunities be provided for review and comment by affected governmental units. To comply with
the Goal 2 coordination requirement, the City coordinated the review of these amendments with all
affected governmental units. Specifically, notice was mailed to the State Department of Land
Conservation and Development, Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), Lane County, and
the City of Springfield. There are no Goal 2 exceptions required for these amendments. Therefore,
the amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2.
Goal 3 - Agricultural Land: To preserve and maintain agricultural lands. •
Goal 3 is not applicable to these amendments as the subject property and actions do not affect any
agricultural plan designation or use. Goal 3 excludes lands inside an aclaiowledged urban growth
boundary from the definition of agricultural lands. Since the subject property is entirely within the
acknowledged urban growth boundary, Goal 3 is not relevant and the amendments do not affect the
area's compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 3.
Goal 4 - Forest Land: To conserve forest lands.
Goal 4 is not applicable to these amendments as the subject property and actions do not affect any
forest plan designation or use. Goal 4 does not apply within urban growth boundaries and,
therefore, does not apply to the subject property, which is within Eugene's urban growth boundary
(OAR 660 - 006 - 0020). Therefore, Goal .4 is not relevant and the amendments do not affect the
area's compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 4.
•
Goal. 5 - Open Spaces. Scenic and Historic Areas. and Natural Resources: To conserve open space . •
and protect natural and scenic resources.
•
• The following administrative rule (OAR 660- 023 -0250) is applicable to this post - acknowledgement
. plan amendment (PAPA) request:
(3) • Local governments are not required to apply Goal 5 in consideration of a PAPA unless the
PAPA affects a Goal 5 resource. For purposes of this section, a PAPA would affect a Goal 5
resource only if:
(a) The PAPA creates or amends a resource list or a portion of an acknowledged plan
or land use regulation adopted in order to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to
address specific requirements of Goal 5;
(b) The PAPA allows new uses that could be conflicting uses with a particular
significant Goal 5 resource site on an acknowledged resource list; or
(c) The PAPA amends an acknowledged UGB and factual information is submitted
demonstrating that a resource site, or the impact areas of such a site, is included in
the amended UGB area.
The subject property does not include a Goal 5 resource site. The proposed amendments do not
•
create or amend a list of Goal 5 resources, do not amend a plan or code provision adopted in order
to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address specific requirements of Goal 5, and do not -
amend the acknowledged Urban Growth Boundary. •
Findings of Consistency •
.Paget
•
•
Goal 6 - Air. Water and Land Resources Ouality: To maintain and improve the quality of the air,
water, and land resources of the state.
Goal 6 addresses waste and process discharges from development, and is aimed at protecting air,
water and land from impacts from those discharges. Nothing in the proposal or the character of the
site or potential uses indicates a future development that would compromise air, water and land
resources. The proposal does not amend the metropolitan area's air, water quality or land resource
policies. Based on allowed low density residential uses, the City can reasonably expect that future
development of the site comply with applicable environmental laws. Therefore, the amendments
are consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 6.
Goal 7 - Areas Subiect to Natural Disasters and Hazards: To protect life and property from natural
disasters and hazards.
Goal 7 requires that local government planning programs include provisions to protect people and
property from natural hazards such as floods, land slides, earthquakes and related hazards, tsunamis
and wildfires. The subject property is not located within known areas of natural disasters or
hazards. The subject property is outside the flood zone and is not subject to hazards normally
associated with steep slopes, wildfires, or tsunamis. Other hazards, such as earthquakes and severe
winter storms can be mitigated at the time of development based on accepted building codes and
building techniques. Therefore, these amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 7.
Goal 8 - Recreational Needs: To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and
visitors and where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities
including destination resorts.
•
Goal 8 ensures the provision of recreational facilities to Oregon citizens and is primarily concerned
with the provision of those facilities in non-urban areas of the state. Unlike planning for its
residential, commercial or industrial land needs under Goals 9 and 10, planning for a city's
recreational needs is largely a matter of local choice. The applicable statutes, Statewide Planning
Goals and administrative rules are not prescriptive as to the amount of park land that a city must
have to serve its population. While the City takes into consideration the existence of private
recreation facilities and open space in its parks planning process, because there is no guarantee that
lands owned by private entities will remain in perpetuity as public open space and/or recreation
facilities, the City does not (and is not required to) account for private facilities and open space in
its supply of recreation facilities, parks and open space. The subject property is not included on any
list, inventory or map identifying the City's existing parks and open space supply. As such,
changing the designation of the subject property will have no impact on the City's parks and open
space supply. While the proposed amendments will impact a private recreational facility, the
proposed amendments will not impact the provision of public recreational facilities, nor will they
affect access to existing or future public recreational facilities. Therefore, the amendments am
consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 8.
Goal 9 - Economic Development: To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a
variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens.
Findings of Consistency
Page 3
•
• The Administrative Rule for Statewide Planning Goal 9-(OAR 660 Division 9) requires that the city
`[p]rovide for at least an adequate supply of sites of suitable sizes, types, -location, and service levels
for a variety of industrial and commercial uses consistent with plan policies[.]" Among other
things, the rule requires that cities complete an `Economic Opportunities Analysis." OAR 660-009 -
0015. Based on the Economic Opportunities Analysis, cities are to prepare Industrial and
Commercial Development Policies. OAR 660 - 009 -0020. Finally OAR 660 - 009 -0025 requires that
• cities designate industrial and commercial lands sufficient to meet short and long term needs. OAR
660- 009 - 0010(2) provides that the detailed planning requirements imposed by OAR 660 Division 9
apply "at the time of each periodic review of the plan (ORS 197.712(3))."
The proposed amendment will not make any changes to the existing land currently designated
commercial. Thus, the amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 9.
Goal 10 - Housing: To provide for the housing needs of the citizens of the state. •
Goal 10 requires that communities plan for and maintain an inventory of buildable residential land
• for needed housing units. •
•
The proposed amendment will re- designate approximately 63 acres from Parks and Open Space to
Residential, thereby increasing the City's current supply of residential lands. Since the subject
property is not currently designated for residential use and is not included in the documented supply
of "buildable land" that is available for residential development as inventoried in the acknowledged
1999 Residential Lands Study, the proposed amendment will increase the City's existing inventory
of land that is available for residential development. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with
Statewide Planning Goal 10.
•
•
Goal 11 - Public Facilities and Services: To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient
arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural
development. •
A portion of the area affected by the amendments is located outside the city limits but inside the
Eugene- Springfield Urban Growth Boundary. The existing level of public facilities and service is
adequate to serve the needs of existing and future development, as public facilities are available or
can be extended to the subject property. While a portion of the subject property is located outside
City limits, annexation is a requirement for any new use that would generate an additional need for
urban facilities and services. Public facilities and services are available for the purpose of
annexation. The provision of these amendments does not affect the planning or development of
future public facilities or services. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Statewide
Planning Goal 11.
Goal 12 - Transportation: To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic
transportation system.
• Goal 12 is implemented through the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), as defined in Oregon •
Administrative Rule OAR 660 - 012 -0000, et seq. The Eugene - Springfield Metropolitan Area
Transportation Plan (TransPlan) provides the regional policy framework through which the TPR is
•
•
Findings of Consistency
Page 4
implemented at the local level. The TPR (OAR 660 - 012 -0060) states that when land use changes,
including amendments to acknowledged comprehensive plans, significantly affect an existing or
planned transportation facility the local government shall put in place measures to assure that the
allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity and performance standards
(level of service, volume to capacity ratio, etc.) of the thcility.
Section 9.8670 of the Eugene Code, 1971, requires a development applicant to comply with the
City's Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Review code provisions if the proposed development will
"generate 100 or more vehicle trips during any peak hour as determined by using the most recent
edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineer's Trip Generation Manual." One of the stated
purposes of the City's TIA Review requirement is "to ensure that developments which will generate
a significant amount of traffic, cause an increase in traffic that will contribute to traffic problems in
the area, or result in levels of service of the roadway system in the vicinity of the development that
do not meet adopted level of service standards provide the facilities necessary to accommodate the
• traffic impact of the proposed development."
The City's TIA Review follows a Type II process and is approved or conditionally approved upon
the applicant's demonstration of compliance with the following criteria at EC 9.8680:
(1) Traffic control devices and public or private improvements as necessary to
achieve the purposes listed in this section will be implemented. These improvements
may include, but are not limited to, street and intersection improvements, sidewalks,
bike lanes, traffic control signs and signals, parking regulation, driveway location,
and street lighting.
(2) Public improvements shall be designed and constructed to the standards
specified in EC 9.6505 Improvements - Specifications. The requirement of •
improvements based on a traffic impact analysis does not negate the ability of the
city traffic engineer to require improvements by other means specified in this code or
rules or regulations adopted thereunder.
(3) • An exception to any or all of the requirements listed in the "Standards for
Traffic Impact Analyses" for development that generate less than 100 trips in any
peak hour may be granted if the applicant demonstrates that the study is not
• necessary in order to demonstrate compliance with this subsection.
(4) In addition to the above criteria, if the Traffic Impact Analysis Review was
required based on EC 9.8670(4), the improvements shall also address the structural
• capacity of the street in the County's jurisdiction and address identified structural
deficiencies, or reduction in the useful life of existing street structures related to the
• proposed development. Improvements may be needed to eliminate the identified
structural deficiencies and to accommodate vehicle impacts to structures.
In accordance with the above - quoted Eugene City code provisions, prior to the any development on
the subject property that will generate more than 100 peak hour trips per day, the developer will •
need to prepare a TIA Review that parallels the TPR analysis required by Statewide Planning Goal
12. Because of the size of the subject property (approximately 63 acres), the number of allowed
Findings of Consistency
Pages
•
single- family dwelling units would be in excess of 300 units. Based on the ITE Trip Generation
Manual, 300 residential units would generate an estimated 300 PM peak trips, far exceeding the
number of PM peak trips that would trigger the City's TIA Review code provisions. Because no
development that will generate more than 100. PM peak trips will be able to occur on the subject
property without the a demonstration of compliance with the City's TIA Review requirements,
postponing the TPR/Goal 12 analysis so that it can occur concurrently with the TIA Review
analysis is reasonable and practicable. As means of ensuring that any development that occurs on
the subject property is consistent with Goal 12, the following condition of approval will be imposed
on the Metro Plan amendment:
•
Prior to the approval of any land division or site review application for the Property
• referenced in Section 1 of this Ordinance, in addition to any applicable requirements
of the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Review in the Eugene City Code, the applicant
shall submit to the City a traffic impact analysis that demonstrates consistency with
the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) at OAR 660 -12 -0060. At•the applicant's
choice, this TPR analysis may be submitted and processed simultaneously with the
TIA Review.
Additionally, as a means of ensuring that DLCD and ODOT receive notice of the proposed
development, the following condition of approval will be imposed on the Metro Plan amendment:
Upon receipt of any land division or site review application for the Property
referenced in Section 1 of this Ordinance the City shall provide notice to DLCD in
the same manner as the City provides notice for a post - acknowledged plan _
amendment.
Based on the above -two conditions of approval, the proposal is consistent with Statewide Planning
• Goal 12. •
Goal 13 - Energy Conservation: To conserve energy.
Statewide Planning Goal 13 calls for land uses to be managed and controlled "so as to maximize the
conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles." Goal 13 is directed at
the development of local energy policies and implementing provisions and does not state
requirements with respect to other types of land use decisions. It is not clear that the goal has any
• bearing on a site-specific decision such as the one at issue. There is no implementing rule that
clarifies the requirements of Goal 13. To the extent that Goal 13 could be applied to the proposed
change in designation, the designation is consistent with Goal 13. The proposed site is located so
that a future development can make efficient use of energy with direct and efficient access. The
proposal is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 13.
• Goal 14 - Urbanization: To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land
use.
The amendments do not effect the transition from rural to urban land use, as the subject property is
within the Eugene - Springfield Urban Growth Boundary limits. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal •
Findings of Consistency .
Page 6
14 does not apply.
• Goal 15 - WiIlamette River Greenway: To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural,
scenic, historical, agricultural, economic and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette
River as the Willamette River Greenway.
The subject property is not within the boundaries of the Willamette River Greenway. Therefore,
Statewide Planning .Goal 15 does not apply.
Goal 16 through 19 - Estuarine Resources. Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes. and Ocean
Resources:
There are no coastal, ocean, estuarine, or beach and dune resources related to the property effected
by these amendments. Therefore, these goals are not relevant and the amendments will not affect
compliance with Statewide Planning Goals 16 through 19.
(b) Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent
The Metro Plan diagram amendment to re- designate approximately 63 acres of land from Parks and
Open Space to Low Density Residential will not create an internal conflict with the remainder of the
Metro Plan. No text or other diagram changes are necessary to ensure internal consistency with the
proposed diagram amendments; adoption of this amendment will not make the Metro Plan
internally consistent.
6.DOC;1 •
00230306.DOC;1
•
•
•
•
Findings of Consistency
•
Page 7