Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10.17.2023 PC AgendaAft WPIanning Commission Phone: 541-682-5481 www.eugene-or.gov/pc i� LANE COUNTY OREGON AGENDA Meeting Location: Online Meeting (Via Zoom) The Eugene and Lane County Planning Commissions welcome your interest in these agenda items. This meeting will be held remotely using virtual meeting technology. Information about online or other options for access and participation is available on the last page of this agenda. For the hearing impaired, assistive -listening devices or an interpreter can be provided with 72 -hour notice prior to the meeting. Spanish-language interpretation may also be provided with 72 -hour notice. These services may not be available during the Planning Commission meeting based on service availability but may occur as a follow up service. To arrange for these services, contact the Planning Division at 541-682-5675. TUESDAY, October 17, 2023 — Joint Public Hearing with the Eugene Planning Commission and the Lane County Planning Commission (6:00 pm) Eugene Planning Commissioners: Ken Beeson; Diane Behling; Tiffany Edwards; Lisa Fragala (Vice Chair); Dan Isaacson (Chair); Jason Lear, Chris Ramey Lane County Planning Commissioners: Jeffery Choate (Vice Chair); Stephen Dignam; Bruce Hadley; Michelle Hankes; Eliza Kashinsky (Chair), Markus Lay; Jonnie Peacock; Stephen Snider; Christian Wihtol Joint Eugene Planning Commission and Lane County Planning Commission Public Hearing: River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan and Metro Plan Amendments and River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood -Specific Code Amendments (City Of Eugene Files MA 23-5 And CA 23-3 & County File 509- PA23-05532) The City of Eugene and Lane County are considering amendments to the Eugene - Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) to adopt the River Road - Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan and repeal the 1987 River Road -Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan. Eugene is also considering neighborhood -specific land use code amendments within the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhood boundaries (these changes would only apply to properties within city limits). City Staff: Terri Harding, 541-682-5635, THard ing(a (a1-or.gov County Staff: Jared Bauder, 541-682-6949, Jared. Bauder(a)Ianecountyor.gov Page 1 of 122 Public Hearing Format: Following the informational overview from staff, the Planning Commissions will open the public hearing for public comment. Testimony will be limited to three minutes per person. The Planning Commissions may seek a response to testimony from City staff. At the end of the hearing, the Planning Commission Chairs will announce whether the record is closed, the record will be held open, or the public hearing will be continued. HOW TO ACCESS THE MEETING To watch a webcast of the meeting live: Visit: https://www.eugene-or.gov/2109/Planning-Commission-Webcasts To be able to participate in the Public Hearing join using one of the two following options: 1. Join on your computer, tablet or smartphone Visit: https://eugene-or-qov.zoom.us/m/88568352100 Sign up to speak by clicking once on the "raise hand" icon 2. Join on your phone Dial one of the below numbers and enter the Webinar ID: 885 6835 2100 +1 833-548-0276 (Toll Free); or +1 833-548-0282 (Toll Free); or +1 877-853-5257 (Toll Free); or +1 888-475-4499 (Toll Free); For higher quality, dial a number based on your current location. International numbers available: https://eugene-or-gov.zoom.us/u/kbEgyMKe59 Sign up to speak by dialing *9 (Star -9) 3. In Person: There will be limited capacity for those without internet access or in need of special accommodations to join in person in the Goodpasture Room at the Lane County Public Works Custom Service Center, 3050 N Delta Hwy, Eugene OR 97408. To attend in person, please RSVP by calling or emailing David Ruiz -Maya at 541-682-6768 or David. Ruiz -Maya @-lanecountyor.gov at least 48 hours prior to the meeting. Page 2 of 122 AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 17, 2023 To: Eugene and Lane County Planning Commissions From: Terri Harding, City of Eugene Planning Division Subject: Joint Public Hearing: RIVER ROAD -SANTA CLARA NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN AND METRO PLAN AMENDMENTS AND RIVER ROAD -SANTA CLARA NEIGHBORHOOD -SPECIFIC CODE AMENDMENTS (City Files MA 23-5 and CA 23-3 & County File 509-PA23-05532) I1;1iN1Z11LA0A114,11y1 The City of Eugene and Lane County have been working with the River Road Community Organization (RRCO) and Santa Clara Community Organization (SCCO) since 2017 to create a new Neighborhood Plan. After thorough community outreach, goal and policy development, analysis, coordination, review cycles, and legal review, an adoption package has been assembled and is ready for the public hearing process. The adoption package consists of amendments to the Eugene Code related to allowed uses and development standards in the River Road and Santa Clara areas, as well as amendments to the Eugene -Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) to repeal the 1987 River Road Santa - Clara Urban Facilities Plan, adopt a new River Road — Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan, and amend the Metro Plan to remove Chapter II Section F from the Metro Plan. At this meeting, the Eugene Planning Commission and Lane County Planning Commission will hold a public hearing to accept spoken testimony regarding the proposed adoption package. Following the public hearing, both Planning Commissions will deliberate and make a recommendation on the proposed Metro Plan amendment, the proposed adoption of the new River Road — Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan, and the proposed repeal of the 1987 River Road Santa -Clara Urban Facilities Plan. Only the Eugene Planning Commission will deliberate and make a recommendation on the proposed code amendments because they will only apply to properties within the Eugene city limits. A summary of the adoption package components is provided in Attachment A. BACKGROUND The River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods are composed of a patchwork of properties within the City of Eugene (incorporated) and Lane County (unincorporated). For over 30 years, land use and development within the River Road and Santa Clara communities have been governed by the River Road -Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan (1987). An updated, forward-looking plan was needed for this large part of the community. RRCO and SSCO dedicated innumerable volunteer hours to developing a foundation of community input on which to build the neighborhood planning process. This work included past community and planning efforts, such as the Santa Clara -River Road Outreach and Learning (SCRROL) and Santa Clara - River Road Implementation Planning Team (SCRRIPT) projects. Page 1 Page 3 of 122 Launched in fall 2017, the neighborhood planning process was a collaborative effort among RRCO, SCCO, the City of Eugene, Lane County, and other stakeholders throughout both neighborhoods. The process had six phases: Reaching Out, Neighborhood Visioning, Neighborhood Priorities, Policy Development, Action Planning, and Adoption, with opportunities for community and stakeholder feedback throughout every phase. The Community Advisory Committee (CAC), comprised of volunteers nominated by the community organization boards and approved by the Eugene Planning Commission, played a key role in all phases of the project, and continues to advocate for neighborhood priorities as the project enters the adoption phase. The neighborhood planning process created a vision for growth and development in a manner that respects the area's unique characteristics and opportunities, which will guide decision-making in River Road and Santa Clara for decades to come. The Neighborhood Plan vision is consistent with Envision Eugene, the community vision for how growth is managed in Eugene's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), in a way that protects and enhances quality of life and reflects shared community values, while tailoring the citywide vision to the local context. The Neighborhood Plan focuses on the topic areas of Economic Development, Transportation, Parks and Natural Resources, Land Use, and Community. To reflect the community values, aspirations, and priorities expressed during outreach, each topic area includes vision statements, goals, policies, and actions. The draft Neighborhood Plan is included as Attachment B. The proposed amendments to the Metro Plan are included in Attachment C. The proposed City of Eugene Land Use Code Amendments are included in Attachment D. These regulatory components work to form the framework for guiding policy decisions in River Road and Santa Clara. In addition, City, County, and community partners will work together to advance actions included in the non -regulatory Action Plan. City staff committed to meeting annually with neighborhood leaders to update community priorities and collaborate on implementation projects. Over the past six years, highlights of the neighborhood planning public engagement have included: • Project web page and Engage Eugene page • Periodic e -newsletter updates to 1,600+ people • 5 community meetings at North Eugene High School • 40+ Community Advisory Committee meetings • 16,800 postcards mailed to all residents and property owners within the River Road and Santa Clara Neighborhoods • Emails to project interested parties providing updates at various times over the project phases Please see the project Public Engagement Summary at Attachment C (Exhibit A) for a full description of project engagement. Neighborhood Planning Process As noted above, the River Road -Santa Clara neighborhood planning process included six key phases, with opportunities for the Planning Commissions to learn about and provide feedback on the project Page 2 Page 4 of 122 along the way. A more detailed written explanation of the project phases and group roles can be found on pages 16-18 of the draft Neighborhood Plan. • Spring 2017 — 2018: The first three phases of the project - Reaching Out, Visioning, and Neighborhood Priorities focused on asking community members what they value in their neighborhoods now and about their hopes and visions for the future. • 2018 - Spring 2019: The fourth phase, the Policy Development Phase, focused on drafting policies that relate to the vision and neighborhood priorities. The draft policies are organized under eighteen high-level goals. Both the goals and policies were written by the Community Advisory Committee and vetted by topic area Working Groups and the project management team. The policy language has been refined by staff to incorporate initial legal feedback, to better reflect the actions associated with those policies, and to provide general clarifying updates. • Summer 2019 - Spring 2021: The fifth phase, the Action Planning Phase, focused on drafting, evaluating, and prioritizing actions, which the community identified as possible strategies to implement the Neighborhood Plan policies. The project team provided updates on the Action Planning Phase and received feedback on land use code related actions to focus on in the Adoption Phase at the March 22, 2021 Eugene Planning Commission work session and the April 6 and April 20, 2021 Lane County Planning Commission work sessions. • May 2021: The Eugene City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners directed staff to move into the Adoption Phase and prepare the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan adoption package for community review. • Summer 2021 -Fall 2022: Work continued preparing and refining a draft corridor code. By late fall 2022, several challenges to the project including the pandemic, staff changes, and new state rules caused the staff team to reconsider the path to landing the project. While the vision statements, goals, policies, and actions remain largely intact, staff proposed shifting certain implementation tools such as zoning and land use code amendments to better align with new rules affecting middle housing, climate friendly development, and housing production. • November 2022 -June 2023: The project staff team spent five months between November 2022 and March 2023 discussing with the CAC how to best land the project within existing resource and state law constraints, while meeting as many of the neighborhood objectives as possible. Staff proposed a compromise that includes the most critical neighborhood -specific land use code amendments identified through the corridor planning work but does not create a new zoning district or rezone properties. In March 2023, the CAC voted to send the draft Neighborhood Plan, Action Plan, and Neighborhood -specific Code Amendments out to the community for feedback. • May -June 2023: A variety of outreach events and tools were offered in May and June, including virtual information sessions, a community survey, River Road and Santa Clara Community Organization meetings, and a Community Meeting held at North Eugene High School. A project update was presented to the Eugene Planning Commission on May 23, 2023, and the Lane County Planning Commission on June 6, 2023. • July -August 2023: The project staff team assembled comments from the outreach tools and events and shared them with the CAC. The comments at this stage in the process were generally supportive, although some community priorities are not addressed by the current Page 3 Page 5 of 122 plan and will require ongoing work by the City, County, and community partners. The CAC voted on July 27, 2023 to move the revised adoption package forward to public hearings. The CAC recommendation letter, as well as recommendations from RCCO and SCCO are included in Attachment E. Formal Adoption Package Based on the process described above, project staff refined the adoption package, including assembling the Neighborhood Plan and non -regulatory Action Plan, drafting plan and code amendments, writing findings, and summarizing the project's public engagement and technical analysis. A complete adoption package has been assembled for the City of Eugene and Lane County Planning Commissions for review and recommendations, before proceeding to the City Council and Board of Commissioners for their consideration, including a joint public hearing and separate actions. Components of the adoption package are summarized in Attachment A. The components of the City of Eugene adoption package attached to this AIS include: • Attachment B: Draft River Road Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan • Attachment C: Proposed Eugene -Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan Text Amendments • Attachment D: Proposed City of Eugene Land Use Code Amendments (neighborhood - specific) The components of the Lane County adoption package attached to this AIS include: • Attachment B: Draft River Road Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Attachment C: Proposed Eugene -Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan Text Amendments Both bodies will also consider the repeal of the 1987 River Road Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan. f].1.149111:71slil1uIW_\WK1,1117]w_LIIL1IILL014L•IuIu11: 9191,1L1:101 The Eugene and Lane County Planning Commissions have already had an important role throughout the project, participating in multiple work sessions as the Neighborhood Plan was developed and providing feedback and direction to the project team and the City Council and Board of Commissioners. The process for the formal consideration of the legislative adoption package complies with City and County procedural requirements for adoption of a Type II Metro Plan Amendment and all the City procedural requirements for a Type V Code Amendment. The legislative process includes public notice and a hearing before the Eugene and Lane County Planning Commissions. Notice of the October 17, 2023, joint planning commission public hearing was provided consistent with the notice requirements for a Type II Metro Plan Amendment and a City of Eugene Type V land use code amendment. This includes notice sent to Eugene neighborhood organizations, the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development, and other community groups and individuals who Page 4 Page 6 of 122 have requested notice. Consistent with ORS 227.186 (Measure 56), a separate notice was also provided to owners of properties affected by the proposed code amendments that apply to C-2 Community Commercial zoned land within the city limits. Notice of the public hearing was also published in the Register Guard consistent with local code requirements. Testimony received in response to the public notice is included as Attachment F to this memo. Any testimony received after the publication of this AIS will be batched and forwarded to the Planning Commissions. Additionally, a copy of the record materials and testimony will be provided directly to the Commissioners for their consideration. At this stage, the commissions' roles are to participate in a joint public hearing and subsequently make separate recommendations on the appropriate portions of the adoption package to their respective governing bodies. The recommendations of the planning commissions must be based on the applicable approval criteria for the proposed amendments. The applicable approval criteria and proposed findings addressing those approval criteria will be provided under separate cover prior to the public hearing. Note that an updated version of the Code Amendments dated September 28, 2023, is included as Attachment D. NEXT STEPS After the public hearing, each Planning Commission will hold its own deliberations and make separate recommendations to their respective governing bodies. Staff recommends that the Planning Commissions hold the record open for one week following the public hearing, until 5pm on October 24, 2023. Testimony received by this date will be indexed and provided to the Commissions for their deliberations. Any testimony received after October 24, 2023 would not be considered by the Planning Commissions for the initial recommendation but will be forwarded to the City Council and Lane County Board for their consideration. The Eugene Planning Commission deliberations and potential recommendation to the Eugene City Council is scheduled for November 14, 2023. The Lane County Planning Commission deliberations and potential recommendation to the Lane County Board of Commissioners is scheduled for November 28, 2023. Following the planning commission recommendations, the Eugene City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners will hold work sessions, a joint public hearing, and deliberations to consider the Planning Commissions' recommendations on the adoption package. These meetings are anticipated in early 2024. ATTACHMENTS A. Summary of Adoption Package Components B. Draft River Road Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan C. Proposed Metro Plan Amendments • Exhibit A: Public Engagement Summary D. Proposed Eugene Land Use Code Amendments Page 5 Page 7 of 122 E. CAC, RRCO, and SCCO Recommendation Letters F. Public Testimony through October 6, 2023 FOR MORE INFORMATION Staff Contact: Terri Harding, Principal Planner Telephone: 541-682-5635 Email: tharding@eugene-or.gov Project page: riverroad-santaclaraplan.org Page 6 Page 8 of 122 Attachment A Summary of River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Adoption Package Components Metro Plan Amendments The proposal involves a Metro Plan Amendment to be considering by the City of Eugene and Lane County to: • repeal the 1987 River Road Santa -Clara Urban Facilities Plan • adopt the new River Road- Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan • remove Chapter II Section F from the Eugene -Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) and references to this section in the Table of Contents and Chapter II Introduction Land Use Code Amendments The proposal involves a City of Eugene Land Use Code Amendment to establish River Road and Santa Clara neighborhood -specific code amendments within the city limits, as follows: • In the C-2 Community Commercial Zone, applies the following design standards: o Limit building height to 60 feet (current limit is 120 feet). o Apply transition standards (setbacks, landscaping, and/or fencing) to new buildings and building additions that increase the square footage of floor area by 20% or more for any development on property abutting Low Density Residential (R-1) zoned land. o Require buildings fronting River Road to provide a main entrance facing that street or to the corner where River Road and another street intersect. o Increase the minimum percentage of the street facing building facade that must be within the maximum front yard setback, from 25% to 80%. o Require minimum percentage of windows along the ground floor of street facing facades and prohibit blank walls of more than 20 linear feet of any fagade. o Require weather protection features over all building entrances. • In the C-2 Community Commercial Zone, prohibits the establishment of the following uses: o Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental/Service, excluding recreational vehicles and heavy trucks o Motorcycle Sales/Rental/Service o Recreational Vehicles and Heavy Truck, Sales/Rental/Service o Agricultural Machinery Rental/Sales/Service o Boat and Watercraft Sales/Service o Equipment, Heavy, Rental/Sales/Service — includes truck and tractor sales o Storage Facility, Household/Consumer Goods, enclosed • In the R-1 Low Density Residential Zone, allows the "Display and Sale of Agricultural Products Grown Offsite" as a permitted use and include limits to size of display, hours of operation, and signage in keeping with "small scale." • Amends Table 9.8010 and corresponding figure to remove reference to the 1987 River Road - Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan and add the new River Road- Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan • Adds adjustment review criteria specific to River Road -Santa Clara under EC 9.8030(39). • Removes policies in EC 9.9610 related to the 1987 River Road- Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan Page 9 of 122 _ J � ur'r z74 �. �� +'L`f••� �r - la _ i' .�i�5C�� :. L�� Zi.�i`�n.r`- �Y'GS.:J �•Re:.vlrAi�i"'.'v�C'`i2. rL4...s.tF� ` TOPIC AR -- 1. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 2. TRANSPORTATION 3. PARKS AND NATURAL ` RESOURCES t � 4. LAND USE l � F t f .f s. co lTv .0i �. r N V Table of Contents Tableof Contents..........................................................................................................................................1 Acknowledgements....................................................................................................................................... 3 Introduction..................................................................................................................................................5 How to Use the Neighborhood Plan.........................................................................................................7 Regulatory Framework and Relationship to Other Plans and Policies...................................................10 HowWe Got Here.......................................................................................................................................13 NeighborhoodHistory.............................................................................................................................13 Past Community and Planning Efforts....................................................................................................15 Developing the Neighborhood Plan........................................................................................................16 Planning Process Phases.........................................................................................................................19 RiverRoad Corridor Study....................................................................................................................... 22 Neighborhood Plan Visions, Goals, and Policies.........................................................................................23 EconomicDevelopment..........................................................................................................................24 Transportation........................................................................................................................................25 TransportationMaps..........................................................................................................................26 Parks and Natural Resources..................................................................................................................30 Parks and Natural Resources Maps....................................................................................................31 LandUse..................................................................................................................................................33 Community.............................................................................................................................................. 35 1 Page 11 of 122 List of Figures Figure 1: River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Map..........................................................................6 Figure 2: River Road -Santa Clara Historical Development Patterns...........................................................14 Figure 3: River Road -Santa Clara Vision Map..............................................................................................23 Figure 4: River Road -Santa Clara Existing Transportation Map..................................................................27 Figure 5: River Road -Santa Clara Future Transportation Map....................................................................28 Figure 6: River Road -Santa Clara Street Jurisdiction Map..................................................................................29 Figure 7: River Road -Santa Clara Parks and Natural Resources Map.........................................................32 2 Page 12 of 122 Acknowledgements Thank you to the community members who have dedicated countless hours to the development of this Neighborhood Plan and the future of the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods. Special thanks to the Community Advisory Committee for providing leadership and playing an active role throughout the process. This work would not have been possible without you. Community Advisory Committee Members Jon Belcher Mary Leontovich Carl Below Ed McMahon Luke Callahan Michele O'Leary Terah Cleveland Kate Perle Rick Duncan Harry Sanger Cameron Ewing Rebecca Sprinson Jerry Finigan Ann Vaughn Beth Gerot Louie Vidmar Louisa de Heer Hans Wittig Susan Kittleson Christine Rush Working Group Members Bruce Barney George Price Vickie Barnts Christina Prince Beverly Barr Meredith Prochot Todd Berger Gaston Ramos Peter Bolander Carleen Reilly Joe Castino Pat Reilly Betty Grant Becky Riley Lisa Hudson Joel Robe Kevin Jones Vicki Roessler Hillary Kittleson Christine Rush Hamid Madami Julie Schaum Cathy Martinit Jolene Siemsen Jacqueline McClure Jan Spencer Jerry Mohr Miaya Sustaita Nora Morgan Cat Tanzer Jim Neu Alpha Wilson Steve Norris Catherine Zukowski Brian Parmelee River Road Community Organization Board Members Jon Belcher Stefan Ostrach Charlsey Cartwright Clare Strawn Mysti Frost Carly Sylva-Gabrielson Dan Isaacson Jacque Wurster Susan Kittleson 3 Page 13 of 122 Santa Clara Community Organization Board Members Jerry Finigan Tim Foelker Patrick Kerr Dawn Lesley Jerry Mohr Triple Bottom Line Sounding Board Members Bill Aspegren Allen Hancock Randy Hledik Ela Kubok Kate Perle Terri Reed Louie Vidmar Matt Vohs Daniel Lombardi Emily Reiman Kristen Taylor Alicia Voorhees Members of the project staff team changed somewhat over the course of the planning period. At the time the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan was adopted, the following staff were part of the core project team: City of Eugene Terri Harding, Principal Planner & Project Manager Alissa Hansen, Planning Director Elena Domingo, Associate Planner Leah Rausch, Associate Planner Zoli Gaudin -Dalton, Assistant Planner Annie Loe, Urban Designer Rob Inerfeld, Transportation Planning Manager Carolyn Burke, Parks & Natural Resource Planning Manager Fabio Andrade, Equity and Community Engagement Manager Lane County Jared Bauder, Associate Planner Lindsey Eichner, Principal Planner Page 14 of 122 4 Introduction The River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods are a patchwork of properties located in the City of Eugene (incorporated) and in Lane County (unincorporated). For over 30 years, land use and development within the River Road and Santa Clara communities have been governed by the River Road -Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan (1987). An updated, forward-looking plan was needed for this large part of the community. The River Road Community Organization (RRCO) and Santa Clara Community Organization (SCCO) dedicated innumerable volunteer hours developing a foundation of community input on which to build the neighborhood planning process. This work included past community and planning efforts, such as the Santa Clara -River Road Outreach and Learning (SCRROL) and Santa Clara -River Road Implementation Planning Team (SCRRIPT) projects. Launched in fall 2017, the neighborhood planning process was a collaborative effort among RRCO, SCCO, the City of Eugene, Lane County, and other stakeholders throughout both neighborhoods. The process had six phases: Reaching Out, Neighborhood Visioning, Neighborhood Priorities, Policy Development, Action Planning, and Adoption with opportunities for community and stakeholder feedback throughout every phase. The neighborhood planning process created a vision for growth and development in a manner that respects the area's unique characteristics and opportunities, and which will guide decision-making in River Road and Santa Clara for decades to come. The Neighborhood Plan vision is consistent with Envision Eugene, the community vision for how growth is managed in Eugene's Urban Growth Boundary (UGB), in a way that protects and enhances quality of life and reflects shared community values, while tailoring the citywide vision to the local context. The Neighborhood Plan focuses on the Topic Areas of Economic Development, Transportation, Parks and Natural Resources, Land Use, and Community. To reflect the community values, aspirations and priorities expressed during outreach, each Topic Area includes vision statements, goals, policies, and actions. Page 15 of 122 Figure 1: River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Map* n' n��,�eec1� Plate 4wbreylmN WVa ndover - 1 Y 1 A . � Spring Creek Dr r r t Filbert Meadows Park Park ` River Loo_pz E Enid Rd santaClara Commu i6ypvr I IrVinrlfnn!llr- l 'L Ferndale Park 1 t O t f Wrving Rd f a Hunsaker'n` u; c ` `92 Randy Pape 1:11 dine y4 k P ns Park :Randy pa► .� � — r �,�� pees % 1 a� Maxwell Rd Howard Ave Barger Dr �. 0 fit 3 �bP W Hilliard Ln 0 �sf 0 w y m Park Ave Q = 2 Royal Ave do h� T % F4, Valley River �s Center River Road - Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Map Roosevelt8lvd 5 Current Zoning Miles N © Neighborhood Centers 0 0.25 0.5 (� AG Agricultural 1-3 Heavy Industrial River Road - Santa Clara I♦ C-1 Neighborhood Commercial PL Public Land © Neighborhood Plan Area caution:This purposes for *for illustrutivepurposes r informational ur oses only _ Eugene Urban Growth Boundary only It is based on C-2 Community Commercial R-1 Low -Density Residential imprecise source data and is Metro Plan Boundary subject to change. Map GO I General Office R-2 Medium-DensityResid ni created September2 19a�m3by � 1i122rks and Open Space Planning staff. 6 1-2 1 Light -Medium Industrial S -H Historic Sou rces:Cityofrugeneand ® Rivers and Waterways RUD How to Use the Neighborhood Plan The River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan is a formally adopted, legally binding land use plan. The plan boundary follows the boundaries of RRCO and SCCO, and includes properties located inside the Eugene city limits, properties located outside the Eugene city limits but within Eugene's UGB, and properties located outside Eugene's UGB but within the boundary of the Eugene -Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan). See Figure 1: River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Map. The Neighborhood Plan provides policy direction for City and County decision -makers as they consider future legislative decisions. Plan policies are not intended to be applied as a standard or criterion for approving or denying a land use or development application unless such direction is specifically stated in the policy. Land use codes adopted by the City and the County, which implement certain policies of this Neighborhood Plan through detailed regulation, generally include the approval criteria for individual land use applications. Finally, some of the policies in this plan are aspirational, including those policies that call for collaboration or additional efforts from RRCO and SCCO and additional community partners. The Neighborhood Plan is organized around five Topic Areas: Economic Development, Transportation, Parks and Natural Resources, Land Use, and Community. Each Topic Area includes vision statements, goals, policies, and actions. The terms "vision statement," "goal," "policy," and "action" as used in this Neighborhood Plan mean the following: • Vision Statements are aspirational and describe the community's best outcome for how the neighborhood will look, feel, and function 20 years and more into the future. Each vision statement is based on community values and aspirations expressed during the Neighborhood Plan community engagement process. The vision statements reflect the ideal outcome if all aspirational goals were to be attained. • Goals are statements that describe hopes for the future of the community related to a particular idea, and flow directly from the neighborhood vision. A goal is aspirational and may not be fully attained within a particular time frame. • Policies are statements adopted to provide a consistent course of action and move the community toward attainment of its goals. Some of the policies in the Neighborhood Plan guide the City and County in formulating proposed changes to local land use codes and other regulatory documents; developing other work programs and long-range planning projects; and preparation of budgets and capital improvement programs. Other plan policies are aspirational calls for collaboration or additional efforts from the RRCO, SCCO, and other community partners. The policies included in this plan will not be used in determining whether the City or County should approve or deny land use or development applications unless such direction is specifically stated in the policy. 7 Page 17 of 122 • Actions are possible strategies to implement the policies of this plan. The Neighborhood Plan is supported by the non -regulatory Action Plan, which includes actions such as possible land use code amendments, zone changes, projects, programs, and possible community partnerships. The Action Plan is not attached to or incorporated in the Neighborhood Plan and the Action Plan is not adopted by the City or County governing boards. The Action Plan is a separate document, which identifies community priorities to guide implementation of the Neighborhood Plan. The inclusion of a particular action in the Action Plan does not require implementation of that action, nor does it prohibit the implementation of other actions, whether or not they are listed in the Action Plan. The Action Plan identifies various local entities such as the City of Eugene, Lane County, RCCO and SCCO, as well as additional community partners, who may lead implementation of different actions. Some actions, such as land use code amendments and zone changes, may require implementation by the Eugene City Council or the Lane County Board of Commissioners. Other actions may be implemented by City or County staff, RCCO and SCCO, or other community partners. Implementation of the Action Plan will occur over time as committed community members strive to improve the neighborhoods, and as resources allow. The Action Plan includes general budget and timeframe estimates to help inform community advocacy for resources and to inform City, County, and other community partners' work plans and capital project development. Some actions will require public funds and resources while other actions will be dependent on private investments and development activities. A set of neighborhood -specific amendments to the City of Eugene's Land Use Code, applying only within RRCO and SCCO, are proposed to be adopted concurrently with the Neighborhood Plan. These amendments include changes to the C-2 Community Commercial Zone to lower the maximum building height, add design standards, and prohibit certain auto -oriented land uses. Additionally, the amendments include changes to the R-1 Low Density Residential Zone to allow for the small-scale collective sale of agricultural products. These amendments reflect community feedback and certain high priority actions in the Action Plan. The policies under the various Topic Areas in this Neighborhood Plan are interrelated and, together, create the plan's policy framework. In some cases there is overlap between policies, and in other cases there may be conflicts and inconsistencies between and among some policies. When making decisions based on the Neighborhood Plan, not all the policies can be complied with to the same degree in every instance. Use of the Neighborhood Plan requires a balancing of its various policies on a case-by-case basis, with an emphasis on those policies most pertinent to the issue at hand. The policies in the Neighborhood Plan vary in their scope and implications. Some call for a specific City or County action; others are directives the City and County must address when adopting or amending their respective land use codes or plans; and others are aspirational calls for collaboration or additional efforts from RRCO, SCCO, and community partners. The common theme of all the policies is that each represents an approach toward land use problem -solving and goal realization in the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods. Adoption of the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan does not M Page 18 of 122 necessarily commit the City, County, neighborhood organizations, or others to immediately carry out each policy to the letter. The City and County will carry out the policies applicable to the City and County to the best of their abilities, given sufficient time and resources. Future Amendments The Neighborhood Plan is a long-range policy document which establishes a framework for future decision-making, however it may require updates or amendments in response to changes in the law or circumstances important to the community. Because the boundary of the plan includes land within the Eugene city limits, land between the Eugene city limits and the UGB, and land outside the UGB but within the Metro Plan Boundary, the plan requires joint adoption by Eugene and Lane County. The approval process for an amendment to the Neighborhood Plan shall necessarily follow the Metro Plan Amendment process for two jurisdictions (Type II process), as outlined in the Eugene -Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan. D Page 19 of 122 Regulatory Framework and Relationship to Other Plans and Policies The Neighborhood Plan is one plan among a variety of land use plans and regulations that exist at the state, regional, and local level. As an adopted land use plan, the Neighborhood Plan has defined relationships to other adopted plans. Statewide Planning Goals Oregon's Statewide Land Use Planning Goals, related statutes, and administrative rules provide a framework for all local land use planning. State law requires each city and county to adopt a comprehensive plan, which must be consistent with the Statewide Land Use Planning Goals, as well as the zoning and land division ordinances necessary to effectuate the comprehensive plan. Other Adopted Land Use Plans At the local and regional level, the two applicable comprehensive plans are the Envision Eugene Comprehensive Plan and the Eugene -Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan). Envision Eugene Comprehensive Plan Envision Eugene is the community vision for how growth is managed in Eugene's UGB in a way that protects and enhances quality of life and reflects Eugene's shared values. The Envision Eugene Comprehensive Plan, the regulatory component of Envision Eugene, is the basic guiding policy document for land use planning within Eugene's UGB and addresses the future of Eugene through goals and regulatory policies regarding land use. WM1111 Senate Bill 100 19suawder.aws Eugene -Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) The Metro Plan is the basic guiding land use policy document for regional land use planning and applies to the Cities of Eugene and Springfield and areas of Lane County within the Metro Plan boundary. The Neighborhood Plan must be consistent with applicable provisions in both the Envision Eugene Comprehensive Plan and the Metro Plan. If inconsistencies occur between the Neighborhood Plan and the Envision Eugene Comprehensive Plan, the Envision Eugene Comprehensive Plan is the prevailing policy document. If inconsistencies occur between the Neighborhood Plan and the Metro Plan, the Metro Plan is the prevailing policy document. As provided in the Envision Eugene Comprehensive Plan, for properties located within Eugene's UGB, if inconsistencies occur between the Envision Eugene Comprehensive Plan and the Metro Plan, the Envision Eugene Comprehensive Plan is the prevailing policy document. Major Related Plans and Programs The River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods are a patchwork of properties located within the City of Eugene (incorporated) and Lane County (unincorporated), and there are related City and County plans and programs that apply to this area. Following is a summary of key City and County plans and programs 10 Page 20 of 122 in place at the time of Neighborhood Plan adoption that relate to the Neighborhood Plan goals, policies, and actions. Eugene 2035 Transportation System Plan Eugene's 2035 Transportation System Plan (TSP) establishes a system of transportation facilities and services that will meet the needs of Eugene residents, businesses, and visitors through 2035, consistent with the Envision Eugene Comprehensive Plan and compliant with Statewide Planning Goal 12 (Transportation). By addressing all modes of travel, the Eugene 2035 TSP is designed to meet Eugene's transportation needs as they evolve in the future and to increase transportation choices available throughout the community. The TSP serves as the City of Eugene's local transportation system plan and pedestrian and bicycle master plan. The Eugene TSP incudes a list of projects, including specific projects in the River Road -Santa Clara area, for implementation through 2035. Eugene Vision Zero Action Plan Vision Zero is an approach to transportation safety that aims to eliminate deaths and lifechanging injuries caused by traffic crashes — this is the goal of implementing Eugene's Vision Zero Action Plan. The Vision Zero approach helps with educating the community on local traffic safety issues and enabling the City of Eugene to prioritize resources based on evidence of the greatest need and impact. Lane County Transportation System Plan The Lane County Transportation System Plan (TSP) establishes Lane County's transportation policies and identifies transportation projects needed through 2036 to meet the needs of the community. As a 20 - year policy and investment guide, the County's TSP addresses major systems rather than ongoing operations and maintenance activities. See Figures 4: Existing Transportation Map, 5: Future Transportation Map, and 6: Street Jurisdiction Map to learn more about City, County, and private streets and infrastructure. Eugene Parks and Recreation System Plan The Eugene Parks and Recreation System Plan (PRSP), adopted in 2018, is a 30 -year strategic plan with implementation recommendations for the first 10 years. The Eugene PRSP includes new parks and trails, improved access to the Willamette River, revitalized pools and community centers, greater connectivity, and more recreation opportunities in underserved areas. The PRSP's long-term vision includes many specific projects - to see a list of priority 1, 2, and 3 projects in the River Road -Santa Clara area, see the Planning District Summary in the PRSP. Eugene Stormwater Basin Master Plan The Eugene Stormwater Basin Master Plan includes goals and objectives, implementation strategies, study area characteristics, and methods for evaluating flood control, water quality, and open waterways. The Stormwater Basin Master Plan is broken into volumes, with a stormwater management strategy for each basin, including River Road -Santa Clara. 11 Page 21 of 122 Lane County Stormwater Management Program The County's stormwater management program addresses control measures to reduce pollutants discharged into waterbodies, including illicit discharge detection. The County works closely with the City of Eugene on stormwater issues, although both jurisdictions maintain an inventory of their stormwater infrastructure and conduct regular maintenance activities. Eugene Climate Action Plan The Climate Action Plan (CAP 2.0) was developed to outline the types of bold actions needed to reach Eugene's community -wide Climate Recovery Ordinance goals. The CAP 2.0 captures the actions the community is prepared to implement, as well as community ideas for what else is needed to create an equitable and livable community for everyone. Some of these actions relate to transportation options, housing, stormwater management, urban forestry practices, and community resilience. Eugene Capital Improvement Program Eugene's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) provides a six-year funding plan for the City's capital improvements, including airport, parks and open space, public buildings, stormwater, transportation, and wastewater projects. Capital projects are generally large-scale endeavors in terms of cost, size, and benefit to the community and needs are based on various City -adopted long-range plans, goals, and policies. Additional Related Plans, Manuals, Resources, and Programs The Neighborhood Plan is a long-range planning document that identifies needs throughout the two neighborhoods that relate to many different topics. There are several other plans, manuals, resources, and programs that relate to the goals and policies in this Neighborhood Plan. They include, but are not limited to, the following: • Beltline Facility Plan • City of Eugene Complete Street Design Guide • City of Eugene Green Building Resources • City of Eugene Historic Loan Program • City of Eugene Housing Implementation Pipeline (HIP) • City of Eugene Parks and Recreation Bond and Levy Projects • City of Eugene Urban Forestry Program • City of Eugene Urban Reserves • City of Eugene Water Quality Overlay Zone • City of Eugene Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone • MovingAhead • Rivers to Ridges Regional Parks and Open Space Vision • Safe Routes to School • Sidewalk Inventory • Transportation Options: Strategies for a Growing Eugene 12 Page 22 of 122 How We Got Here Neighborhood planning took place between 2017 and 2023, but it builds on a legacy of community organizing and planning, as well as the natural environment, built environment, and community features that make the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods distinct. This section summarizes the path to creating the Neighborhood Plan, beginning with the neighborhood's history through to plan adoption. Neighborhood History The River Road and Santa Clara communities are oriented around River Road, which now runs on top of an established indigenous peoples' trail, moving north -south through these communities. In the northernmost portion of Eugene's UGB, the Santa Clara area encompasses about 2,400 acres and has physical borders that include the Willamette River to the east, Randy Pape Beltline Road to the south, and Northwest Expressway to the west. Just south of Santa Clara is the River Road community which encompasses about 1,700 acres and is bordered by the Willamette River to the east, Beltline Road to the north, Northwest Expressway and Railroad Yard to the west, and Thomason Lane to the south, adjoining the Whiteaker Neighborhood. See Figure 1: River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Map. The areas known today as River Road and Santa Clara lie within the traditional homeland of the Kalapuya people. From time immemorial, within the context of the Willamette Valley's mosaic of majestic landscapes and ecologies, the Kalapuya bands have accessed, the natural resources made available by way of the walam9t, or what is today known as the Willamette River and the Valley's fertile, nutrient -rich soils. Given the available resources and the potential for agricultural land, the area was also attractive to non - indigenous settlers. Beginning in 1840, these settlers arrived in the Oregon territory by way of the Oregon Trail. Diseases, introduced to the Valley by settlers, decimated the indigenous populations. By 1850, more than 90 percent of the Native population had died in an onslaught of repeated epidemics. Today, the Kalapuya people are modern Indigenous community members who continue to practice reverence and traditional connection to the Willamette River and Valley. (Learn more about the Kalapuyan people of Oregon at https://fiveoaksmuseum.orglexhibit/this-is-kalapuyan-land/.) In the 1850s, this area was settled by scattered subsistence farm operations. Overtime, commercial agriculture became the preeminent land use especially with the construction of the Oregon and California Railroad in 1871, which was associated with transporting agricultural products. Though residential construction continuously increased throughout the early 1900s, the communities remained predominantly agricultural in character until the post -World War II increases in Eugene's population spurred the siting and development of more subdivisions and homes within both communities. The rapid increase in population correlated with an estimated 45 percent of the River Road area's residences being constructed between 1940 and 1959. The result was a continued decrease in average farm size, declining agricultural production, and a checkerboard landscape of homes and farmland. As urbanization accelerated during the late 1940s and 1950s, Santa Clara also experienced increases in commercial development. 13 Page 23 of 122 River Road, designated Pacific Highway in 1923, was once the only major link between Portland and California. This designation of River Road as a state highway greatly influenced much of the development experienced in the River Road and Santa Clara communities. According to land use studies from the 1930s and 1940s, the majority of the roads in the area were created to provide access to River Road. Later, the completion of Beltline Highway (1970) and Northwest Expressway (1980) further facilitated development; this development resulted in changes to the use of the land. Generally, land uses shifted from being primarily farmland to an increase in subdivisions and the presence of homes. Post -World War II growth brought with it the development of educational and religious facilities. In 1945, River Road and Santa Clara school districts joined Eugene School District No. 4, and five schools were built in the River Road community. The area also experienced an increase in church construction during the 1950s and 1960s. Though church construction had previously been limited to the downtown core, over this period of rapid growth, construction of churches began to take place in areas outside of downtown. Figure 2: River Road and Santa Clara Historical Development Patterns HistorieaI Development Patterns in River Road 16 it +' 70 ' 16166 ti i Wish Imandp Mir a + *: 4F f, �rw�a,a i+at■.iarr aa pirt4 *4 Oat• 5M ■ tOl -1 JU 1}},I' .1*} i Hfil. MI iM-M MAN -20U HistorlcaI Development Patterns in Santa Clara __q ' .CYCI• 11,, LJ OIC `JT Op . W a WIN ate* Fr t IRV ^ 'P _ Mi;IF144aw - ��s i1if71-two DA5ndtea, Spwgi g+4 -■M W-rw mi. kwi i IM - XOT Page 24 of 122 14 Continued Development and Annexation Development continued to urbanize both communities, bringing aspects of in -town communities, such as curved streets and cul-de-sacs, to River Road and Santa Clara by 1975. Accompanying these transformations to the built environment were continuing conversations around how these communities could be incorporated into the City's jurisdiction and how urban services, such as electricity, water, transportation, and sewer, would be provided to the area. Annexation, sometimes called "incorporation," is the legal process by which properties located in a county become part of a city ("incorporated") and thus can be eligible to receive city services. In 1982, the adopted regional Metro Plan governing planning efforts of Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County, established the regional UGB and included policies requiring that if new development occurred on properties within the UGB, the properties in question would be annexed to the appropriate city, either Eugene or Springfield. Sanitary Sewer Service and Patchwork Jurisdiction Later in the 1980s, a groundwater pollution problem in the area led to the state mandating the provision of sanitary sewers. The Metro Plan specified that cities were the sole providers of sewers in the metro area, which meant the City of Eugene was responsible for providing sewers to River Road and Santa Clara. While the City originally intended to provide sewer service to individual properties that chose to voluntarily annex, in order to reduce the groundwater pollution problem, Eugene extended wastewater service to developed properties regardless of whether a property owner chose to annex. These processes resulted in tensions between River Road and Santa Clara community residents and the City. The legacy of these tensions has led to the continued jurisdictional fragmentation of these communities, with some residents integrated into the Eugene City limits and others remaining within the Lane County jurisdiction—all of which created inefficiencies in the provision of services and confusion for residents and agencies alike. Policies in the Metro Plan now encourage annexation as the preferred means of providing urban services to new development. Annexation is voluntary, however it is typically required when a property owner proposes to develop a property that is within the UGB but not within city limits as a condition of certain land use approvals. In the City of Eugene, annexations must be approved by the Eugene City Council, and the property must be contiguous to the city limits or across the street from the city limits. These conditions were not required pre -2008, which contributed to the checkerboard pattern of City and County properties seen throughout the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods today. Past Community and Planning Efforts Adopted in 1987, the River Road -Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan governed land use and development in the River Road and Santa Clara communities for over 30 years. A number of planning efforts have occurred in River Road and Santa Clara in the years since the Urban Facilities Plan was adopted, leading up to and informing the formal Neighborhood Planning process that began in 2017. 15 Page 25 of 122 Published in 2006, "Eugene's Historic River Road" document was the result of a year-long collaboration between Historic Preservation Northwest, City of Eugene Planning staff, and members of the public. The document was intended to assist in the preparation of City and County policies pertaining to the identification and protection of historic resources in the area. Initiated in 2007 and acknowledged by the Eugene Planning Commission in 2009, the Lower River Road Concept Plan supported planning efforts for the Rasor Mixed -Use Center. Lower River Road was identified in the regional transportation master plan, TransPlan (2001), as a potential area for mixed-use redevelopment. This planning process brought diverse elements of the community together to propose over thirty recommendations related to the vision for Lower River Road and to evaluate implementation strategies related to sustainability, transportation, and land use. Santa Clara -River Road Outreach and Learning (SCRROL) RRCO and SCCO joined together in February 2011 on an ambitious public outreach project to survey area residents and identify priorities for the future development of both neighborhoods. Known as the Santa Clara -River Road Outreach and Learning (SCRROL) project, their mission statement was: To develop a community -wide, shared knowledge about challenges and opportunities in our growing and changing neighborhoods that can inform collaborative decisions in the future. They identified community priorities and facilitated community dialogue on land use, governance, parks and recreation, and transportation. This outreach work resulted in a Report and Recommendations document that included key findings about what was important to the neighborhood residents and a list of recommendations. Santa Clara -River Road Implementation Planning Team (SCRRIPT) SCRROL's Report and Recommendations included a recommendation to form a new advocacy group named the Santa Clara -River Road Implementation Planning Team (SCRRIPT), a task force to be composed of River Road and Santa Clara representatives to work on common goals. SCRRIPT would function similar to SCRROL but was created to be more proactive in advocating for specific solutions and implementing the goals identified by SCRROL. Throughout the SCRROL and SCRRIPT planning initiatives, the community organizations dedicated countless volunteer hours in reaching out to and engaging neighbors. The results formed a foundation for the Neighborhood Plan. Developing the Neighborhood Plan SCRRIPT and SCRROL, among other efforts by RRCO and SCCO, laid the foundation for the neighborhood planning process. Launched in fall 2017, neighborhood planning was a collaborative effort among the 16 Page 26 of 122 RRCO and SCCO, the City of Eugene, Lane County, and other stakeholders throughout both neighborhoods to create a vision for growth and development in a manner that respects the area's unique characteristics and opportunities, which will guide decision-making in River Road and Santa Clara for decades to come. The process was guided by a project charter that outlined the decision-making structure, and a public involvement plan that focused on community outreach. Project Roles Early in the neighborhood planning process, City and County staff worked with the RRCO and SCCO to establish project roles and various technical and working groups. Some of these groups worked through the duration of the planning process, while others formed for a specific purpose during a particular phase. The roles of the primary groups included: Community Organizations: RRCO and SCCO played an integral role in the development of the Neighborhood Plan, through all phases of the project. But their role doesn't end at adoption. Ongoing implementation of the Neighborhood Plan will include continued collaboration between the City, County, community partners, and the community organizations. Project Management Team: The project management team consisted of the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) co-chairs, one from River Road and one from Santa Clara, and City and County Planning staff tasked with guiding the process, including coordination and communication with the community and key stakeholders. Community Advisory Committee (CAC): The CAC consisted of 11 voting members, with two alternates, nominated by the RRCO and SCCO Boards and appointed by the Eugene Planning Commission to represent the varied voices of the two communities. The CAC included both residents and property owners, including a member representing areas outside Eugene's UGB. Representatives from special districts serving the community were also encouraged to participate in the process. The CAC committed to creating a Neighborhood Plan, adopted by the City and County, to advance the community vision of the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods while being consistent with Envision Eugene. The CAC acted as a representative body for the two neighborhoods and strived to weigh the varied input from residents, businesses, property owners, local appointed and elected officials, and RRCO and SCCO. The CAC employed the following principles: • Be prepared and able to act in a deliberative, considerate, and civil manner • Respect diverse community demographics and varied interests • Weigh the perspectives and input of the whole community • Practice decision-making that places the needs and desires of the entire neighborhood first The CAC participated in outreach efforts and Topic Area Working Groups and led development of vision statements, goals, policies, and actions. The CAC worked collaboratively with staff to support the Neighborhood Plan's formal adoption process. The CAC made a final community recommendation, along with RRCO and SCCO, on the Neighborhood Plan adoption package. 17 Page 27 of 122 Topic Area Working Groups: Topic Area Working Groups were ad hoc, flexible groups comprised of members of the public, RRCO and SCCO, and CAC members interested in diving deeper into specific Topic Area details. The groups worked with the CAC to translate community input on best outcomes for the future into vision statements, goals, policies, and actions. The working groups collaborated with the CAC, project management team, and Technical Advisory Committee to develop the plan and participated in outreach throughout the process. City and County Coordination: The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), comprised of City, County, and Lane Transit District staff, served as an advisory body to the project management team, CAC, and Topic Area Working Groups. The TAC included input from City and County staff who work on subjects such as transportation, parks, stormwater, economic development, and land use planning. The TAC provided technical support related to the Topic Areas, vetted ideas for feasibility in balance with local budgets and priorities, and communicated how neighborhood -specific issues fit within the broader City or County context. Additionally, City and County coordination teams included local elected officials and City and County department executives who provided policy direction at critical junctures, as well as a connection with local decision -makers. Planning Commissions: The Eugene and Lane County planning commissions provided feedback and guidance throughout the process, including reviewing and approving the project charter and public involvement plan, appointing CAC members, and providing feedback on the plan components, including land use code changes to support the Neighborhood Plan vision. General Public: The neighborhood planning process included early and ongoing opportunities for the public and key stakeholders to share ideas, raise concerns, and provide feedback. Stakeholders included area property owners, residents, business owners and employees, advocacy groups, and public and non- profit organizations, among others. The project management team crafted a public engagement process that was: • Meaningful: create a vision crafted with beauty, fun, warmth, and welcome • Accountable: respond to ideas, critique, comments, and praise • Inclusive: communicate with all stakeholders, including communicating with the under- represented, communicating outside of structured meetings, and communicating in ways that people understand and can relate to • Transparent: make decisions public; share information in a variety of formats and places • Realistic: inform about constraints, opportunities, and objectives • Outcome -oriented: create a community -supported and Council -adopted neighborhood plan! Early outreach focused on asking the community what they value in their neighborhoods now and about their hopes and visions for the future, which was used to inform development of the Neighborhood Plan. Outreach continued throughout each phase to share updates and gather feedback. 18 Page 28 of 122 Planning Process Phases The sections below summarize the six phases of the neighborhood planning process: Reaching Out, Neighborhood Visioning, Neighborhood Priorities, Policy Development, Action Planning, and Adoption. Each includes a summary of key stakeholder input and opportunities for public involvement. Reaching Out Phase In the summer of 2017, RRCO, SCCO, and staff began the 'Reaching Out' phase with three objectives: Raise awareness about the project Promote the fall communitywide kick-off event Create opportunities for people to provide input on the future of their community The project team began raising awareness about the project by meeting with neighbors throughout the community, attending more than 20 events in advance of the fall kick-off event. Nearly 400 people attended the kick-off event and participated in activities to identify what residents value about the area, as well as sharing their future hopes for the neighborhood. The project team made an effort to engage fresh voices, with outreach events specific to high school students, affordable housing residents, Spanish speakers, and rural residents in Santa Clara, in partnership with local community organizations. The project team also visited with over 300 neighborhood businesses. Neighborhood Visioning and Neighborhood Priorities Phases The Visioning and Priorities phases continued focusing on raising awareness of the project and asking the community what they valued in their neighborhoods as well as their hopes for the future. The CAC and the Topic Area Working Groups met monthly to compile and review the feedback received during the Reaching Out phase, recognizing the priorities and values heard during this process, as well as the many years of engagement done in the community by SCRROL and SCRRIPT. Different themes emerged from the community feedback and the Neighborhood Plan began to develop around five main Topic Areas: Economic Development, Transportation, Parks and Natural Resources, Land Use, and Community. A vision for the future of the River Road and Santa Clara communities started to appear. The CAC and Working Groups continued public outreach, including questionnaires, community forums, an online survey, and several targeted outreach events. Using this widespread input from the community, the CAC and Working Groups moved into the Policy Development phase and started crafting the vision statements, goals, and policies of the Neighborhood Plan. Policy Development Phase In this phase, work focused on drafting policies related to the vision and neighborhood priorities developed from community input. Throughout the Policy Development phase, Working Group meetings were held periodically and interested community members were welcome to attend. Policy writing was led by the CAC and supported by staff on the Technical Advisory Committee as well as Working Group members. The CAC hosted a "Policy Round -Up" and a "Planning in Action Open House" to engage the public in reviewing and prioritizing draft policies. 19 Page 29 of 122 Additionally, the TAC completed a policy review to ensure the draft policies aligned with existing City and County policies. After initial community and staff review, the project team convened a Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Sounding Board meeting to provide a citywide perspective about the equity, environmental, and economic implications of proposed goals and policies in the Neighborhood Plan. The TBL Sounding Board communicated with City and County committees to keep them informed and engaged. The TBL Sounding Board included representatives from the following boards and commissions: • Eugene Planning Commission • Lane County Planning Commission • Eugene Human Rights Commission • Eugene Sustainability Commission • Eugene Active Transportation Committee • Intergovernmental Housing Policy Board • Eugene Historic Review Board • Eugene Budget Committee • Eugene Neighborhood Leaders Council In May 2019, the Eugene City Council approved utilizing the draft goals and policies as a platform for moving into the Action Planning Phase. Action Planning Phase The Action Planning Phase focused on drafting, evaluating and prioritizing actions to implement the draft policies. Refining the action items was a collaborative process among the CAC, Working Group members, and City, County, and partner agency staff to incorporate community and technical feedback. The project team hosted a variety of public outreach events to inform the Neighborhood Plan actions, including a City of Eugene Planning Division Project Fair at the Downtown Library, a 'Pumpkin Pie and Planning' event in the neighborhood, a series of small group discussions called 'Neighborhood Conversations,' and a second TBL Sounding Board Meeting. The meetings provided the opportunity for groups of staff, volunteers, and community members to discuss elements of the land use changes; sharing support and reservations. In mid-March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic hit and slowed down the engagement process. However, after receiving comprehensive feedback from previous engagement, the CAC continued to meet virtually on Zoom each month and refine the draft actions. The project team mailed postcards to specific properties, which included commercially zoned areas and key large church properties beyond the corridor that were targeted for potential zone changes/land use code changes to support potential future redevelopment. The postcards were intended to solicit feedback from tenants and property owners about these potential changes. The RRCO and SCCO continued their review and provided input on the draft actions proposed in each Topic Area. In May 2021, the project team received direction from the Eugene City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners to move into the Adoption Phase and to prepare a plan adoption package for community review. Adoption Phase In 2022, City staff offered a path to adoption that built on broad community agreement and the extensive engagement, collaboration, and community volunteer hours dedicated to the neighborhood 20 Page 30 of 122 planning process since 2017. The proposed path forward also recognized the challenges and changes faced between 2020 and 2022, including the COVID-19 pandemic, state mandates for other planning priorities, staff changes, and resource constraints. The project management team worked to refine a final adoption package, including a refined set of neighborhood -specific land use code amendments to achieve many of the land use goals outlined in the Plan. The River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan adoption package is comprised of the Neighborhood Plan document and neighborhood -specific code amendments addressing important topics like commercial development standards and transitions between commercial mixed-use and lower density residential areas. While not a part of the adoption package, the Action Plan, which acts as a non -regulatory guidance document, remains an important part of the planning effort. *Placeholder to continue describing adoption process once complete. * River Road Corridor Study One desired outcome of the Neighborhood Plan is to improve conditions along River Road, which is identified as a key transit corridor in Envision Eugene. The River Road Corridor Study was a concurrent planning process that integrated the Neighborhood Plan vision for active mixed-use neighborhood centers along the River Road corridor and a transportation system that is safe, accessible, affordable, environmentally responsible and transitions to zero carbon. The River Road Corridor Study included an in-depth analysis of the River Road corridor, from Northwest Expressway to Hunsaker Lane, funded by a Federal Transit Administration grant awarded to Lane Transit District and the City of Eugene. The Corridor Study included stakeholder interviews, public workshops, economic and demographic research, and conceptual design work, which resulted in land use and multimodal recommendations to encourage mixed-use neighborhood centers and a variety of housing types; integrating how people get around, where they shop and live, and how the corridor looks and feels to support implementation of the community vision along River Road. Recommendations from the River Road Corridor Study were incorporated into the Neighborhood Plan vision, goals, and policies, as well as the neighborhood -specific land use code amendments and the Action Plan. The string of pearls concept along River Road (illustrated in Figure 1: River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Map) originated from this study. 22 Page 31 of 122 Neighborhood Plan Visions, Goals, and Policies G O BEACON DRIVE � , LOpAk ENTREPRENEURSHIP i PEACES TO GATHER 1 _ BUILD COMMUNITY IRVINGTON DRIVE f` Iti� A MEETING OUR HOUSING NEED NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER AND LOCAL]DI IRVING ROAD �l BELTUNE Lt OF PLACE WORKING LANDSCAPE Figure 3: River Road -Santa Clara Vision Map* AGRICUI TURN HERITAGE FOOD PRODUCTION Ak.. r WALKABLE NEIGHBORITI CONVENIENT ACCESS TO DA„,,NDS ;Za r � { 14 � tz EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES � FOR ALL RESIDENTS r WELL DESIGNED, SUSTAINW1 E y AND COMPATIBLEHOUSINC- MAXWELL ROAD WELCOMING &INCLUSNE STRONG SOCIAL NETW( P� THRIVING SHARED SPACES ECONOMIC ACTIVITY r` TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM .,.-SAFE EFFICIENTAND ACCESSIBLE CLEAN, SAFE: ACCESSIBLE ENHANCES ECOSYSTEM HEALTH PROVIDES OPPORTUNfTIES FOR BECREATION N Fs` - W E kII S BIKE. on'SE PUBtJGT IT SAFELY ACCESS GOODS & SFR' CES Page 32 of 122 23 Economic Development VISION STATEMENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Goal 1: Improve the neighborhood economy and empower local residents by encouraging the growth and creation of local businesses. Policy 1.1 Incentives for Local Businesses: Help neighborhood businesses use existing local, regional, and state loan programs to support growth and creation of neighborhood businesses. Policy 1.2 Neighborhood Assets: Support business development that utilizes neighborhood assets. Policy 1.3 Patronage of Locally Owned Businesses: Encourage patronage of locally owned businesses through community organization efforts such as marketing, education, and events. Policy 1.4 Regulatory Environment: Strive for a local regulatory environment that is supportive of economic development in line with neighborhood vision (such as creating small commercial nodes) Goal 2: Promote redevelopment that enhances walkability and increases access to daily needs.' Policy 2.1 Vibrancy: Incentivize and support redevelopment that fosters active mixed-use neighborhood centers. Policy 2.2 Small Business Development: Promote small business development that supports active mixed-use neighborhood centers by identifying local funding sources and continuing local outreach and assistance to small business owners. Goal 3: Promote living wage emolovment opportunities within the neighborhoor' Policy 3.1 Residential Employment: Encourage businesses in residentially zoned areas at a scale that complements the surrounding neighborhood. Policy 3.2 Employment Opportunities: Promote the creation of employment opportunities that offer a living wage. 1 Examples of daily needs include grocery stores, pharmacies, and other necessary services. 24 Page 33 of 122 Transportation VISION STATEMENT TRANSPORTATION Goal 4: Implement a transportation system that is designed to be safe for all users. Policy 4.1 Safety and Accessibility: Improve safety and accessibility for people walking, biking, and using mobility devices. Policy 4.2 Riverfront Paths: Improve safety enhancements and amenities along rive rfront shared use paths. Goal 5: Promote a connected and efficient multi -modal transportation system that is equitable and affordable and addresses congestion on River Road. Policy 5.1 Regional Transportation Network: Work towards convenient, equitable, and affordable access to a regional pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and vehicle network throughout the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods. Policy 5.2 Transit: Support affordable public transit along River Road from the Urban Growth Boundary to the rest of Eugene in collaboration with Lane Transit District. Policy 5.3 Active Transportation to Commercial Centers: Expand active transportation networks that connect neighborhoods to their adjacent commercial areas, schools, and community gathering spaces. Policy 5.4 Traffic Management: Prioritize transportation infrastructure improvements to support the traffic flow and enhance safety objectives. Policy 5.5 Public Right -of -Way Management: City and County will continue to cooperatively work towards addressing jurisdictional issues in the right of way, including parking, maintenance, street improvements, and annexation issues Goal 6: Plan for a transportation system that is future oriented, environmentally responsible, and transitions to zero carbon. Policy 6.1 Zero Carbon: Transition transportation system toward zero carbon by prioritizing improvements that support seamless connections for switching between modes, active transportation options, ride sharing, and electric vehicle use. Policy 6.2 Education and Youth Engagement: Educate current and future users of the transportation system about active transportation options and transit, tapping into existing resources like Safe Routes to School and City of Eugene youth recreation programs. 25 Page 34 of 122 Policy 6.3 Future Transportation Needs: Support a transportation system that responds to the long-term needs of the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods. Policy 6.4 Street Design: Apply appropriate design standards to address the distinct types of travel lanes typical of the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods, consistent with City and County guidelines. Transportation Maps The Existing and Future Transportation Maps on the following pages include City, County, and private streets and infrastructure, as well as planned improvements from the 2035 Eugene Transportation System Plan and Safe Routes to School program priorities. The Street Jurisdiction Map illustrates streets within the jurisdiction of the City and County. 26 Page 35 of 122 u E Enid Rd 1 Irvine �aArrowhead Park 1 I z / A—Irving Rd o -0 y N � 2 Randy Pape Beltline dark Barger Dr s _o 0 z 0 u LU Royal Ave o. 01 'k 10 2 �6 ibrev Pa IN Figure 4: River Road -Santa Clara Existing Transportation Maps . e,&00,&V r JeD ?, e&dover 2Santa Clara Community Pari 1 v j 1 1 c r -Hunsaker1,n` River Road - Santa Clara RaoseveltBlvd Existing Transportation Infrastructure — Sidewalks Q Rectangular Rapid -Flashing Parks and Open Space Bike Routes Beacon Crosswalk Eugene Urban Growth Boundary Bike Lanes 0 River Road - Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Area Paved Shoulder NRWWMrIPMUclary Shared Use Path; Accessway Rivers and Waterways W Delta Ponds Park O rn �z m m Valley River Center ¢ N Miles 0 0.25 0.5 A Caution, This map is for *for illustrative purposes informational purposes only. It is basedon imprecise source only data and is subject to change. P created September ZOZ3 6y Planning Staff. by Sources: City of Eugene and 27 RLI ins Park Figure 5: River Road -Santa Clara Future Transportation Mop* 4WbreyiLn 'v 1 W ndover Awbrey Park � + Spring Creek Dr iflll 1 RiverLoo p2 E Enid Rd Inrington.lD A Arrowhead Park • W. ,ilkes Dr BlackfootAve D `rr —r da River Loop 7 O `r rvingli d C 'CO, O Hunsaker Ln y�9 L Ruby Randy Pape Belt e ::...... Rancty�papPe , ��a Barger Dr R 0 s� 3 0�r W Hilliard Ln 2 ess� o y s y w 1P Royal Ave River Road - Santa Clara Future Transportation Projects Roosevelt Blvd Projects in the Transportation Transportation Additions System Plan to Consider Parks and Open Space 0 • • Accessway Safe Routes to School Eugene Urban Growth Boundary • • • Neighborhood Greenway Accessway to River River Road - Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Area • 0 0 Protected Bike Lane Nei g • 0 * Shared Use Path —Q0g%4P4 PA Boundary 0 0 0 Sidewalk Rivers and Waterways Delta Ponds Park a v =.2 Cu S.FI Valley River Center 1105 N Miles 0 0.25 0.5 14 Caution', This map is for *for illustrative purposes informational purposes only. It Only is based on imprecise source data and is subject to change. Map created September 2D23 .I by Planning Staff. m _ _ Sources: City of Eugene and RLI • I �. ► ► f I I I ! f 1 n� _ �►ti 1 t` fi �1S1 E Enid Rd lot ff� was �� b -ice, ���M ■ - • Toad -Mum= Fell Barger Dr obi- ° .tit 0 Pss o w m ; Royaf Ave do �? FIT T }pr Valley River `Dss� Center "DO - A River River Road - Santa Clara Roosevelt Blvd ,105, Street Jurisdiction N N Streets *Local Access Roads (LARs) are open to the public, but not fl Miles 0.25 0.5 maintained by the government. Property owners that receive 14 Lane County r J Eugene Urban Growth Boundary access from a LAR are responsible to ensure the road is kept *for illustrative purposes -� City of Eugene 0 River Road -Santa Clara open and in good repair. only I . Local Access Roads* Neighborhood Plan Area page 3000rn-22is map is for informational purposes only. It is based on Metro Plan Boundary imprecise source data and is subject to change. Map created Private Rivers and Waterways September 2023 by Planning Staff, sources City of Eugene and RLlo 29 Parks and Natural Resources VISION STATEMENT PARKS AND NATURAL RESOURCES Goal 7: Maintain and create natural areas which are healthy, thriving spaces that provide habitat r -r native species and function as natural infrastructure. Policy 7.1 Stormwater Conveyances: Enhance natural stormwater conveyances to reduce pollution, increase infiltration, protect against flooding, and improve habitat. Policy 7.2 Stormwater Education: Educate the public about the interconnectedness of function and safety in our natural stormwater system through City and community collaboration. Policy 7.3 Habitat Corridors: Create new and enhance existing habitat corridors throughout the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods through community organizing and collaboration with local service providers to conduct outreach and education to property owners. Policy 7.4 Public Natural Areas: Create new and enhance existing natural areas, including within the Willamette River Greenway, that are accessible to all residents. Policy 7.5 Tree Canopy: Promote, conserve, protect, and improve our urban forest by preserving and planting street trees and encouraging private property owners to plant trees with education and incentives, consistent with Eugene's Urban Forestry program. Goal 8: Provide neignporhooci access to recreational opportunities, parks, and community centers. Policy 8.1 Parks Access: Plan for all residents to have access to parks or publicly owned open space within one -half -mile walking distance of their residence. Policy 8.2 Connectivity: Improve connectivity between parks, natural areas, and public open spaces. Policy 8.3 Recreational Opportunities and Community Centers: Enhance equitable access to recreational opportunities and well-maintained community centers. 30 Page 39 of 122 Goal 9: Make the Willamette River a vital, healthy, and accessible part of the neighborhoods. Policy 9.1 Safe and Convenient Access: Provide safe and convenient access to the riverbank park system for people walking, biking, and using mobility devices. Policy 9.2 Stewardship of the Willamette River Ecosystem: Work with the community and non- profit organizations to balance preservation and access to the river. Policy 9.3 Recreational Uses: Promote accessible recreational uses along the Willamette River edge in partnership with local service providers to improve access to the river and provide amenities and programs. Goal 10: Preserve agricultural land and open spaces within the Neighborhood Plan boundary. Policy 10.1 Agricultural Land Preservation outside the Eugene Urban Growth Boundary (UGB): Preserve high value farmland (Class 1 and Class 2 soils) outside the UGB for farm use, where feasible or as the state allows. Policy 10.2 Open Space Preservation: Promote a network of publicly and privately -owned open space areas in collaboration with local service providers and private property owners. Policy 10.3 Agricultural Enterprises within the UGB: Promote agricultural enterprises within the UGB through legislative updates to local land use regulations, incentives, and collaboration with private property owners. Parks and Natural Resources Maps The Parks and Natural Resources Map on the following page includes City of Eugene Parks and Open Space projects as of 2023, existing parks, open space, and public lands within the neighborhoods, and other wetland, riparian, and habitat resources. 31 Page 40 of 122 Figure 7: River Road -Santa Clara Parks and Natural Resources Map*�e�,Pla� Awbrey+m f PaYI¢ - A_wbrey Park r Spring Creek Dr River/Loop Parld 1 \ , r � j p r River Loop 2 1 E Enid Rd s ` an a Ct ra _ t •ommuity. ' ~ ` Irvin gton•Dr �'• , Arrowhead - Park ` 4- ark VVIIICeS,�r` --- River Loop 1 •I� r 2 •yam- �„ a-"". _ � r I �• � _ 1f t Irving Rd r ¢' � Fiunsakerljn + a r `g2 u Randy Pape Beltline r � ns Park ~■ 1 — -� tt�� an Pape Metro Wastewater .- Treatment Facrility - r Maxwell•Rd Howard Ave Barger Dr 0 0 75 P1 IX 3 se. 1 OW Hilliard Ln d 0 Park Ave Q 2 asor �` Royal Ave to. FV �rnF� R .b/ Valley River rp' Pss� Center ¢ River Road - Santa Clara Roosevelt Blvd Parks and Natural Resources X05 N Parks Projects (2023) Q Willamette Greenway Rivers and Waterways Miles 0 0.25 0.s Parks and Open Space Eugene Urban Growth Boundary caution: This map is for informational purposes only. It Publick Owned Land River Road - Santa Clara ,eased—Innp—r-—r- y Neighborhood Plan Area data and is subject to ehaoge. Page 41 Of 122 Map created September 2023 AM Wetland, Ri arian, and Habitat Land Metro Plan Boundg by Planning staff. � p ry *for illustrative purposes only sour_ City of Fugene, Ruo, `y 32 NWI, and DOGAMI �.. Land Use vibiu►v STATEMENT LAND USE Goal 11: Support development that is well designed and economically, socially, and environ—ant--11­ ciictainahlc Policy 11.1 Effective Public Process for Development: Encourage effective collaboration between developers, public agencies, and neighbors through legislative updates to local land use regulations. Policy 11.2 Well Designed Built Environment: Update design standards through legislative updates to local land use regulations so that they provide for gradual transitions between different uses and scales and incorporate pedestrian scale design through building design, size, scale, and site layout requirements. Policy 11.3 Well Designed Community Space: Help build a sense of community by using welcoming and well-designed public and private community space. Policy 11.4 Green and Resilient Properties: Encourage actions on residential, commercial, and public properties that enhance food and energy production, water storage and conservation, and tree canopy through programs, incentives, and legislative updates to local land use regulations. Goal 12: Plan for fiit„rP hnimi­ that addresses the needs of the community. Policy 12.1 Compatible Infill: Encourage innovative and creative housing options and infill, and incorporate pedestrian scale design through building design, size, scale, and site layout requirements through legislative updates to local land use regulations. Policy 12.2 Affordable Availability: Plan for affordable and moderate -income housing throughout the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods through strategies, funding, partnerships, and execution of the City and County's housing plans. Policy 12.3 Innovative Housing Strategies: Pursue innovative housing strategies through collaborative planning efforts between the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhood organizations, the City, the County, and local service providers. 33 Page 42 of 122 Policy 12.4 Monitoring and Implementation: At five-year intervals after adoption of the Neighborhood Plan, City will use available data from the Growth Monitoring Program to measure the effectiveness of policies established in this plan. The River Road and Santa Clara Community Organizations will use the results to revise Action Plan priorities over time as work is completed and new community priorities are identified. Goal 13• C- ---r+ -,r ­+;­ --A ......3 ^----,. D^ - A --;A- 13.1 Key Areas for Development: Support more development and redevelopment in key areas for residential, commercial, and mixed-use development through legislative updates to local land use regulations. Policy 13.2 Walkable Neighborhood Centers: Support walkable neighborhood centers where people can access transit, shopping, parks, schools, and public spaces within walking distance through legislative updates to local land use regulations. Goal 14: Prom,' land 11SP --A development and enhances neighborhnnd chnrnr+cr Policy 14.1 Compatibility Transitions: Enhance compatibility through development standards such as height and scale transitions, setbacks, buffering with trees, and window offsets between adjacent properties that are zoned differently through legislative updates to local land use regulations. Policy 14.2 Neighborhood Livability: Retain and enhance neighborhood livability, such as by mitigating noise, identifying and encouraging preservation of historical and cultural properties, and promoting green development and design at pedestrian scale. Policy 14.3 Willamette River Compatibility: Encourage development that is less intense along the river by making legislative updates to local land use regulations that include additional standards to protect, maintain, preserve, and enhance the natural, scenic, historic, and recreational qualities of the Willamette River Greenway. 34 Page 43 of 122 Community VI;InN STATFMFNT COMMUNITY Goal 15: Foster a welcoming and inclusive community. Policy 15.1 Welcoming and Inclusive: Promote a welcoming environment and inclusive approach to the work of the River Road and Santa Clara Community Organizations in collaboration with the City, County, and other local service providers such as schools and non- profit organizations. Policy 15.2 Housing Affordability: Show community support for affordable housing opportunities in the neighborhoods. Policy 15.3 The Unhoused Community: Advocate for housing and provide information to community members about housing services and social services available for people without stable housing. Policy 15.4 Public Art: Support public art through public programs and community advocacy. Goal 16: Foster collaborative relationships to build a stronger and more resilient community. Policy 16.1 Communication and Outreach: Enhance communication and outreach capabilities of the River Road and Santa Clara Community Organizations by advocating for stable local funding to reach the entire neighborhoods. Policy 16.2 Gathering and Learning Spaces: Enhance access to locations and opportunities for community gathering, sharing, and learning spaces for all residents in collaboration with neighborhood schools, businesses, and other community partners. Policy 16.3 Community Engagement: Build and maintain resident engagement through neighborhood projects, outreach, empowering neighborhood volunteers, and applying for the City's Community and Neighborhood Matching Grants Program. Policy 16.4 Resilience Networks: Build community support and participation in small scale resilience networks that help neighbors and businesses communicate, share resources, and prepare for emergencies. 35 Page 44 of 122 Goal 17: Provide comprehensive public services and community resources that address the evolving needs of the community. Policy 17.1 Address Present Confusion about Service Providers: Assist River Road and Santa Clara residents by providing information about current service providers so there is clarity about which agencies provide services where and how to contact them. Policy 17.2 Essential Public Services (safety, water, fire): As neighborhoods evolve, strive for equitable provision of essential public services if amalgamation and/or transition of service providers is considered. Policy 17.3 Community Resources: Work to expand parks and recreation services as well as library and cultural services in the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods. Policy 17.4 Annexation: Annexation of the River Road and Santa Clara areas will occur only through strict application of state laws and local policies (e.g., ability to extend key urban facilities and services in a timely manner). In each case, Eugene will make every reasonable attempt to provide for annexation only on a voluntary basis and according to prior individual property annexation agreements. Goal 18: Increase resilience in local food, water, and disaster preparedness systems necessary for human health and wellbeing. Policy 18.1 Green Infrastructure: Invest in infrastructure development that is resilient to disasters, enhances food, water, and energy stability, and preserves ecosystem functions, as feasible. Policy 18.2 Food Production and Storage: Promote home and neighborhood food production and storage through community education, outreach, programs, and legislative updates to local land use regulations. Policy 18.3 Renewable Resources and Energy: Promote renewable resources and energy conservation to decrease reliance on public utility grid through community education, outreach, and incentives. Policy 18.4 Neighborhood -wide Emergency Preparedness: Educate and prepare for natural disasters by increasing access to regular Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) training and through community volunteer efforts. 36 Page 45 of 122 Attachment C Proposed Metro Plan Amendments Deletions shown in [s+�wt] Additions shown in bold italic Table of Contents Chapter Page Preface............................................................................................................................................. i I. Introduction..................................................................................................................... I-1 Background....................................................................................................................... I-1 Purpose.............................................................................................................................. I-1 PopulationForecast...........................................................................................................I-2 PlanningFunctions............................................................................................................I-2 Useof the Metro Plan.......................................................................................................I-3 Relationship to Other Plans, Policies, and Reports...........................................................I-5 General Assumptions and Findings..................................................................................I-6 II. Fundamental Principles and Growth Management Policy Framework .............. II -A-1 A. Fundamental Principles................................................................................... II -A-1 B. Metropolitan Goals..........................................................................................II-B-1 C. Growth Management Goals, Findings, and Policies........................................II-C-1 D. Jurisdictional Responsibility........................................................................... II -D-1 E. Urban and Urbanizable Land...........................................................................II-E-1 [F. River- Road and SapA., (''1.,,-., ('foals F;,-.rling .,,,d Policies .............1 —r-7] G. Metro Plan Diagram....................................................................................... II -G-1 III. Specific Elements.....................................................................................................III-A-1 A. Residential Land Use and Housing Element .................................................III -A-1 B. Economic Element......................................................................................... III -B-1 C. Environmental Resources Element................................................................ III -C-1 D. Willamette River Greenway, River Corridors, and Waterways Element...... III -D-1 E. Environmental Design Element..................................................................... III -E-1 F. Transportation Element...................................................................................III-F-1 G. Public Facilities and Services Element..........................................................III-G-1 H. Parks and Recreation Facilities Element........................................................III-H-1 I. Historic Preservation Element.........................................................................III-I-1 J. Energy Element............................................................................................... III -J-1 K. Citizen Involvement Element........................................................................III-K-1 IV. Metro Plan Review, Amendment, and Refinement ................................................... IV- 1 V. Glossary......................................................................................................................... V-1 Page 46 of 122 Chapter II Fundamental Principles and Growth Management Policy Framework This chapter contains Fundamental Principles that reflect the overall themes of the Metro Plan. The chapter also contains: Metropolitan Goals; Growth Management Goals, Findings, and Policies; Eugene and Springfield Jurisdictional Responsibility; Urban and Urbanizable Land; [ ;] and Metro Plan Diagram. II -A-1 Page 47 of 122 f-i�'�.4'3'i!�TS1'1!*Rli� . h■.!�'i. _T7IRl1Jf•J/.4/�S!*7�!!� \- ■ - ; • II -F-1 Page 48 of 122 111161 1 . • • . .� �..z..:�... - f-i�'�.4'3'i!�TS1'1!*Rli� . h■.!�'i. _T7IRl1Jf•J/.4/�S!*7�!!� \- ■ - ; • II -F-1 Page 48 of 122 densities,2. in order- to alehieve ufban ufban servieles, > must be provided. II -F-2 Page 49 of 122 .. ,. Ill ffi�il m IN 110010111 fop IN oil I ._ F-9 ivrp-vp-qrjrr.m ._ pu OEM 1`1`19w ._ 1 MINOR y • 011 densities,2. in order- to alehieve ufban ufban servieles, > must be provided. II -F-2 Page 49 of 122 • !L.���%t.�\ �■�l�l!..■7�T1'I.l�l�♦�� ��T1��1���'��I■,moi ■ I I � ILeto pmm ON NOW IN 11 II -F-3 Page 50 of 122 ........ . ............ONNOMiloft111fil. M-1 • •.. II -F-4 Page 51 of 122 A II -F-5 Page 52 of 122 METRO PLAN APPENDIX B REFINEMENT PLANS, FUNCTIONAL PLANS, AND OTHER PLANNING DOCUMENTS .. •. .• RIVER ROAD -SANTA CLARA NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN Date: XXX 2024 Adopted by: Eugene City Council Lane County Board of Commissioners Adopting Resolution #xxxx, repealed by #xxxx U'YXX, 2004 Adoption Date XXYXX, 2024 Page 53 of 122 Attachment C, Exhibit A River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Engagement Summary WA Launched in fall 2017, the River Road -Santa Clara - 4k neighborhood planning process has been a collaborative effort among community members, River Road Community Organization (RCCO), Santa Clara Community Organization (SCCO), City of Eugene, Lane County, and other stakeholders throughout both neighborhoods. The process had six phases: Reaching Out, Neighborhood Visioning, Neighborhood Priorities, Policy Development, Action Planning, and Adoption, with opportunities for community and stakeholder feedback along the way. This engagement summary includes the community engagement objectives and outcomes from each of the six planning phases. In July 2017, the Eugene Planning Commission (acting as the Citizen Involvement Committee) approved the RRSC Neighborhood Planning Public Involvement Plan. The Project Management Team committed to a community engagement process that was: • Meaningful: creates a vision crafted with beauty, fun, warmth, and welcome • Accountable: responds to ideas, critique, comments, and praise • Inclusive: communicates with all stakeholders, including the under -represented, outside of structured meetings, in ways that people understand and can relate to • Transparent: makes decisions public; shares information in a variety of formats and places • Realistic: informs about constraints, opportunities, and objectives • Outcome -oriented: creates a community -supported and council -adopted neighborhood plan! The Public Involvement Plan and the associated Project Charter (July 2017) established several foundational, community -led groups that would lead neighborhood planning, including: • Community Advisory Committee (CAC): A group of 11 voting members, appointed by the Eugene Planning Commission, that represent the varied voices of the two neighborhoods. The CAC was responsible for considering the full breadth of public input, developing operating rules, working with City and County staff to reach a mutually agreed upon community vision and plan that works within the larger Envision Eugene community vision, and making a final community recommendation. • Project Management Team (PMT): A small core team of the CAC co-chairs and City and County staff tasked with carrying out the project in accordance with the Project Charter. • Technical Advisory Committee (TAC): Composed of City and partner agency staff to serve as advisory body to the Project Management Team and the Community Advisory Committee. The TAC represented their own project or departmental interests and communicated how the neighborhood -specific issues fit within the broader City/County context. • Topic Area Working Groups: Each group focused on one of the Plan's priority areas and included community members and staff. • River Road and Santa Clara Community Organizations: Both community organizations supported public outreach throughout the project. During key decision points in the project, the organizations led efforts to host meetings and communicate with stakeholders. Both community organizations made recommendations to the CAC to inform the final community recommendation on the plan adoption package. Page 54 of 122 River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Engagement Summary SEA N ��0 . plate s Phase 1: Reaching Out (2017) In the summer of 2017, the community organizations, volunteers, and staff began the 'Reaching Out' phase to raise awareness about the project and opportunities for input. The goal of the Reaching Out phase was to give as many community members as possible the opportunity to provide input into the vision for their neighborhood. The results of this outreach identified areas where community members were united, and it flagged some more complicated areas for future neighborhood conversations. Raising Awareness Community volunteers and project staff began raising awareness about the project by meeting with neighbors where they were. They promoted the project at fun activities like Sunday Streets and the grand opening of the new River Road Elementary School and during routine errands at the grocery store. Volunteers from the community organizations canvassed their neighborhoods with informational flyers, sent updates in their newsletters, and used social media to share information. In total, there were more than 20 events in advance of the fall kick-off event. Kick-off Event The fall 2017 community event at North Eugene High School was a huge success, with nearly 400 people filling the Highlander gymnasium. Activities at the kick-off event included a mapping exercise to identify what residents value about the area and a 'my ideas' activity that asked participants to share their future hopes for the neighborhood. Community volunteers and project staff were thrilled with this result but knew there were community members who were unable to attend evening meetings, so an extra effort was made to meet with them at more convenient times and places with targeted outreach. Targeted Outreach To bring in fresh voices, the project stepped out of the meeting room and into the community, conducting unique activities with interesting visuals that stimulated important conversations. The project staff and community volunteers formed partnerships with local organizations like St. Vincent DePaul, Food for Lane County, and our local schools. These organizations helped reach a broader cross Page 2 of 11 Page 55 of 122 ,Ln River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Engagement Summary section of residents. Small group meetings were held with high school students, affordable housing residents, Spanish speakers, and rural residents in Santa Clara. In addition, a group of neighborhood volunteers and City and County staff did door-to-door canvassing of local businesses to gather their input on the neighborhood. Rural Santa Clara: SCCO includes rural residents who live beyond the urban growth boundary (UGB). Members of this community are more unlikely to participate in broader neighborhood workshops that are not tailored to their unique geographic location. The project staff and volunteers thought it was important to target outreach efforts at these constituencies December 2017 attracted over 20 participants. Business Canvassing: Regardless of whether business owners and employees reside in the neighborhood, they have a stake in the outcome of the neighborhood planning process. However, they are often tied to their workplace and may not be able to attend conventional neighborhood outreach events. Community volunteers and project staff made a concerted effort to reach out to businesses in the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods. In November and December 2017, neighborhood volunteers teamed with City and County staff to conduct door-to-door outreach. A rural Santa Clara workshop in City staff and community volunteers canvassing neighborhood businesses These pairs spoke with nearly 300 businesses along River Road and in other commercial areas throughout the neighborhoods. They promoted the planning process, conducted interviews, and encouraged business owners and employees to get involved. Inclusive Outreach: Building a foundation of trust and democracy starts with understanding who has a stake in the outcome of the project and how and when they can participate. Public meetings are often filled with elderly, white, middle-class people listening to public servants slogging through long presentations. To involve youth, low-income residents, people with disabilities, and communities of color, project staff and community volunteers forged relationships with community partners who have earned the trust and respect of historically marginalized community groups through consistent service. Working in collaboration with organizations such as Saint Vincent De Paul, Food for Lane County, and the school districts, the project involved people who do not typically attend public meetings. This targeted outreach to rural Santa Clara residents, the business community, and historically marginalized community groups helped diversify the voices involved in the neighborhood planning process. The values, hopes, and concerns expressed by these stakeholders were balanced with those expressed by other members of the public to create a comprehensive community vision. Page 3 of 11 Page 56 of 122 , N 0, River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Engagement Summary Phases 2-3: Visioning and Neighborhood Priorities (January — June 2018) The Visioning and Neighborhood Priorities phases continued focus on raising awareness of the project and asking community members what they valued in their neighborhoods and hopes for the future. Starting in early 2018, the CAC and topic area Working Groups met monthly to compile and review the feedback received during the Reaching Out phase, recognizing the priorities and values heard during this process, as well as the many years of community engagement through previous planning work. Different themes emerged and the Neighborhood Plan began to develop around five main topic areas: Economic Development, Transportation, Parks and Natural Resources, Land Use, and Community. A vision for the future of the River Road and Santa Clara communities started to appear. Outreach Questionnaires In summer 2018, the CAC and Working Groups developed outreach questionnaires for each of the plan topic areas. These questions were used during community forums, an online survey, and several targeted outreach events. The June 2018 community forums (attended by over 300 people) provided a chance for neighbors to come back together and review the community vision, developed by the CAC, working group members and staff, based on community input received in the Reaching Out Phase. They discussed the questionnaire in small groups and heard each other's opinions. The events were held on two different days of the week (Wednesday and Sunday) and at different times (evening and afternoon) to make it more accessible to people with varying schedules. A light meal and activities for children were provided. Recruitment to these forums included a hard copy invitation mailed to all property owners in River Road and Santa Clara, email invitations to more than 1,000 people on the project's interested parties list, yard signs at high traffic areas (such as parks and major intersections), and posters in area businesses. In addition, community volunteers attended neighborhood events and personally extended invitations. Page 4 of 11 Page 57 of 122 River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Engagement Summary P N 0, P1� The online survey, posted after the June �t 2018 forums, was disseminated through the website, interested parties emails, area organizations, and Facebook, resulting in 106 completed surveys. The project staff and community t. / volunteers worked hard on inclusive outreach to connect with people who were not well represented at the community forum: youth, communities of color, people with disabilities, and low-income residents. ��- Events included a picnic for young families, attendance at the North Eugene �+ 1 Highlanders football team practice, a small A CAC volunteer guides a neighbor through a survey at a group discussion with people with community event disabilities, and individual conversations with people with limited incomes. The project collaborated with organizations such as Cornerstone Housing, St. Vincent De Paul, Headstart, Lane Independent Living Alliance, St. Mary's Church, the Confederated Tribes of the Siletz, North Eugene High School, and Huerto de la Familia. This targeted outreach resulted in an additional 142 completed surveys. Chatting with the North Eugene Highlanders football team Page 58 of 122 Page 5 of 11 River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Engagement Summary SEA N ��0 . plate s Phase 4: Policy Development (July 2018 — May 2019) After laying the groundwork through the phases of Reaching Out, Visioning, and Neighborhood Priorities, the Policy Development phase started in late 2018 through spring 2019 and focused on the drafting of policies related to the vision and neighborhood priorities developed from community input. Throughout the policy development phase, Working Group meetings were held periodically and interested community members were welcome to attend. Policy Round -Up Policy writing was led by the CAC and supported by staff on the TAC as well as Working Group members. At the 'Policy Round -Up' in December 2018, participants sorted the draft policies into broad, cross- cutting themes organized under 18 high-level goals. The goal of the activity was to review the draft policies and identify missing ideas, such as places where certain themes across a topic area were not well represented within the draft policies. More than 60 people participated. Triple Bottom Line Sounding Board In January 2019, the TAC did a closer review of the policies to ensure that the draft policies aligned with existing City and County policies. In February 2019, the first Triple Bottom Line Sounding Board meeting was held to provide a citywide perspective about the equity, environmental, and economic implications of proposed action items in the Neighborhood Plan topic areas. Throughout the topic areas, there are overarching themes such as equity and inclusion, connectivity, healthy people and climate, safety, prosperity, and neighborhood identity. River Road Corridor Study February 2019 brought the first workshops for the River Road Corridor Study.' Over the span of the three-day open house the public had a chance to dive into the details and create actual designs for neighborhood centers along River Road. The theme of the first open house was, "Getting Started: 1 The River Road Corridor Study was a partnership between Lane Transit District and the City of Eugene, supported by a grant from the Federal Transit Administration. The completed study is available here: https://www.eugene- or.gov/DocumentCenter/View/60545/River-Road-Corridor-StudV-FTA-Grant Page 6of11 Page 59 of 122 P R0, River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan aP1 Engagement Summary NiC Reflecting the Neighborhood Vision and Priorities," the second "Developing Concepts: Exploring the Ways the Vision Can Take Shape Along the Corridor," and the third open house concluded with "Establishing Criteria: Refining Ideas and Creating Evaluation Criteria." These workshops were followed by an email survey to participants asking about additional ideas, concerns, and areas of excitement. For those that couldn't attend, we developed an online survey to give people an opportunity to weigh in on both high-level principles for the project and some of the early concepts. As part of the initial workshops, the Corridor Study project staff hosted a Business Round Table, inviting businesses and commercial properties along River Road to talk about design concepts along the corridor and provide input. Photos from the Corridor Study Workshop #1 Planning in Action Open House In April 2019, another community event, the 'Planning in Action Open House' at North Eugene High School provided community members an opportunity to review the draft policies as well as draft actions. The Open House took place on both a Sunday afternoon and a Wednesday evening to accommodate as many community members and businesses as possible. Food and activities for children were provided at these meetings. More than 200 neighbors attended in total and there were great, in- depth conversations at each of the tables. There were many new faces joining the neighborhood planning process at these open houses. These conversations were a chance for neighbors to see how their concerns and aspirations were represented in the draft policies and started the transition from policy development into action planning. On May 15, 2019, City Council officially approved the draft goals and policies as a platform for moving into the Action Planning Phase. Page 7 of 11 Page 60 of 122 River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Engagement Summary SEA N ��0 . plate s N i A ` Phase 5: Action Planning (May 2019 — March 2021) In May 2019, the project transitioned into the Action Planning phase, which focused on drafting, evaluating and prioritizing actions to implement the draft policies. Refining the action items was a collaborative process among the CAC, Working Group members, and City, County, and partner agency staff to incorporate community and technical feedback. River Road Corridor Study In June 2019, project staff held a second series of Corridor Study workshops. Participants learned about corridor concepts and land use and zoning options. The design team and community members discussed implementation strategies and land use policies that could guide the type and location of growth. As they reviewed the work of the design team, community members were asked a series of questions to determine whether the proposed development standards and land use types fit with the vision for the River Road Corridor area and desired neighborhood character. Community members, staff, and consultant team members brainstormed draft land use concepts, zoning options and design standards to further vet with the community using an online survey throughout summer and fall 2019 focusing on two draft land use concepts. Project Fair, Pumpkin Pie and Planning, and Community Events Also in June 2019, project staff highlighted the Neighborhood Plan at a City of Eugene Planning Division Project Fair at the Downtown Library, connecting with community members and talking to them about the neighborhood planning efforts. Staff and community volunteers attended several other events throughout the summer of 2019 to talk with community members about the Neighborhood Plan and collect input. In November 2019, community volunteers and project staff hosted the 'Pumpkin Pie and Planning' event. Over 150 community members, the CAC and City and County staff discussed and shared thoughts on draft action items. It was both a celebration with neighbors on all the work that had been done on the Neighborhood Plan and an opportunity to continue providing input. Highlights of the presentation and discussion included land use, zoning, better transportation, the development of parks and the future of housing in Santa Clara and River Road. Given the large number of participants, discussions were geared towards covering topics with highest priority and expressing support or concern for the action items. Free pumpkin pie was available for those who attended, as well as harvest art activities, Page 8 of 11 Page 61 of 122 SEA N 0 River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan P Engagement Summary s NTA < and a chance to win a basket of goodies. The Land Use topic area had the widest range of opinions, with many participants wanting more information on future land use standards that could address community concerns. Online Survey An online survey was open from August to November 2019, reaching nearly 500 respondents and collecting input and concerns regarding draft actions. Results from in-person outreach events were collated with the online survey results to refine policies and actions. Triple Bottom Line Sounding Board In February 2020, the planning team convened a second Trible Bottom Line Sounding Board meeting, and their feedback was collected on the Action Plan highlights. Neighborhood Conversations From January to March of 2020 a series of small group discussions, Neighborhood Conversations, took place in common neighborhood gathering spaces to discuss how the proposed Neighborhood Plan vision would be implemented. At each of these small group meetings, participants reviewed the proposed land use concepts and discussed: What land uses will be allowed? How is zoning proposed to change? How quickly might changes start to happen? These conversations focused on the Land Use topic area of the Neighborhood Plan and exploring the initial details of the River Road Corridor Study. An invitation to the Neighborhood Conversations was mailed to 16,000+ addresses including all residents and property owners in the neighborhood, emailed to the 1,500+ interested parties list, and shared by the River Road and Santa Clara Community Organizations. Overwhelming interest from residents and property owners in the neighborhood led to scheduling additional meetings —13 conversations in total, attended by approximately 200 residents. Another 80+ people did not attend but learned about the project and received answers from staff or community leaders about their questions in response to the invitations. Approximately half of the participants were new to the project, and the other half had some previous knowledge or had participated in a Plan meeting. While most participants were over 50, the project staff nr and community volunteers did engage younger residents and communities of color through both the Conversations and a meeting hosted jointly with EI Camino Del Rio Elementary School in River Road. The meetings provided the opportunity for groups of staff, volunteers, and A Neighborhood Conversation at Camino Del Rio community members to discuss elements of the land use changes, sharing support and reservations. In mid-March 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic hit and slowed down the engagement process. However, after receiving comprehensive feedback from previous engagement, the CAC continued to meet virtually on Zoom each month and refine the draft actions. Project staff continued to send newsletters through our interested parties email list and in March 2021 launched the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Engage Eugene project website, part of the City of Eugene's online engagement platform. Page 9 of 11 Page 62 of 122 , N 0, River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Engagement Summary Phase 6: Adoption (March 2021— xxx 2024) On May 12, 2021, project staff received direction from the Eugene City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners to move into the Adoption Phase and prepare a plan adoption package for community review. Between spring 2021 and spring 2023, staff and the CAC worked on refining the adoption package and adapting the plan and implementation tools to evolving state requirements, including legislation affecting middle housing and more climate -friendly housing development. In March 2023, the CAC approved bringing the draft Neighborhood Plan, Action Plan, and neighborhood - specific code amendments out for community feedback, kicking -off the broader engagement process for the Adoption Phase. Updated drafts of the Neighborhood Plan and Action Plan and an initial draft of the neighborhood -specific code amendments were published to the project website and the project's Engage Eugene site. Public Information Campaign Project staff distributed information about neighborhood planning and the adoption process through a variety of digital media, including updates to the project website, Engage Eugene webpage, social media, and e -newsletters from the City Planning Division, and both community organizations. Project staff also developed summary documents that were available online and at in-person events, as well as graphics depicting the proposed code amendments. Postcard Mailing In early May 2023, project staff mailed a postcard to all owners and residents of the River Road and Santa Clara neighborhoods, approximately 16,800 people. The postcard featured ways to engage during the adoption phase, including virtual information sessions, an in-person community event, meeting toolkit, and online feedback form. --- LETU KNOW YOWRE ATTENDING OR GIVE FEEDBACK BY A postcard mailing for ways to engage during the Adoption Phase Page 10 of 11 Page 63 of 122 SEA N 0 River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan P Engagement Summary s Virtual Information Sessions Project staff hosted two virtual information sessions to provide an opportunity for community members to learn about neighborhood planning, the draft adoption package, and ways to engage. A total of 21 people attended the two sessions in May 2023, including CAC members. Facilitated Discussions with Community Organizations Project staff participated in the community organization meetings to provide an update on neighborhood planning and support small group discussions. The RCCO meeting was in-person only, while the SCCO meeting included an opportunity for virtual participation during the presentation followed by in-person discussions. Approximately 65+ people participated in the two meetings. In -Person Community Event Project staff and the CAC hosted an evening, in-person community event at North Eugene High School on May 25, 2023. A total of 47 residents participated. Community members were invited to learn about the draft plan by visiting topic tables and reviewing maps and topic area summaries. Staff presented an overview of neighborhood planning and then participants joined small group discussions based on topic area. In addition to CAC members and City and County planning staff, other city departments including Parks and Open Space, Transportation Planning, and the Office of Equity and Community Engagement participated in discussions. Community members learning about the Draft Neighborhood Plan Meeting Toolkit Community Advisory Committee members at the May Community Event For community members who wanted to dive deeper into the plan, project staff provided a meeting toolkit. This toolkit offered guidance on hosting a small or medium-size group discussion with neighbors, family and friends, or existing groups. The same guidance was used by the community organizations for their meetings. Page 11 of 11 Page 64 of 122 Attachment D Proposed River Road/Santa Clara Neighborhood -Specific Land Use Code Amendments Version date: September 28, 2023 Additions are in bold italic Deletions are in [".,^kete' strikeewtl 9.2160 Commercial Zone - Land Use and Permit Requirements. The following Table 9.2160 Commercial Zone Land Uses and Permit Requirements identifies those uses in Commercial Zones that are: (P) Permitted. (SR) Permitted, subject to an approved site review plan or an approved final planned unit development. (C) Subject to a conditional use permit or an approved final planned unit development. (S) Permitted, subject to the Special Development Standards for Certain Uses beginning at EC 9.5000. (#) The numbers in ( ) in the table are uses that have special use limitations described in EC 9.2161. Examples shown in Table 9.2160 are for informational purposes, and are not exclusive. Table 9.2160 does not indicate uses subject to Standards Review. Applicability of Standards Review procedures is set out at EC 9.8465. Table 9.2160 Commercial Zone Land Uses and Permit Requirements 1 Page 65 of 122 Motor Vehicle Related Uses Car Wash P C Motor Vehicle Sales/Rental/Service, excluding recreational vehicles and heavy trucks P(11) C Motorcycle Sales/Rental/Service P(11) C 1 Page 65 of 122 I I . i • Parking Area not directly related to a primary use on the same development site SR (4) P(5) P Parts Store P P Recreational Vehicles and Heavy Truck, Sales/Rental/Service C(11) Repair, includes paint and body shop P Service Stations, includes quick servicing P C Structured Parking, up to two levels not directly related to a primary use on the same development site P P P Structured Parking, three or more levels not directly related to a primary use on the same development site C P C Tires, Sales/Service P C Transit, Neighborhood Improvement P P P P Transit Park and Ride, Major P P P Transit Park and Ride, Minor C P P P Transit Station, Major C SR SR SR Transit Station, Minor. C P P P Trade (Retail and Wholesale) Agricultural Machinery Rental/Sales/Service C(11) Appliance Sales/Service P P Bicycle Rental/Sales/Service P(1) P P Boat and Watercraft Sales/Service P(11) C Book Store P(1) P P Building Materials and Supplies Computer Store P(1) P P Convenience Store P(1) P P P(2) Drug Store (excluding Drug Treatment Centers) P(1) P P Electrical Appliances and Supplies P(1) P P Page 66 of 122 9.2161 Special Use Limitations for Table 9.2160. (11) Prohibited Uses in River Road and Santa Clara. Use is prohibited on property located within the city limits of the City of Eugene and within the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Area as shown on Map 9.2161(11). 9.2170 Commercial Zone Development Standards - General. 3 Page 67 of 122 • Equipment, Light, Rental/Sales/Service P P Equipment, Heavy, Rental/Sales/Service - includes truck and tractor sales C(11) Fabric Store P P Floor Covering Store P P Furniture and Home Furnishing Stores P P Garden Supply/Nursery P(1) P General Merchandise (includes supermarket and department store) P(1) P P P(2) Hardware/Home Improvement Store P(1) P P Healthcare Equipment and Supplies P P Liquor Store P P Manufactured Dwelling Sales/Service/Repair C Office Equipment and Supplies Plumbing Supplies P P P P Retail trade when secondary, directly related, and limited to products manufactured, repaired or assembled on the development site P(1) P P Storage Facility, Household/Consumer Goods, enclosed P(11) 9.2161 Special Use Limitations for Table 9.2160. (11) Prohibited Uses in River Road and Santa Clara. Use is prohibited on property located within the city limits of the City of Eugene and within the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Area as shown on Map 9.2161(11). 9.2170 Commercial Zone Development Standards - General. 3 Page 67 of 122 (2) Application of Standards. In addition to applicable provisions contained elsewhere in this land use code, the development standards listed in Table 9.2170 Commercial Zone Development Standards shall apply to all development in commercial zones. C-1 C-2 C-3 GO Building Height (See EC 9.2170(3) and EC 9.2170(13)) Maximum Building Height 35 feet 120 feet 150 feet 50 feet Setbacks (See EC 9.2170(4) and EC 9.2170(13)) Minimum Front Yard Setback 10 feet 5 feet 3 feet 10 feet Maximum Front Yard Setback 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet Minimum Interior Yard Setback 0 feet to 10 feet 0 feet to 10 feet 0 feet 0 feet to 10 feet (3) Building Height. (a) Exceptions to the general height restrictions for commercial structures stated in Table 9.2170 Commercial Zone General Building Height and Setback Standards are contained in: 1. EC 9.6715 Height Limitation Areas. 2. EC 9.6720 Height Exemptions for Roof Structures and Architectural Features. (b) Subject to the limitations in subsection (a) of this section, in the C-2 or C-3 zones, no portion of a building located within 50 feet of a residential zone shall exceed the maximum building height permitted in the abutting residential zone. (c) Subject to the limitations in subsection (a) of this section, the maximum permitted building height for main or accessory buildings in the GO zone shall not exceed 35 feet in height within 50 feet of an abutting AG, R-1, or R-2 zone. Otherwise, main and accessory building height maximums shall not exceed 50 feet. (d) Subject to the limitations in subsections (a) and (b) of this section, the maximum building height for properties in the C-2 zone and located within the city limits of the City of Eugene and within the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Area as shown on Map 9.2161(11) shall not exceed 60 feet. Also see EC 9.2170(13) for Transition Standards. (4) Setbacks. 4 Page 68 of 122 (a) Exceptions to the general minimum front and interior yard setback requirements stated in Table 9.2170 Commercial Zone General Building Height and Setback Standards are contained in: 1. EC 9.6745 Setbacks - Intrusions Permitted. 2. EC 9.6750 Special Setback Standards. (b) Minimum Front Yard Setbacks. The minimum front yard setbacks stated in Table 9.2170 Commercial Zone General Building Height and Setback Standards, shall apply only to new buildings and any building addition that increases the length of the building facade facing a street, internal accessway, private drive, or shopping street as defined in EC 9.2175(3) by at least 100%. For purposes of this subsection, the front yard setback may be measured from a front lot line abutting a public street or from the edge of the sidewalk furthest from the curb of an internal accessway, private drive, or shopping street. In addition, only the portion of the development site specifically affected by the new building and any linear facade expansion of more than 100% are subject to the requirements of this subsection. 1. The minimum front yard setback in C-2 and C-3 zones shall be landscaped to the Basic Landscape Standard (L-1) in accordance with EC 9.621 0(l), except for paved pedestrian walkways, building entrances and enhanced pedestrian space. Vehicular access connections and driveways to parking areas are also exempt from this landscaping standard, but vehicle use areas are not otherwise allowed between the building and the street within the minimum setback area. 2. In C-2, except for C-2 within the Downtown Plan Area as shown on Map 9.2161(6) Downtown Plan Map, buildings and other structures with less than the minimum 5 - foot setback are allowed, and exempt from the minimum landscaping requirement in this subsection, only for the following: a. Ground floor commercial and other non-residential uses that provide a minimum 10 -foot ground floor ceiling height, and at least 60 percent of the street facing ground -floor wall area consists of glazing, openings, display windows or doorways. To meet this standard, the area of openings, glazing, display windows and doorways must allow two-way visibility with a Visible Light Transmittance (VLT) 5 Page 69 of 122 of at least 60 percent. Mullions and other solid components of glazed window systems may be counted as part of the glazing used to comply with this standard. b. Ground floor residential uses with a vertical separation of 3 feet above grade. Shared lobbies and building entrances are exempt from these vertical separation requirements. The minimum setback under this exception may only be reduced to 3 feet, and the remaining area of the reduced setback shall be provided as enhanced pedestrian space. c. Buildings with a street facing facade at the minimum 5 -foot setback or less according to the standards above shall provide a main entrance facing the street. A building may have more than one main entrance, and buildings having frontage on more than one street shall provide at least one main entrance oriented to a street, or to the corner where two streets intersect. On properties zoned C-2 and located within the city limits of the City of Eugene and the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Area as shown on Map 9.2161(11), buildings fronting River Road shall provide a main entrance oriented to that street or to the corner where River Road and another street intersect. d. Vehicular use areas are not permitted between the street and any portion of the building at or within the required minimum setback according to this subsection, except for access to parking areas. 3. For C-2 and C-3 within the Downtown Plan Area as shown on Map 9.2161(6) Downtown Plan Map, buildings and other structures with less than the minimum setback are allowed, and exempt from the minimum landscaping requirement in this subsection, only for the following: a. Ground floor commercial and other non-residential uses that provide a minimum 12 -foot ground floor ceiling height, and at least 75 percent of the street facing ground -floor wall area consists of glazing, openings, display windows or doorways. To meet this standard the area of openings, glazing, display windows and doorways must allow two-way visibility with a Visible Light Transmittance (VLT) of at least 60 percent. Mullions and other solid components of glazed window systems may be counted as part of the glazing used to comply with this standard. 0 Page 70 of 122 b. Ground floor residential uses with a vertical separation of 3 feet above grade. Shared lobbies and building entrances are exempt from these vertical separation requirements. The minimum setback under this exception may only be reduced to 3 feet, and the remaining area of reduced setback shall be provided as enhanced pedestrian space. c. Buildings with a street facing fa4ade at the minimum setback or less according to the standards above shall provide a main entrance facing the street. A building may have more than one main entrance, and buildings having frontage on more than one street shall provide at least one main entrance oriented to a street, or to the corner where two streets intersect. d. Vehicular use areas are not permitted between the street and any portion of the building at or within the required minimum setback according to this subsection, except for access to parking areas. 4. The minimum setbacks in C-1 and GO shall be landscaped to the Basic Landscape Standard (L-1) in accordance with EC 9.621 0(l), except for paved pedestrian walkways, building entrances and enhanced pedestrian space. Vehicular access connections and driveways to parking areas are also exempt from this landscaping standard, but vehicle use areas are not otherwise permitted between the building and the street within minimum setback areas. (c) Maximum Front Yard Setbacks. The maximum front yard setbacks stated in Table 9.2170 Commercial Zone General Building Height and Setback Standards, shall apply only to new buildings and any building addition that increases the length of the building facade facing a street, internal accessway, private drive, or shopping street as defined in EC 9.2175(3) by at least 100%. For purposes of this subsection, front yard setback may be measured from a front lot line abutting a public street or from the edge of the sidewalk furthest from the curb of an internal accessway, private drive, or shopping street. In addition, all new buildings and the portion of the development site specifically affected by the new building and any linear facade expansion of more than 100% are subject to the requirements of this subsection. (See Figure 9.2170(4)(c) Maximum Front Yard Setbacks, Building Orientation, and Entrances.) 7 Page 71 of 122 1. In C-1, at least 80% of all street facing facades of the building must be within the specified maximum front yard setback. 2. Except as provided in EC 9.2170(4)(c)(3), [I]in C-2 and C-3, a minimum of 25% of all street facing facades must be within the specified maximum front yard setback, or, orientation to an internal accessway, private drive, or shopping street as defined in EC 9.2175(3) is permitted in compliance with EC 9.2173(4)(a) 3. On properties zoned C-2 and located within the city limits of the City of Eugene and the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Area as shown on Map 9.2161(11), a minimum of 80% of all street facing facades must be within the specified maximum front yard setback, or, orientation to an internal accessway, private drive, or shopping street as defined in EC 9.2175(3) is permitted in compliance with EC 9.2173(4)(a). 4{-3}. In GO, at least 60% of all street facing facades of the building must be within the specified maximum front yard setback. 5{4}. Vehicular use areas are not permitted in between the street and the portion of the building that is used to comply with this subsection. 6{-5}. Buildings fronting on a street must provide a main entrance facing the street on any facade of the building within the front yard setback. A main entrance is a principal entrance through which people enter the building. A building may have more than one main entrance. Buildings having frontage on more than one street shall provide at least one main entrance oriented to a street, or to the corner where two streets intersect. On properties zoned C-2 and located within the city limits of the City of Eugene and the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Area as shown on Map 9.2161(11), buildings fronting River Road shall provide a main entrance oriented to that street or to the corner where River Road and another street intersect. 7{4}. The land between the portion of a building complying with EC 9.2170(4)(c)(1) or and a street must be landscaped or paved with a hard surface for use by pedestrians. If a hard surface is provided, the area must contain at least the equivalent of 1 pedestrian amenity for every 200 square feet of hard surface. The use of porous materials for hard surfacing is encouraged. Residential developments are exempt from this subsection, except as required by any more restrictive provisions of EC 8 Page 72 of 122 9.2170(4)(b) above. (See Figure 9.2170(4)(c)6. Landscaped or Paved Pedestrian Area with Pedestrian Amenities.) 8R4. The maximum front yard setback may be exceeded if the area between the building and the front property line is landscaped or paved for use by pedestrians. The area must contain at least the equivalent of 1 enhanced pedestrian amenity for every 200 square feet of hard surface. (See Figure 9.2170(4)(c)6. Landscaped or Paved Pedestrian Area with Pedestrian Amenities.) (d) Where lot lines abut property within a residential zone category, the minimum interior yard setback for any building shall be 10 feet. Within the Downtown Plan Area as shown on Map 9.2161(6) Downtown Plan Map, adjustments to this section may be made based on the criteria in EC 9.8030(16). (e) For lots zoned C-1 within the S JW Jefferson Westside Special Area Zone boundaries as shown on Figure 9.3605, setbacks from all portions of interior lot lines (as that term is defined for purposes of the S -JW Special Area Zone) shall be at least 10 feet from the interior lot line. In addition, at a point that is 20 feet above grade, the setback shall slope at the rate of 10 inches vertically for every 12 inches horizontally (approximately 50 degrees from vertical) away from that lot line. (f) Adjustments. Except for the Downtown Plan Area as shown on Map 9.2161(6) Downtown Plan Map, adjustments to the minimum and maximum front yard setbacks and landscaping standards in this subsection, except subsection (4)(a), may be made, based on criteria at EC 9.8030(2) Setback Standards Adjustment. Within the Downtown Plan Area, adjustments to the minimum and maximum front yard setbacks in this subsection, except subsection (4)(a), may be made, based on the criteria at EC 9.8030(16). (13) River Road/Santa Clara Specific Standards. The following standards apply to new buildings and any building additions constructed on properties zoned C-2 and located within city limits of the City of Eugene and the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Area as shown on Map 9.2161(11). (a) River Road/Santa Clara Transition Standards. The following standards apply to new buildings and to building additions that increase the square footage of floor area by 20 0 Page 73 of 122 percent or more on property abutting R-1 zoned land. The following standards shall be applicable between the new building or the building addition and any property line abutting land zoned R-1. The proposed development must comply with one of the following options described below. Option 1. The minimum interior yard setback shall be 10 feet from any property line that abuts land zoned R-1. In addition, at least one of the following must be provided along the entire portion of any property line that abuts land zoned R-1: a. A 6 -foot high, 100 percent sight -obscuring wooden fence or masonry wall. b. A 6 -foot high metal fence with high shrubs planted every 6 feet. Chain link and cyclone fences are not allowed. For the purposes of this subparagraph, high shrubs must be: Selected from the City of Eugene Plant Materials list approved by administrative order of the city manager, ii. Designated in the City of Eugene Plant Materials list as meeting the high shrub requirement, and iii. In at least 5 -gallon containers at the time of planting. C. Landscaping with a minimum plant bed width of 10 feet meeting EC 9.6210(3) High Screen Landscape Standard (L-3). 2. Option 2. The minimum interior yard setback shall be 15 feet from any property line that abuts land zoned R-1. In addition, the development shall comply with all of the following. a. At a point that is 30 feet above grade at the property line, the interior yard setback shall slope toward the interior of the property at the rate of 10 inches vertically for every 12 inches horizontally away from that property line until a point 25 feet away from the property line. b. For new buildings or building additions within 25 feet of land zoned R-1, trees growing to a mature height of at least 20 feet shall be planted at a minimum interval of 25 feet, parallel to the property line, between buildings and any property line that abuts land zoned R-1. C. One of the following shall be provided along the portion of any property line that abuts land zoned R-1: A 6 -foot high, 100 percent sight obscuring wooden fence or masonry wall. 10 Page 74 of 122 ii. A 6 -foot high metal fence with high shrubs planted every 6 feet. Chain link and cyclone fences are not allowed. For the purposes of this subparagraph, high shrubs must be: 1. Selected from the City of Eugene Plant Materials list approved by administrative order of the city manager; 2. Designated in the City of Eugene Plant Materials list as meeting the high shrub requirement, and, 3. In at least 5 -gallon containers at the time of planting. 3. Option 3. A minimum 25 foot setback shall be provided between a new building or building addition and the portion of any property line that abuts land zoned R-1. The 25 foot setback area may be used for open space, vehicle use area, pedestrian circulation, bicycle parking, stormwater quality facilities, or landscaping. (b) River Road/Santa Clara Building Walls/Window Coverage. 1. Windows are required along all street facingground floor walls within the maximum front yard setback at a minimum of 60% of the horizontal length and 25% of the area of applicable ground floor walls. 2. All windows shall have a minimum Visible Light Transmittance (VLT) of 0.6 or higher. 3. A blank length of wall of more than 20 linear feet is prohibited along any facade. Windows, arcades, colonnades, or main entrances can be used to address this standard. 4. Adjustments to the standards in this subsection(b) may be made, based on the criteria of EC 9.8030(39). (c) River Road/Santa Clara Weather Protection. Weather protection features such as canopies, awnings or arcades shall be provided over at least the full width of all building entrances to a depth of at least 3 feet. Alternatively, building entrances may be set back a minimum of 3 feet behind the face of the building. 1. Adjustments to the standards in this subsection(c) may be made, based on the criteria of EC 9.8030(39). 11 Page 75 of 122 R-1 Low Density Residential Zone Amendments Explanation: Changes to R-1 Low Density Residential permitted uses to allow for small-scale collective sales of agricultural products 9.2740 Residential Zone Land Use and Permit Requirements. The following Table 9.2740 Residential Zone Land Use and Permit Requirements identifies those uses in the residential zones that are: (P) Permitted. (SR) Permitted, subject to an approved site review plan or an approved final planned unit development. (C) Subject to an approved conditional use permit or an approved final planned unit development. (PUD) Permitted, subject to an approved final planned unit development. (S) Permitted, subject to the Special Development Standards for Certain Uses beginning at EC 9.5000. (#) The numbers in ( ) in the table are uses that have special use limitations that are described in EC 9.2741 Special Use Limitations for Table 9.2740. The examples listed in Table 9.2740 are for informational purposes and are not exclusive. Table 9.2740 does not indicate uses subject to Standards Review. Applicability of Standards Review procedures is set out at EC 9.8465. Table 9.2740 Residential Zone Land Uses and Permit Requirements 12 Page 76 of 122 Accessory Uses Accessory Uses. Examples include a garage, P P P P storage shed, and services primarily for use by residents on the site, such as a recreation room and laundry facility. Parking areas and garages constructed and used for a principle use on the development site, such as an apartment, are allowed as an accessory use. Agricultural, Resource Production and Extraction Community and Allotment Garden P P P P 12 Page 76 of 122 Display and Sale of Agricultural Products Grown on the Site Display and Sale of Agricultural Products Grown Offsite R-1 R-2 R-3 9.2741 Special Use Limitations for Table 9.2740. (9) Display and Sale of Agricultural Products Grown Offsite. This use is only allowed on property located within the city limits of the City of Eugene and the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Area as shown on Map 9.2161(l 1), and is subject to the following standards: (a) Use is limited to two days in a calendar week and is limited to between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. (b) Permanent changes to the development site to specifically accommodate the use are prohibited. (c) Except during the hours of operation of the use, there shall be no display or outdoor storage of agricultural products visible from the street. (d) The use is not permitted on a flag lot. (e) Parking associated with the use must be located on -street or within an existing on- site parking area. (f) Signs associated with the use shall not be placed in the public right of way or vision clearance area. All signage must comply with the sign standards at EC 9.6600. Other Code Amendments 9.8010 List of Adopted Plans. The documents listed in the following Table 9.8010, including any adopted amendments, are the currently effective adopted plans that may be applicable to a particular land use 13 Page 77 of 122 application. The plans and adopted policies are more particularly set forth beginning at EC 9.9500, and the boundaries for each are depicted on Map 9.8010, Adopted Plans. Table 9.8010 List of Adopted Plans Bethel-Danebo Refinement Plan (Phase II) River Road -Santa Clara [Urban Pac t os; Plan] Neighborhood Plan Bethel-Danebo Refinement Plan Riverfront Park Study Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan South Hills Study Envision Eugene Comprehensive Plan South Willamette Subarea Study Eugene Downtown Plan TransPlan (Metro Area Transportation Plan) Eugene -Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) Walnut Station Specific Area Plan Eugene 2035 Transportation System Plan West University Refinement Plan Fairmount/U of 0 Special Area Study Westside Neighborhood Plan Jefferson/Far West Refinement Plan Whiteaker Plan Laurel Hill Neighborhood Plan Willakenzie Area Plan 19th and Agate Special Area Study Willow Creek Special Area Study 14 Page 78 of 122 9.8030 Adjustment Review - Approval Criteria. The planning director shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny an adjustment review application. Approval or conditional approval shall be based on compliance with the following applicable criteria. (39) River Road/Santa Clara Neighborhood Specific Standards. Where this land use code provides that the River Road/Santa Clara Neighborhood Specific Standards can be adjusted, the standards may be adjusted upon finding that the design achieves all of the following. (a) Contributes to the continuity of building facades along the street. (b) Creates an attractive pedestrian environment along all adjacent streets. (c) Is compatible with adjacent development. 9.9500 Adopted Plan Policies. The adopted plan policies set forth in the sections beginning at EC 9.9500 shall be used when applicable for purposes of evaluating applicable adopted plan policies pertaining to subdivisions, partitions, and site review. However, in accordance with Metro Plan Policy A.9, a maximum residential density established by an adopted plan policy set forth in EC 9.9500 through EC 9.9710 may not be applied to an application proposing middle housing. For purposes of this section, a maximum residential density includes but is not limited to, a minimum lot size requirement, a limit on the number of dwelling units per acre, or another similar regulation that has the effect of limiting residential density. 15 Page 79 of 122 16 Page 80 of 122 17 Page 81 of 122 IN Page 82 of 122 19 Page 83 of 122 Map 9.21 G1 (11) River Road - Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Area >v � 1 � 1 4J I - � s ■ 1 1 1 1 1 1 i - 1 _ 1 1 I 1 I Irving Rd . - _ — Mi xwell-Rd- �ff Barger Dr - A, _ _ I 1 • 1 1 lip 1 � ■ 1 1 1 ■ i� _ - ..-- Randy'Pape'Beltline`'�► IA110 ;r - l l I r 1 y'•' .• •• Roosevelt Blvd r. Eugene Urban Growth O Metro Plan Boundary River Road - Santa Clara -� Boundary (UGB) Neighborhood Plan Area Page 81df 122 Eugene �1 Taxlots {outlined in white) 0 0.3 0.6 Miles July 2023 t• •• Map 9.8010 Adopted Plans Map Legend Legend ❑ 1, Eugene Downtown Plan 2, Downtown Riverfront Specific Area Plan C 3, Riverfront Park Study ® 4, West University Refinement Plan ■ 5, 19th & Agate Special Area Study L\\ 6, Fairmount/University of Oregon Special Area Plan ■ 7, Walnut Station Specific Area Plan 8, Laurel Hill Neighborhood Plan 9, South Hills Study ■ 10, South Willamette Subarea Study 11, Jefferson/Far West Refinement Plan 12, Westside Neighborhood Plan IN`s 13, Whiteaker Plan 14, Willakenzie Area Plan 15, River Road - Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan 16, Bethel-Danebo Refinement Plan ■ 17, Bethel-Danebo Neighborhood Refinement Plan Phase II 18, Willow Creek Special Area Study 19, West Eugene Wetlands Plan City or Metropolitan Area Plans Envision Eugene Comprehensive Plan = UGB Eugene 2035 Transportation System Plan = UGB + Airport Master Plan Area (not shown) Comprehensive Stormwater Management Plan = Eugene City Limits (not shown) Metro Plan = Eugene -Springfield Metropolitan Area (not shown) TransPlan = Eugene -Springfield Metropolitan Area (not shown) This map is intended as general reference for the boundaries of plans adopted by the Eugene City Council. For specific boundaries, please refer to the plan. Map prepared by Eugene Planning and Development Department. (Some plans have overlapping boundaries.) Page 86 of 122 22 Eugene Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) July 2023 Attachment E Community Advisory Committee River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Planning Recommendation Letter— August 2023 To the joint planning commissions, The Community Advisory Committee for the River Road Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan is composed of eleven elected representatives from both River Road and Santa Clara Community Organizations. Our charge has been to represent our neighborhoods and to guide the process over time. Since the project's launch in 2017, 18 people have held these roles, each appointed and approved by the Eugene Planning Commission. We, the members of the River Road/Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan community advisory committee have voted to recommend the final plan, and request its approval from this body. In addition, and required in the project charter, the two participating neighborhood association boards, RRCO and SCCO, have also voted to approve this plan with additional recommendations listed in the attached submissions. The Action Plan was created by our neighbors to implement the goals and policies. While this is an aspirational document, city staff have committed to referencing it when making decisions that impact our neighborhood, requesting funding, and implementing programs. The regulatory shifts from the state as well as the city's pivot from separate corridor plans to a citywide approach have us concerned that our work will be disregarded in the planning of the River Road corridor. We ask that the detailed and comprehensive work done for that project be consulted when corridor planning for River Road begins in the future. The landscape for implementing our plan changed dramatically over the course of our work and required us to limit our scope. Our two neighborhoods had broad support for the work done through our RR/SC Corridor Plan to help create nodes for commercial development that would move us toward an active and walkable corridor. We would like to continue the efforts to increase the locally -owned businesses' activation of the corridor, and ensure that the limited commercial lots are used for that purpose. We look forward to working with you as you review this plan, and we are available for questions and consultation at any point in your deliberations. Please note the RRCO Board Recommendation and SCCO Recommendation created by the community organizations during their final review. In community, The River Road/Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Community Advisory Committee Page 87 of 122 River Road Community Organization DD River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Planning LNM Recommendation Letter—July 2023 coo Dear Mayor Vinis and Members of the City, We, the members of the River Road Community Organization Board, are writing in support of the Draft River Road/Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan being submitted by the Eugene Planning staff, in conjunction with the Community Advisory Committee, and the River Road and Santa Clara community organizations. For the past 6 years, our community and board members have engaged in this effort with enthusiasm and with the needs of our unique and fast-growing neighborhood in mind. The plan does not address all of the requirements outlined as part of the Envision Eugene initiative; however, we have heard from our community via a variety of vehicles and believe that the current draft should proceed through the adoption process, moving us forward from the refinement plan of 1986 that currently guides the development for our area. We are ready to partner with the City and County to move the draft plan forward and are willing to accept some of the shortcomings of the document in order to proceed. While the new plan will define much of the direction for the neighborhood, we have identified three core areas of opportunity that were eliminated from the plan. As these three areas of opportunity are core to the desires of our community, we are committed as a board to continue to advocate for resolution of these issues to meet the needs of River Road residents. These are: 1. No Parking Resolution for County Streets: Lane County controls 76% of River Road Local Streets (58% of Santa Clara) and they have negligible capacity to enforce on -street parking standards. The reduction in on-site parking requirements through the middle housing code amendments and other State standards means that our experience with parking overflow near ECCO housing will just become more intense. Many of the County Local streets in our neighborhoods aren't developed to urban standards and have limited capacity to accommodate the overflow parking almost certain to occur with new properties lacking minimum on-site parking requirements. Without someway to regulate on -street parking on a significant majority of our streets, further densification will lead to more unsafe streets in our neighborhoods. One potential resolution would be for the City Manager to include deliberation on how to address the issue as part of the Climate Friendly and Equitable Community Parking Reform process. 2. Potential Loss of Commercial Properties: When we asked our neighbors to set goals for the Neighborhood Plan, they placed strong emphasis on having more commercial opportunities, especially restaurants, gathering spots & groceries. They also called for 20 Minute Neighborhoods -- businesses they could easily walk or bike to. However, the staff decision to eliminate the proposed Corridor Mixed Use zone leaves the majority of our current Commercial properties in the C-2 Community Commercial Zone. This zone allows 100% of the properties in the zone to be residential with no commercial at all. The eliminated Corridor Mixed Use zone would have required commercial use on the ground floor. The economic study included in Sera Architect's River Road Corridor Study showed that economic demand for housing is high and commercial use is low. Without regulation requiring it or some kind of incentive to encourage it, the commercial facilities we currently have may well be replaced Page 88 of 122 River Road Community Organization DD River Road-Santa Clara Neighborhood Planning JAM Recommendation Letter—July 2023 CcAll by multifamily housing that ironically will create an even greater need for the commercial properties they replace. We encourage the City to conduct a feasibility study to determine how to encourage more commercial services in the River Road/Santa Clara area. 3. Need for Neighborhood Specific Regulations for the River Road Corridor: We continue to believe that we need neighborhood-specific regulations to guide the development of the River Road corridor. We appreciate the C2 code changes proposed instead of a special area zone but recommend that you reconsider a one-size-fits-all ordinance for all seven corridors, as proposed to be enacted in 2026. We wish to recognize the efforts of the Eugene Planning staff, the RRCO and SCCO boards, the Community Advisory Committee, and all of the members of our joint communities who have engaged with us over these past 6 years to reach this milestone. It is our hope that we will continue to collaborate over the coming years as we work to implement the Action Plan and resolve our parking, commercial, and corridor issues. With kindest regards, River Road Community Organization Board Members Page 89 of 122 Santa Clara Community Organization River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Planning Recommendation Letter —July 2023 Santa Clara Community Organization (SCCO) voted unanimously to recommend approval of the neighborhood plan, the action plan the code amendments, and staff suggested additions as well as these edits in bold: Policy 5.2 Transit: Support affordable PUBLIC TRANSIT ALONG RIVER ROAD FROM THE URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY to the rest of Eugene in collaboration with Lane Transit District. Policy 7.4.1. Identify natural areas on public land and collaborate with public agencies to manage with ecological values in mind. PRIORITIZE THE USE OF NATIVE PLANTS WHERE APPROPRIATE. Under Policy 6.3 consider adding an action related to sound mitigation for residential areas abutting highways. Have staff review comments from Eliza Kashinsky about possible perils of tying code changes to neighborhood boundaries instead of specific locations. Page 90 of 122 Attachment F River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan City File: MA 23-5, CA 23-3 County File: 509-PA23-05532 Testimony Batch 1 Batch Information Date Range Date Batch Number Page Count Start End Submissions 1 31 09/12/2023 10/06/2023 11 From To Date Time Attachments Michael Reeder Testimony 10/6/2023 16:32 1 Steve Norris Testimony 10/6/2023 15:14 1 Bill Kloos Testimony 10/6/2023 13:31 1 Hillary Kittleson Testimony 10/5/2023 16:45 Bill Kloos on behalf of Kevin Journey Testimony 10/3/2023 10:25 1 Teresa Bishow on behalf of Action Rent All Testimony 10/3/2023 10:09 1 Ruby Matthews Testimony 10/2/2023 11:18 Bron Fain Testimony 10/2/2023 0:00 David Chubb Testimony 10/2/2023 0:00 Gordon and Connie Howard Testimony 9/28/2023 0:00 Beverly Barr Testimony 9/16/2023 20:33 Notes: For reference, submissions are organized in reverse chronological order by the date they were included in the record. If viewing the digital PDF file, please note that bookmarks are included for navigating between each submission. Page 91 of 122 From: Micheal Reeder To: Eugene RR -SC Plan Subject: RR/SC Plan and Code Amendments I Clemens Marina & Meeker Family Written Testimony Date: Friday, October 6, 2023 4:33:32 PM Attachments: image001.ong Reeder to PCs (Clemens Marina) 10-6-2023.pdf [EXTERNAL 1# Dear Ms. Domingo: Please include the attached letter into the record for the Eugene and Lane County Planning Commissioners for their consideration. Please include me and my clients onto the interested parties list. Sincerely, Mike Law Office of Mike Reeder Oregon sand Use Law Office: (541) 225-8777 1 oregonlanduse.com 375 W. 4th Ave., Suite 205, Eugene, OR 97401 NOTICE: This email is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential or privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, or distribution is prohibited. If you received this message in error, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the message. Page 92 of 122 env Law Office of Mike Reeder Oregon Land Use Law October 6, 2023 Sent Via Email: RRSCPlanneugene-or.gov Eugene Planning Commission Lane County Planning Commission c/o Elena Domingo Eugene Planning Division 99 West 10th Avenue Eugene, OR 97401 RE: RRSC Plan and Code Amendments Eugene Files MA 23-5 and CA 23-3 & County File 509-PA23-05532 Dear Planning Commissioners: I represent Chuck and Patsy Meeker, the Meeker Family LLC, the Meeker Family Limited Partnership and Clemens Marina, Inc. My clients own three lots on River Avenue where Clemens Marina, a longtime family-owned boat dealership, is located. These three tax lots are identified as Assessor's Map 17-04-13-21, Tax Lots 800, 900 and 902. Established in 1958, Clemens Marina is Oregon's largest aluminum boat dealer with locations in Eugene, Troutdale, and southeast Portland. My clients purchased Tax Lots 900 and 902 in the early 1980s and expanded the operations with the purchase of Tax Lot 800 in 2003. At the River Avenue location, the three lots are in the boundary of the draft River Road Santa Clara Plan Area and will be adversely impacted by adoption of the draft RRSC Plan and the proposed code amendments to the C-2 zone. The three tax lots are further described below: Tax Lot 800 — 333 River Avenue Metro Plan & 1987 River Road Urban Facilities Plan Designation — Commercial Existing Zoning — C-2 Community Commercial Lot Size — 2.75 Acres Tax Lot 900 — 311 River Avenue Metro Plan & 1987 River Road Urban Facilities Plan Designation — Commercial Existing Zoning — I-2/SR Light -Medium Industrial with Site Review overlay Lot Size — 0.45 Acres Page 93 of 122 12 Meeker Family Testimony NIA 23-5/CA 23-3/509-PA23-05532 October 6, 2023 Tax Lot 902 — 309 River Avenue Metro Plan & 1987 River Road Urban Facilities Plan Designation — Commercial Existing Zoning — I-2/SR Light -Medium Industrial with Site Review overlay Lot Size — 1.70 Acres In 1967, the lots were included in a city -initiated application to annex properties along the east and west sides of River Road between the Beldine highway and the Owosso bridge. In 1996, the city granted Site Review approval for the Clemens Marina (SR 96-047) to expand on the portion of the site zoned I-2/SR. (The remainder of the site was zoned C-2 and did not require Site Review approval.). The 1996 Site Review approval expired. In 2000 the property owners submitted a new application for a similar expansion. The City granted Site Review approval allowing construction of an additional 7,200 square foot building and expansion of the Clemens Marina (SR 00-002). The currently -adopted and acknowledged 1987 River Road Urban Facilities Plan (1987 RR Plan) contained a land use diagram, description, and recommendations for each area of the neighborhood. My client's properties were included in the "River Avenue" area. The 1987 RR Plan identified a conflict between the Metro Plan commercial designation of the area and lots zoned industrial. To correct the Plan/Zone conflict, the 1987 RR Plan designated the area along the north side of River Avenue as Commercial (consistent with the Metro Plan) and recommended the area be rezoned to Commercial. At that time, as now, the C-2 zone implemented the Commercial Plan designation. At the time, as now, the C-2 zone permitted RV/Boat & Watercraft/Motor Vehicle sales, rental and service. (See EC Table 9.2160). The draft RRSC Plan does not contain a land use diagram, nor does it provide recommendations on how to resolve conflicts between the Metro Plan Diagram and existing zoning. Furthermore, the draft code amendments to C-2 will prohibit certain uses including `Boat and 1-Vatereraft Sales/Service ". If approved, this will result in the C-2 zoned portion of the Clemens Marina site becoming a non -conforming use. The I-2 zone permits `Boat and W,`atereraft Sales/Service" and retail trade directly related to the primary use of the site. The Planning Commissions should direct staff to prepare a tax lot specific land use diagram for the RRSC Plan to clarify the land use for each property in the planning area and to implement state-wide planning goals. Without a parcel specific Plan diagram, the proposed RR/SC Plan is not a legitimate refinement plan. There are no findings of fact or evidence in the record with the Planning Commission's agenda packet that justifies the public need, or any basis for, amending the C-2 zone development standards. The draft amendments, such as the decrease in building height, will substantially decrease the capacity for commercial land to meet projected employment growth. In addition, draft amendments changing the C-2 development standards will immediately create many non -conforming structures resulting in untold negative financial impacts on businesses and property owners. It is unclear why the C-2 zone standards approved for other areas of the City are not appropriate for the River Road/Santa Clara planning area. If the Office phone: (541) 225-8777 3377°�5 W. 4th Ave., Suite 205 mreeder@oregonlanduse.r%e 9,1 of 122'ene, Oregon 97401 oregonlanduse.com 3 Meeker Family Testimony NIA 23-5/CA 23-3/509-PA23-05532 October 6, 2023 neighborhoods have unique circumstances that warrant special zoning regulations, a better course of action would be to create new zoning districts instead of wholesale amending the C- 2 zone in the entire RR/SC planning area. This is hodgepodge planning that affects the City's buildable lands inventories for Commercial and will impact the development pattern of other C-2 properties in the other neighborhoods throughout the City without those neighborhoods' consent. The code amendment proposal is not consistent with the state-wide planning goals, in particular, Goal 2 (Land Use Planning) and Goal 9 (Economic Development), and should therefore be rejected. Goal 2: Land Use Planning - There is no factual basis for reducing the maximum building height of the C-2 zone or imposing a blanket prohibition of RV/Boat & Watercraft/Motor Vehcile sales in the C-2 zone in this area. The impacts to the City's buildable lands inventory have not been addressed. Goal 9: Economic Development - The proposed code amendments prohibit opportunities for a "variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens." Narrowing the range of permitted uses in the C-2 zone does the opposite of what Goal 9 is intended to promote. Clemens Marina is a long established, family-owned business with deep ties to the community. My clients object to the proposed amendments to the C-2 zone to remove `Boat and Watercraft Sales/Service"as a permitted use and to change the development standards in the C-2 zone. I request the public record be held open until at least until 5 p.m. on November 7, 2023 to allow additional time to submit written public testimony on the RRSC Plan and related code amendments. cc: Clients Respectfully submitted, �n Micheal M. Reeder Attorney for the Meeker Family and Clemens Marina Office phone: (541) 225-8777 3375 W. 4th Ave., Suite 205 mreeder@oregonlanduse.KWe 9 of 1EYene, Oregon 97401 oregonlanduse.com From: steve norris To: Eugene RR -SC Plan Subject: Comment re: proposed RR/SC Neighborhood Plan Date: Friday, October 6, 2023 3:14:48 PM Attachments: Comment-proposedRRSCNeighborhoodPlan.pdf Comment-proposedRRSCNeighborhoodPlan.pdf [You don't often get email from steve_norris@hotmail.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LeamAboutSenderldentification ] [EXTERNAL ] Thank you. Page 96 of 122 Planning Commissioners, re: proposed River Road/Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan 10/6/2023 Thank you for this opportunity to submit comment on the proposed RR/SC Neighborhood Plan. First and foremost; I want to express my sincere appreciation and gratitude to so many of my dedicated neighbors, who volunteered considerable amounts of their time and energy collaborating with each other and multiple agencies, over many years, to produce the Plan. I worked with the group for a while in the early days but not so much the last few years. I never lost my interest though, which is centered on "Land Use" and respectful, collaborative "Community." River Road and Santa Clara offer plentiful opportunity for residential developers (e.g. large lots, developer - friendly building code) as well as challenges (e.g. underdeveloped infrastructure, overlapping jurisdictions). Unfortunately, those same opportunities and challenges, combined with current code, can result in negative impacts to current residents. As you deliberate the proposed Neighborhood Plan and action items — and add your own ideas - I submit the following example of a current residential infill -project for your consideration. ETni' Cir -� ALL moi-' F:F'{ i ,t s`% r k: ikX The residential infill project example is "Howard Meadows" (outlined in red, above) — a 3 acre subdivision (12 lots) currently under construction at the intersection of Howard Ave. and Lake Dr. - in River Road. Before development, the site was a flat, grass field with a gradual slope from South to North. I encourage you all to pay a site -visit to gain further perspective. The shaded lots are `City' (annexed) and all the others are `County' (unannexed) properties. All streets in the immediate area are `County.' `Howard Meadows' constructed an extension of Lake Dr. down the middle of their site, which connects with Rosewood Ave. at the NE corner of the site. I've zoomed out for this photo in order to include 48 residential lots surrounding the development — because, it appears, 48 units is what's being approved to be constructed at `Howard Meadows' (twelve 2 -story 4-plexes). Providing on-site parking for all 48 units is, apparently, not required and there are "No Parking" signs along half the new section of Lake on site. As you can see, there are no streets immediately adjacent to Page 97 of 122 6 `Howard Meadows' to absorb/accommodate any overflow parking — which leaves Howard Ave. (with its new `Safe Routes to School' project starting soon) as the nearest parking option — unless parking arrangements can be made with Howard Elementary or ...? Commissioners are aware of the parking situations created when the `ECCO Apartments' complex was constructed at River Road and Hatton Ave. — with overflow parking from the units now clogging Evergreen and other surrounding local County streets. Related Neighborhood Plan references and recommendations: Goal 11: Support development that is well designed and economically, socially, and environmentally sustainable. Action Plan 11.1.1, "Revise the Neighborhood/Developer meeting process that requires developers to meet with the River Road or Santa Clara neighborhoods at least one month prior to submitting a land use application ...": I also suggest adding a City Planner to the required guest list — to see the site, to bridge the developer/neighbor information gap, to bridge the City/County information gap and to definitively answer code and related questions. Action Plan 11.2.1, Minimize land use conflict by adding code requirements that adjoining low density and higher -density residential land are designed to be more compatible, as well as between residential and non-residential uses. Develop and adopt development standards that provide form and site transitions such as sloped setbacks, balcony offsets, and buffering between properties zoned low-density residential and denser development in adjacent multi -unit housing and commercial zones. Prohibit upper story balconies on housing walls that abut R-1 rear yards unless the buildings are at least 50 feet from the property line.": I strongly suggest this action apply to any/all community residential infill projects. Goal 14: Promote land use and development that protects and enhances neighborhood character. Action Plan 14.1.1, Develop transitions between R-1 properties: I suggest difficult puzzles are the most satisfying to solve and certainly worth the effort. Action Plan 14.1.2, Increase minimum required parking standards when higher density development abuts R-1 zoning and the adjacent streets (i.e., lanes) aren't developed to Eugene's local street standard or higher to avoid spillover parking problems. Do periodic review as automobile usage changes. I suggest this issue regarding residential infill and parking and prior -existing neighborhood conditions deserves some serious discussion and expedited action. Above are `before' (left) and `current' (right) photos of the NE corner of `Howard Meadows' — where the new City section of Lake now abuts the old County section of Rosewood Ave. This section of Rosewood Ave. is 12' wide and classified as a Local Access Road (LAR). Neighbors who front Rosewood have always maintained the Page 98 of 122 road and ROW to high standards. There is a natural stormwater swale running along both sides of Rosewood (notice the culverts lower -right) which neighbors are also responsible for maintaining and protecting. The yellow house is City (annexed) property. The `Howard Meadows' developer submitted and the City approved a site design that called for filling and raising the northern end of the 3 acre site by at least three feet — raising serious neighbor concerns. Neighbors had to be fully engaged with the City and the subdivision process to ensure bollards were installed and Rosewood was protected from construction vehicles and dangerous increased two-way traffic. Neighbors' stormwater concerns, based on the elevation change on the North end, were duly noted. Related Plan references and recommendations: `Stormwater' and `Transportation' are addressed in the proposed Neighborhood Plan but there are so many nuances to the mix of jurisdictions in RR/SC that it would have been very difficult to cover all the possibilities and ... Both the `Howard Meadows' and `ECCO Apartments" examples raise an important question; what rights/voice do County residential property owners, who front and have maintained LAR's for decades in RR/SC, have when it comes to new developments that directly impact them? Community Above are two more current photos from `Howard Meadows' ... to illustrate the lack of on-site parking and how long-established neighbors who border the site will be impacted. The `Howard Meadows' subdivision is an example of how current code can be applied to negate many of the aspirational goals, the heart of Community, in the Neighborhood Plan: `respect' `compatibility' `neighborhood character' `quality of life' ... each a subjective discussion, with an eye to collaborative problem -solving, worth having. Thank you again for the opportunity to recognize the work and dedication of my awesome RR/SC neighbors and for letting me add my 2 -cents worth of context to your discussion. I trust you will give every aspect of the proposed Neighborhood Plan the serious consideration it deserves and I look forward to hearing your recommendations. Sincerely, Steve Norris, River Road Page 99 of 122 From: To: Cc: Subject: Date: Attachments: Bill Kloos Ewene RR -SC Plan KLOOS Bill (SMTP); Teresa Bishow (teresa(&bishowconsulting.com); Kevin Journeylibhomes4(obmsn.com); Mike Reeder (mreeder(aloreaonlanduse.com) Testimony for Planning Commission Friday, October 6, 2023 1:32:31 PM Kloos Lttr PC 10.6.2023.odf [EXTERNAL Please provide the attached letter to the Planning Commission. Thanks. Bill Kloos Law Office of Bill Kloos PC 375 W. 4th Ave., Suite 204 Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: 541-954-1260 Email: Bill Kloos&LandUseOregon.com Web: www.LandUse0regon.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this email communication may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or if you have reason to believe that this message has been addressed to you in error, you are hereby notified that your receipt of this email was not intended by the sender and any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information except its direct delivery to the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify me immediately by telephone at the numbers listed above or by email and then delete the e-mail from your computer and do not print, copy or disclose it to anyone else. Thank you. Page 100 of 122 9 LAW OFFICE OF BILL KLOOS PC OREGON LAND USE LAW 375 W. 4- AVENUE, SUITE 204 EUGENE, OR 97401 TEL: 541.954.1260 WEB: WWW.LANDUSEOREGON.COM October 6, 2023 Eugene Planning Commission Lane County Planning Commission c/o Elena Domingo Eugene Planning Division 99 West 10th Avenue Eugene, OR 97401 Sent Via Email: RRSCPlangeu eng e-or.gov BILL KLOOS BILLKLOOS @LANDUSEOREGON.COM RE: RRSC Plan and Code Amendments Eugene Files MA 23-5 and CA 23-3 & County File 509-PA23-05532 Dear Commissioners: This letter is filed on behalf of Kevin Journey and Action Rent -All & Events. The latter is among all the C-2 uses that are being cut in half with the current, proposed code amendments. This letter raises questions about the refinement plan changes. The current refinement plan, although a bit tatty around the edges due to age, has all of the essential elements that the Metro Plan says a refinement plan should have. First, it makes the Metro Plan more specific by adding detail that helps determine what the plan designation is for specific parcels. Second, it has specific, robust, mandatory policies to be applied in making site- specific land use decisions. In short, the current plan has good planning legs. The plan proposed for adoption has neither. First, there is no land use plan; it is missing in action. Likely it was not overlooked or accidently left on the cutting room floor. Why, for gosh sakes, is the City proposing to drop the land use plan from a refinement plan? What is the thinking? Second, the proposed plan has no binding policies in the land use element that would apply in the context of a land use application. None. Just "should" and "encourage" and "pursue" and "update" and "monitor" and so on. There are no ultimate policy choices to apply in making land use decisions. This is a refinement plan in name only. If this document does not contain either a land use plan diagram or mandatory policies for land use decisions, is it really a refinement plan? What is it refining? Not the Metro Plan Diagram because it does not refine that diagram. Not the Metro Plan plan text because it adopts no binding land use policies. Maybe it should be labeled as something more generic — like "RR -SC Visioning Statement." The emphasis in the Staff Report is on describing the new language being adopted, which all soft stuff. The Commission needs to focus equally on the existing plan being consigned to the plan Page 101 of 122 10 Eugene Planning Commission October 6, 2023 Page 2 document dumpster. The dumping of the old needs to be justified just like the adopting of the new. With the dumping of the old, all property owners are being stripped of the plan designations shown in and the policies stated in the existing RRSC plan. The City needs to justify, under the city and state standards for amending plans, all of the information in the existing plan that is being abandoned, Here is a short, partial list of clear, directive mapping and policy that is being dumped: • The current plan is used to determine what the plan designation is for specific properties when that cannot be determined by the Metro Plan Diagram alone. See, e.g. Shin Zone Amendment Z 06-3, an application denied by the HO but approved by the Commission. • The current plan is used to determine whether a zone change is consistent with plan policies. See Shin decision above. • The current plan makes policy statements about what areas should be the subject of city - initiate plan amendments. • The land use element of the plan states five residential policies that apply to land use decisions. RRSC Plan at 2-14. • The commercial/industrial element of the plan states six policies that apply in determining where these uses should go (and not go) and how they should be regulated to be good neighbors. RRSC Plan at 2-18 • The plan states mandatory policies for growth in the many identified subareas. RRSC Plan at 2-24. If the old plan is being thrown out as the new plan is adopted, where will the Director and the HO and Commission turn for the clear guidance that is now provided in the current plan? Is it efficient or good planning to cut decision makers adrift as this amendment will do? Maybe the City could have both. Leave the existing RRSC Plan, with its maps and grit and specificity, in place and put the new plan on top of it. The new plan is general and largely content free in terms of mandatory language such that it might fit on top of the existing plan with minimal conflict. The Commission should consider recommending to staff that a map be added to the new plan that makes the new plan parcel -specific. The text of the Metro Plan says: (1) The Metro Plan is not parcel specific, yet. (2) The parcels on the boundary line of two plan designations are of indeterminate plan designation. (3) The RLID parcel database is the official database for the current Metro Plan Diagram. (4) The City is committed to getting to a 100% parcel -specific plan diagram. Given all of the above, the City could add to the plan a diagram that shows the plan designation in the RLID database for each parcel. That would refine the Metro Diagram in the way that the Metro Plan text anticipates and would have great utility in decision making. There Page 102 of 122 11 Eugene Planning Commission October 6, 2023 Page 3 would no arguing about what the plan designation is for a parcel. Just look at the map. That would save a lot of time, expense, and litigation at LUBA. LUBA on a regular basis has to make the final call what the plan designation is for a unit of land in Eugene or where the plan boundary is. It has repeatedly asked, in the body of its opinions, why it has to do that — why can't Eugene adopt a plan diagram that is parcel specific, like all the other cities manage to do? This Commission asks the same question from time to time. It is time to ask it again, but not accept the "we are working on it" answer. Here is an example of how the city is not working on it, but rather moving in the opposite direction. That is, the City is abandoning a refinement plan map that, although not fully parcel specific has proven useful in answering the recurring question in Eugene --"Hey, what is my property plan designated?" From the standpoint of a practitioner, leaving the current refinement plan in place is far preferrable to pitching it in favor of the current proposal. Sincerely, 1611/ /troos Bill Kloos Cc: clients Page 103 of 122 12 From: Hillary Kittleson To: Eugene RR -SC Plan Cc: Bev at Home; Jolene Siemsen; Charles Kittleson Subject: Joint Hearing on River Road Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Date: Thursday, October 5, 2023 4:44:40 PM You don't often get email from hillarykittleson@msn.com. Learn why this is important [EXTERNAL ] Members of the Eugene and Lane County Planning Commissions: I have lived in the River Road neighborhood for over 30 years and served as a member of SCRRPT, which worked hard to listen to our neighbors and then lobby for the initiation of the neighbor plan. With an allocation of $100,000 from City Contingency funds, the formal planning process began. At that time, the project time line called for completion in about two years. That was in 2017! The triple squeeze of Covid and dramatic middle housing code changes at the State and local level has caused years of delay and a reduced plan scope. So, I am asking that the City mitigate the effects of the reduced scope by using one- time funds to address concerns expressed by the Citizen Advisory Committee and the board of the River Road Community Organization. For me, this is a socio-economic equity issue that good land use planning can address. In high SES neighborhoods, residents can have some assurance that "highest and best use" will include basic amenities that contribute to a livable neighborhood. In mixed SES areas, that assurance can only be given by the government, through its policies and codes. The concerns expressed by the RRCO board regarding potential loss of commercial properties is a good example: ...staff decision to eliminate the proposed Corridor Mixed Use zone leave the majority of our current Commercial properties in the C-2 Community Commercial Zone. This zone allows 100% of the properties in the zone to be residential with no commercial at all. The eliminated Corridor Mixed Use zone would have required commercial use on the ground floor. The economic study included in Sera Architect's River Road Corridor Study showed that economic demand for housing is high and commercial use is low. Without regulation requiring it or some kind of incentive to encourage it, the commercial facilities we currently have may well be replaced by multi family housing... Page 104 of 122 13 My neighbors asked for walkable commercial areas back in listening sessions we held in 2014 and continued to strongly support that concept in subsequent citizen input events. To respond to that strong value, I am asking that you recommend to the City Council use of one-time funds to create a neighborhood -specific zone to protect the neighborhood and provide the equity that it deserves. If City-wide changes are subsequently made that protect all neighborhoods, the zone could be eliminated. One-time funds could also be used to address the River Road Corridor issue cited by the CAC and RRCO board and the parking issue cited by the RRCO board. In a time of constrained resources for ongoing services, the City has an opportunity to strengthen the neighborhood plan by using one-time resources. This approach will have far-reaching positive results, a great investment of City funds and will keep faith with the two neighborhoods who have worked so long and hard to develop this plan. Sincerely, Hillary Kittleson 995 Elkay Drive Eugene, OR 97404 This testimony endorsed by: Bev Barr, SCCRPT Member, Working Group Member 1275 Betty Lane Eugene, OR 97404 Jolene Simpson, Working Group Member 190 Hawthorne Ave. Eugene, OR 97404 Charles Kittleson 995 Elkay Drive Page 105 of 122 14 Eugene, OR 97404 Page 106 of 122 15 From: Bill Kloos To: Euaene RR -SC Plan Cc: KLOOS Bill (SMTP); Teresa Bishow(teresa(cbbishowconsulting.com); Kevin Journeylibhomes4(@msn.com) Subject: RRSC Testimony to PC on behalf of Kevin Journey Date: Tuesday, October 3, 2023 10:24:31 AM Attachments: Kloos Lttr to PC 10.3.2023.odf You don't often get email from billkloos@landuseoregon.com. Learn why this is important [EXTERNAL ] Elena — Please add this letter to the record. Thank you. Bill Kloos Law Office of Bill Kloos PC 375 W. 4th Ave., Suite 204 Eugene, OR 97401 Phone: 541-954-1260 Email: Bill Kloosi.7LandUseOregon.com Web: www.LandUse0regon.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this email communication may contain confidential information that is legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, or if you have reason to believe that this message has been addressed to you in error, you are hereby notified that your receipt of this email was not intended by the sender and any disclosure, copying, distribution or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information except its direct delivery to the intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify me immediately by telephone at the numbers listed above or by email and then delete the e-mail from your computer and do not print, copy or disclose it to anyone else. Thank you. Page 107 of 122 16 LAW OFFICE OF BILL KLOOS PC OREGON LAND USE LAW 375 W. 4- AVENUE, SUITE 204 EUGENE, OR 97401 TEL: 541.954.1260 WEB: WWW.LANDUSEOREGON.COM October 3, 2023 BILL KLOOS BILLKLOOS @LANDUSEOREGON.COM Eugene Planning Commission Lane County Planning Commission c/o Elena Domingo Via Email only: RRSCPlan@eugene-or.gov Eugene Planning Division 99 West 10th Ave. Eugene, OR 97401 Re: RRSC Plan and Code Amendments (Eugene File AC 23-3) Dear Commissioners: I represent Action Rent -All & Events and Kevin Journey. They have very substantial investments in C-2 property at 121, 141 and 151 River Avenue. You will have more detailed testimony from Bishow Consulting explaining why the proposed code amendments to C-2 accompanying the new RRSC neighborhood plan will be devastating to the business and the owner. Cutting the C-2 density in half is not good policy for the RRSC area or for the City at large, which will lose capacity of economic growth, jobs and housing. Please extend the open record period in conjunction with your October 17 hearing, which will allow more C-2 owners to weigh in on the merits of this proposal. Also, please add my name to the list of persons entitled to written notice of the final decision. Sincerely, 1611/ /troos Bill Kloos Cc: Bishow Consulting Client Page 108 of 122 17 From: Teresa Bishow To: Eugene RR -SC Plan; DOMINGO Elena M Cc: Kevin Journey Cjbhomes+(bmsn.com); Action RentAllEvents(aamail.com; KLOOS Bill (SMTP); Teresa Bishow Subject: RRSC Plan Code Amendments (CA 23-3) - Action Rent -All Testimony Date: Tuesday, October 3, 2023 10:08:38 AM Attachments: Action Rent -All Testimony PC 2023 10 03.Ddf ISome people who received this message don't often get email from teresa@bishowconsulting.com. Learn w v this is important [EXTERNAL ] Hi, On behalf of Action Rent -All & Events, please accept the attached public testimony concerning draft code amendments for the RRSC Plan Area. Thanks for your consideration, Teresa Teresa Bishow, AICP Bishow Consulting LLC 375 West 4th Ave, Suite 204 P.O. Box 50721 Eugene, OR 97405 541-514-1029 www.bishowconsulting.com Page 109 of 122 18 60jBoSHCNSUOW PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT SERVICES 375 West 4"' Ave., Ste 204 P.O. Box 50721 Eugene, OR 97405 541-514-1029 teresa@bishowconsulting.com October 3, 2023 Eugene Planning Commission Lane County Planning Commission c/o Elena Domingo Eugene Planning Division 99 West 10th Avenue Eugene, OR 97401 Sent Via E-mail: RRSCPlan(a)-eugene-or.gov RE: RRSC PLAN CODE AMENDMENTS (Eugene File CA 23-3) This letter is written on behalf of my client — Action Rent -All & Events. Established in the mid -1960's, the local business is located at 121 River Avenue. About 7 years ago, the business was acquired by Lora Journey and significant financial investments were made to sustain and grow the business onto adjacent property at 141 and 151 River Avenue. Action Rent -All & Events objects to the draft code amendments to the C-2 zone to: 1) Prohibit certain uses including "Equipment, Heavy, Rental/Sales/Service — includes truck and tractor sales". 2) Decrease the maximum building height from 120 feet to 60 feet. 3) Increase the percent of street facing facades of buildings being within the maximum front yard setback from 25% to 80%. 4) Increase restrictions on blank walls from a maximum of 100 linear feet for large commercial buildings to a maximum of 20 linear feet for all new buildings. Currently, EC 9.2173 provides standards for exterior walls and windows that only apply to new commercial buildings with 25,000 square feet or more of floor area. Action Rent -All & Events is financially adversely impacted by the draft code amendments. The business currently rents heavy equipment and prohibiting the use will thrust the business into a non -conforming status. The revised C-2 standards will Page 110 of 122 19 also cause a financial hardship to due plans to expand the business onto two adjacent lots. According to EC 9.8065 Code Amendment Approval Criteria, a code amendment shall be consistent with applicable statewide planning goals, comprehensive plan, and adopted refinement plan. The draft code amendments are NOT consistent with Statewide Planning Goals. 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 basis for such decisions and actions. The Measure 56 public notice states that "The proposed changes in C-2 include limiting building height, adding design standards, and prohibiting certain new auto -oriented uses. " There is no factual basis in the record establishing what determined the list of "auto - oriented" uses being prohibited. The draft RRSC Plan states, "These [code] amendments reflect community feedback and certain high priority actions in the Action Plan." A review of the community feedback during the preparation of the draft RRSC Plan does not point to any specific concerns regarding heavy equipment rental uses or why they are considered "auto -oriented" uses. It is irrefutable that a fast-food restaurant with a drive -up window serves the motorist far more than a business renting heavy equipment, selling boats, or providing storage for household goods. There is also insufficient factual basis for the draft code amendments to substantially decrease the allowed building height or impose different design standards for C-2 zoned properties in the RRSC Plan area. How do the draft code amendments for C-2 impact the projected commercial land needed to accommodate employment growth? What is the factual basis for amending the city-wide C-2 standards to create special provisions only applicable to the RRSC Plan Area? 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. On commercially zoned land in the City of Eugene, the use "Equipment, Heavy, Rental/Sale/Service" is only permitted in C-2, subject to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). The draft code amendment to prohibit this use on C-2 zoned properties in the RRSC Plan Area will cause an immediate, adverse impact on my client and reduce the variety of economic activities permitted in the neighborhood. Action Rent -All & Events Page 2 of 5 BISHOW Planning Commission Testimony October 3, 2023 d� CONSULTING Page 111 of 122 20 The draft code amendments are NOT consistent with the comprehensive plan and the draft RRSC Plan. The Metro Plan contains the applicable policy below in italics followed by information demonstrating the draft code amendments are not consistent. A.22 Expand opportunities for a mix of uses in newly developing areas and existing neighborhoods through local zoning and development regulations. The draft code amendments will narrow the range of uses permitted on C-2 zoned property in the RRSC Plan Area and impose new development regulations. The proposed changes will decrease the mix of uses in the area and create unnecessary financial burdens on new commercial development. The draft RRSC Plan contains the goals and policies below in italics followed by information demonstrating the draft code amendments are not consistent. Goal 1: Improve the neighborhood economy and empower local residents by encouraging the growth and creation of local businesses. Policy 1.1 Incentives for Local Businesses: Help neighborhood businesses use existing local, regional, and state loan programs to support growth and creation of neighborhood businesses. Action Rent -All & Events is a locally owned business serving the River Road/Santa Clara area for about 60 years. The business includes a catering service (e.g. tents and other non -consumable party supplies), rental of light equipment (e.g. hand held power tools) and rental of heavy equipment (e.g. rideable lawn mowers). Of the total business revenue, about 30% of the catering service revenue and 90% of the equipment rental is from customers living in the River Road/Santa Clara area. The draft code amendment will prohibit the rental of heavy equipment and create new standards both of which will cause the site to be in a non -conforming status. Banks and other loan programs generally provide loans only to uses permitted and conforming with local regulations. Policy 1.2 Neighborhood Assets: Support business development that utilizes neighborhood assets. Action Rent -All & Events is conveniently located near River Road and Beltline, key transportation corridors and neighborhood assets. Located on River Avenue along the south side of Beltline, the business is suitable for the location and is not adversely impacted by the traffic noise. The people living in River Road/Santa Clara provide a strong customer base for the business. Due to the location and type of business, the Action Rent -All & Events Page 3 of 5X019 BISHOW Planning Commission Testimony October 3, 2023 IM CONSULTING Page 112 of 122 21 draft code amendments will substantially increase the cost of any new buildings as the company looks to expand. Policy 1.4 Regulatory Environment: Strive for a local regulatory environment that is supportive of economic development in line with neighborhood vision (such as creating small commercial nodes). The business revenue from "heavy equipment" as defined in the Eugene code, is less than 18% of the total revenue. As allowed in EC 9.2170(8)(b), the large rental equipment is located outdoors. The business believed the heavy equipment rental was a permitted use in C-2 as it was accessory to the main use of the site for light equipment rental and catering services. The draft code amendment appears to shift the use from "Accessory Use" or permitted subject to a CUP, to a use prohibited in C-2 in the RRSC Plan Area. The draft code amendment is not supportive of economic development. Goal 11: Support development that is well designed and economically, socially, and environmentally sustainable. Policy 11.2. Well Designed Built Environment: Update design standards through legislative updates to local land use regulations so that they provide for gradual transitions between different uses and scales and incorporate pedestrian scale design through building design, size, scale, and site layout requirements. According to Ellen MacArthur Foundation, a circular economy is "a systemic approach to economic development designed to benefit businesses, society, and the environment. In contrast to the take -make -waste linear model, a circular economy is regenerative by design and aims to gradually decouple growth from the consumption of finite resources." It is based on designing out waste and pollution while keeping products and materials in use. The rental industry increases the longevity of equipment and materials thus having a positive impact on the circular economy. Rental companies often have other environmental efficiencies such as improved transportation and logistics. Increasingly community members are looking for ways to buy less consumable products and decrease impacts to the environment. Action Rent -All & Events provides a sustainable business model to help protect the environment by providing: 1) Shared use, 2) Repairability, 3) Resource use, 4) Reusability, and 5) Recyclability. In closing, the north side of River Avenue, east of River Road and south of Beltline, consists of a mix of land uses and combination of C-2 and 1-2 zoning. We hope the Planning Commission will carefully consider our request not to amend the C-2 zoning to impose special standards for RRSC Plan Area or remove the north side of River Avenue from the geographic area subject to the new provisions. Action Rent -All & Events Page 4 of 5X019 BISHOW Planning Commission Testimony October 3, 2023 IM CONSULTING Page 113 of 122 22 Sincerely, 7'e4-aSa/ 3 W-L40'w Teresa Bishow, AICP cc: Client Bill Kloos Action Rent -All & Events Page 5 of 5 Vffj BISHOW Planning Commission Testimony October 3, 2023 d9 CONSULTING Page 114 of 122 23 From: Ruby Matthews To: Eugene RR -SC Plan Subject: Please approve the RRSC Plan ! Date: Monday, October 2, 2023 11:18:01 AM [You don't often get email from rubyisawitch@icloud.com. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderldentification ] [EXTERNAL ] I am so impressed with the way information was gathered and every effort was made to include all members of the RRSC community in the process and formulation of this plan. Untold number of community volunteer hours has added up to an excellent, environmentally responsible and solutions oriented vision for a more livable, connected, and vibrant community. I am grateful to live in a place where so many caring people are willing to give of their time and talents to create a better home for us all. I hope you will approve this blueprint for meeting the challenges ahead; equity and resilience are built into the plan. Sincerely, Ruby Matthews 3050 Memory Lane Santa Clara Page 115 of 122 24 9-28-23 River Road- Santa Clara Neighborhood Proposed Code Amendments Attention: Eugene Planning Commissioners c/o Elena Domingo Planning Commission Members: I am writing today to object to the proposed code amendments that city staff are attempting to impose on us in the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood. My family has leased property at 425 River Avenue for over 13 years and this is a unique area composed of many independent small businesses. If the new amendments are imposed on us, many of the long time businesses will be forced to move out of this area or will not be able to rebuild if our current buildings are altered or destroyed. The answer to this dilemma is simple, direct staff to place an overlay zone or exemption zone on the already developed and established small triangle of land that runs from River Road east to the end of River Avenue, then turns West and follows Beltline Road back to River Road, and then exempt it from these proposed amendments. This small piece of land has been thoughtfully built and developed consistent with current and historical standards. Please do not destroy our existing neighborhood, we are happy, prosperous, and serving the needs of our city. Please either exempt this "River Avenue/Beltline Triangle" area from the proposed amendments or vote to reject these new amendments completely. Taking away long established usesage and developmental rights is just not right or warranted. Thank you for your consideration. Bron Fain 425 River Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97404 Page 116 of 122 25 9-28-2023 Eugene Planning Commission City of Eugene Planning Division 99 West 10th Avenue Eugene, OR 97401 Re: River Rd. / Santa Clara Proposed Code Amendments Eugene Planning Commission: The proposed code amendments to C-2 zoned property will destroy the integrity of the River Road Neighborhood. By eliminating and prohibiting all the sales, rental, and service use's currently allowed in the C-2 zone in the future, you would deprive the residents access to many needed and desired services required to enjoy a peaceful quality of life that residents have enjoyed for decades. I bought my first boat at Clemens Marina many years ago! I have operated Air Tool Maintenance located at 420 River Road for over 28 years and am fortunate to be able to walk to work from. my home which is also on River Road. If the proposed code amendments are implemented it will devastate established business coridors like the "River Avenue/Beltline Triangle" which is surrounded by River Road, River Avenue, and Beltline Hwy. This area consists of virtually every type of business that is set forth on page 2 of the Public Notice of the proposed code amendment plan that will be prohibited if this amendment is adopted. This action strikes me as "Condemnation without Compensation". It will take away businesses ability to operate, as well as land owners ability to lease, sell, develop, or rebuild a viable business on their land. This is still America, please do not rubber stamp this proposed code amendment! Vote no, and allow the current C-2 standards to remain in place. Thank you for your attention and consideration. r David Chubb Page 117 of 122 26 �O \Azo INQ pv IN CF y.r. MI/ , Oge 118 of 122 27 N , r\ n �,. 9-25-2023 Eugene Planning Commission c/o Elena Domingo City of Eugene Planning Division 99 West 10th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 Re: River Road -Santa Clara Specific Code Amendments Planning Commission Members: This letter is written in opposition to the River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Specific Code Amendments as is currently proposed. My comments apply to a relatively small triangular corridor within the greater River Road -Santa Clara area. For your ease of review I will refer to this area as the "River Avenue/Beltline Triangle" which is defined as, land originating at River Road and follows River Avenue East to the end of River Avenue, then turns West and follows Beltline Hwy back to River Road. Historic Overview: My name is Gordon Howard and my wife and I own the property at 65 Ross Lane which is bordered by Beltline Hwy on one side and River Avenue on the other side. Beltline Hwy and River Avenue form a one of a kind island of developed long standing businesses. River Avenue business owners helped craft the River Avenue road improvement project years ago to provide an environmentally beneficial road, bike path, and swale project that serves the community and business owners. The businesses on River Avenue are made up of small business owners who have been good partners to the City of Eugene and we should find a way to continue that relationship, one that allows us all to prosper and not selectively wipe out our longstanding way of life. The proposed code amendments read like a "hit list" for the existing businesses. Virtually every business that currently exists in the "River Avenue/Beltline Triangle" will be prohibited if the amendments are implemented as proposed, which will have a devastating impact on many current small business owners and land owners. Practical Alternative: I hope that the Planning Commission is interested in coming up Page 119 of 122 28 with a win-win alternative. Therefore, I propose that the City create an "exception zone" known as "River Avenue/Beltline Triangle" which runs from River Road East down to the end of River Avenue and then turns West up Beltline Hwy back to River Road. This exception zone which is already developed would allow that small unique triangle to remain under the current zone and still implement the other proposed changes to the other sectors in the River Road/Santa Clara Neighborhood which are most desired by the membership of those respective organizations. This would allow the existing businesses to thrive without the devastating effects to their business. The "River Avenue/Beltline Triangle" conforms with current planning standards by providing a transition from a major arterial highway (Beltline) to a buffer zone made up of existing commercial and light industrial businesses (River Avenue/Beltline Triangle) and then transitions again to residential neighborhoods. This is a sound historical planning practice which serves the community well. Recommendation: Direct staff to create the aforementioned exception zone for the "River Avenue/Beltline Triangle" area and then come back to the Planning Commission and City Council for approval. I believe the "River Road/Beltline Triangle" business and land owners would support the proposal if this change is implemented. Top 10 Reasons NOT to approve the proposed code ammendments as currently written. 1. It will create non -conforming use's for many if not all businesses currently existing in the "River Road/Beltline Triangle" Under the proposed language, if a current "legal" non -conforming use stops, it will NOT be allowed to start again. 2. Existing sales lots (Auto's, Boats, etc.) adjacent to Beltline Hwy provide a buffer and transition area to the residential areas. These businesses provide a needed service to the entire population of the City of Eugene and are properly located. 3. Great financial loss in valuation of commercial and light industrial land values will occur if the current land cannot be utilized for the existing use's and may possibly end up sitting vacant. 4. Small businesses will be wiped out or put out of business. A designation of "legal" non -conforming use is a temporary bandaid which will go away at some time in the future. 5. Existing businesses, employee's, and owners will lose their jobs with no replacement employment in site. 2 Page 120 of 122 29 6. The City of Eugene Sewer Treatment Plant is located on the South side of River Avenue and creates traffic and intermittent odor problems which is not conducive to other businesses locating in the area if current use's are not allowed to continue. 7. The City of Eugene may find itself in litigation based on a "takings" claim if property owners have their current property rights curtailed or valuations decimated by the needless implementation of plan amendments, when a simple reasonable solution is available. 8. The business community on River Avenue has been a good partner to the City of Eugene and we should find a way to continue and enhance that relationship, which will allow us all to prosper and not selectively wipe out longstanding businesses. 9. This is an opportunity to demonstrate that City Leadership can be responsive to the needs of services to the general population, Neighborhood Community Groups, and to the business community. This solution is a win-win, where eveybody gets something and nobody gets hurt. 10. Please direct your planning staff to craft an "exception area" in the "River Road/Beltline Triangle" which will provide the relief that the Community Organizations desire and the security that the business owners desire. If you chose not to implement this alternative solution, then I would request that you vote to oppose this proposal of specific code amendments in it's entirety. Respectfully submitted, Gordon & Connie Howard PO Box 775, Pleasant Hill Oregon 97455 Page 121 of 122 30 From: bkbCabepud.net To: Euaene RR -SC Plan Subject: River Road -Santa Clara Neighborhood Plan Date: Saturday, September 16, 2023 8:33:15 PM IYou don't often get email from bkb@epud.net. Learn why this is im op rtant [EXTERNAL Hello to the Planning Commissions: Please adopt the RR -SC Neighborhood Plan as quickly as you can! Tremendous time and years of effort have been spent on this project. I believe that it is now as good as it can get. By adopting this Plan, you will affirm the efforts of hundreds of citizens and staff members who have collectively devoted hundreds if not thousands of hours in order to make our neighborhoods better and safer. Now it is time to get going on the implementation. It cannot be soon enough. Please, let there be no further delays. Thank you for listening, Beverly Barr 1275 Betty Ln Eugene, OR 97404 bkb(@epud.net 541-461-0688 land 541-543-9513 mobile Page 122 of 122 31