HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report4-01-6h,
• • Hearings Official
Phone: 541-682-5377
www.eugene-or.gov/hearingsofficial
AGENDA
Meeting Location:
Harris Hall - Lane County Public Service Building
12 5 East 8t" Avenue
The Eugene Hearings Official welcomes your interest in these agenda items. Feel free to come
and go as you please at any of the meetings. This meeting location is wheelchair-accessible.
For the hearing impaired, FM assistive-listening devices are available or an interpreter can be
provided with 48 hours' notice. To arrange for these services, contact the Planning Division at
(541) 682-5481.
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2015
(5:30 p.m.)
1. Vance, Eric & Cork, Dona Q 15-9)
Assessors Map: 18-03-06-11 Tax Lot: 3200 and 3300
Location: 74 East 18 1h Avenue and 1 850 Oak Street
Request: Rezone properties to C-2 Community Commecial zone.
Applicant: Eric Vance & Dona Cork
Representative: Erik Vance
Lead City Staff: Erik Berg Johansen, Assistant Planner
Telephone: (541) 682-5437
E-mail:erik.berg@)ci.eugene.or.us
II. Chamotee Trails PUD (PDT 15-1 /ARA 15-13)
Assessors Map: 18-03-20-23 Tax Lot: 1 101
Location: West Amazon Drive, east of Fox Hollow Road
Request: PUD with 10 single-family residential lots and 1 common open space lot.
Applicant: Tom Walter, Walter Development, LLC
Representative: Renee Clough, Branch Engineering, Inc.
Lead City Staff: Erik Berg Johansen, Assistant Planner
Telephone: (541) 682-5437
E-mail: erik.berggci.eugene.or.us
Public Hearing Format:
1. Staff introduction/presentation.
2. Public testimony from applicant and others in support of application.
3. Comments or questions from neutral parties.
4. Testimony from opponents.
5. Staff response to testimony.
6. Questions from Hearings Official.
7. Rebuttal testimony from applicant.
8. Closing of public hearing.
The Hearings Official will not make a decision at this hearing. The Eugene Code requires that
a written decision must be made within 15 days of close of the public comment period. To be
notified of the Hearings Official's decision, fill out a request form at the public hearing or
contact the lead City staff as noted above. The decision will also be posted at www.eugene-
or.us/hearingsofficial.
AM
WPIanning
Atrium Building, 99 West 10" Avenue
Eugene, Oregon 97401
Phone: 541-682-5377
Fax: 541-682-5572
www.eugene-or.gov/planning
ZONE CHANGE STAFF REPORT
Applicant/File Name (Number):
Vance, Eric & Cork, Dona (Z 15-9)
Applicant's Representative:
Eric Vance, Cowboys Savannah, LLC
Applicant's Request:
Rezone subject properties from General Office (GO) to Community Commercial (C-2)
Subject Property:
Tax Lots 3200 and 3300 of Assessor's Map 18-03-06-11; Located at 74 E. 18th Avenue and 1850 Oak
Street.
Relevant Dates:
Application submitted on August 24, 2015; supplemental materials submitted on September 23, 2015;
application deemed complete on September 28, 2015; public hearing scheduled for November 4,
2015.
Lead City Staff:
Erik Berg-Johansen, Assistant Planner, Eugene Planning Division, Phone: (541) 682-5437
Background and Present Request
The subject site is located within the Friendly Area neighborhood south of East 18th Avenue and west of
Oak Street. Tax Lot 3200 (0.7 acre) is split-zoned with Community Commercial (C-2) zoning on the western
side of the property, and General Office (GO) zoning on the eastern side of the property. Tax Lot 3300
(0.1 acre) is zoned GO. The site is currently developed with the "South Eugene Professional Plaza," which
supports a variety of uses such as medical offices and therapy centers.
The immediate vicinity to the north, east, and west is dominated by commercial and office uses (e.g.
Safeway and The Meridian commercial center). Limited High-Density Residential (R-3) zoning exists south
of the site, and currently supports a mix of townhomes, apartments, and single-family residences.
The present request is for zone change approval from the current GO zone (that encompasses the
majority of the subject site) to the C-2 zone. If approved, both subject tax lots would be zoned C-2. As
discussed in the following evaluation, the Metro Plan designates the subject property as "Commercial";
Vance, Eric & Cork, Dona (Z 15-9) October 2015 1
HO Agenda - Page 1
the proposed C-2 zone would correctly implement this plan designation. The applicant also states the
proposed rezoning will improve the development potential of the subject site.
The Eugene Code (EC) requires City staff to prepare a written report concerning the subject land use
application. In accordance with the Type III land use application procedures at EC 9.7320, the staff report
is made available seven days prior to the public hearing, to allow citizens an opportunity to review the
staff analysis of the application. The staff report provides only preliminary information and
recommendations. The Hearings Official will consider additional public testimony and other materials
presented at the public hearing before making a decision on the application. Pursuant to EC 9.7330, the
Hearings Official's written decision on the application is made within 15 days from the close of the public
record, following the public hearing. The quasi-judicial hearing procedures applicable to this request are
described at EC 9.7065 through EC 9.7095.
Referrals/Public Notice
On September 18, 2015, staff provided information concerning the application to other appropriate City
departments, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), public agencies, and the affected
neighborhood group (West Eugene Community Organization). Referral comments were received from the
City's Public Works Department. The neighborhood did not respond.
Staff mailed notice of the proposed zone change to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and
Development (DLCD) on September 30, 2015. On October 1, 2015, staff also mailed public notice of the
proposed zone change and the hearing date to owners and occupants within 500 feet of the subject
property. Up to this point, no additional testimony has been received.
Zone Change Evaluation
EC 9.7330 and EC 9.8865 require the Hearings Official to review an application for a zone change and
consider pertinent evidence and testimony as to whether the proposed change is consistent with the
criteria required for approval, shown below in bold typeface. Staff's findings in response to each of the
criteria are provided below, to assist the Hearings Official in making a decision on the zone change
request.
EC 9.8865(1): The proposed zone change is consistent with applicable provisions of the Metro Plan.
The written text of the Metro Plan shall take precedence over the Metro Plan diagram where
apparent conflicts or inconsistencies exist.
The Metro Plan designates the subject property as Commercial, and the proposed C-2 zoning is consistent
with this designation. Staff finds no policies from the Metro Plan to be mandatory approval criteria;
regardless, it appears that the Metro Plan's policy direction would support the proposed zone change.
Based on these findings, the criterion is met.
EC 9.8865(2): The proposed change is consistent with applicable adopted refinement plans. In the
event of inconsistencies between these plans and the Metro Plan, the Metro Plan controls.
The South Willamette Subarea Study is the applicable adopted refinement plan for the area of the
proposed zone change. In general, the plan acknowledges and supports the Metro Plan designations for
Vance, Eric & Cork, Dona (Z 15-9) October 2015 2
HO Agenda - Page 2
the area. The plan also provides eight specific recommendations related to certain subareas within the
plan area. Staff confirms that the subject site is not within any of these subareas.
The only area near the subject site that is included in the recommendations is the residentially-zoned
portion of Oak Street between 18th and 19th Avenues, which is located just south of the subject site. The
recommendation states that residential uses should be continued in this section of the block.
Based on these findings, the criterion is met.
EC 9.8865(3): The uses and density that will be allowed by the proposed zoning in the location of
the proposed change can be served through the orderly extension of key urban facilities and
services.
Key urban facilities and services are defined in the Metro Plan as: wastewater service, stormwater service,
transportation, water service, fire and emergency medical services, police protection, City- wide parks
and recreation programs, electric service, land use controls, communication facilities, and public schools
on a district-wide basis (see Metro Plan page V-3).
Referral comments from the Public Works Department, included in the application file, confirm that the
uses and density allowed by the C-2 zone on the subject properties can be serviced through the orderly
extension of key urban facilities and services. Based on these findings, the criterion is met.
EC 9.8865(4): The proposed zone change is consistent with the applicable siting requirements set
out for the specific zone in:
(b) EC 9.2150 Commercial Zone Siting Requirements.
In addition to the approval criteria in EC 9.8865 Zone Change Approval Criteria, the following C-1
Neighborhood Commercial siting requirements apply:
(1) New C-1 zones shall be located within convenient walking or bicycling distance of an adequate
support population. For new C-1 areas between 4% and 5 acres, an adequate support population
is 4,000 people (existing or planned) within an area conveniently accessible to the site.
(2) New C-1 areas larger than 1.5 acres shall be located on a collector or arterial street.
(3) Existing neighborhood commercial areas shall not be allowed to expand to greater than 1.5
acres unless the development area site abuts a collector or arterial street.
The above siting requirements are not applicable to the subject property as the applicant does not
propose a zone change to Neighborhood Commercial (C-1), and the subject site is not within an existing
neighborhood commercial area.
Based on these findings, the proposed zone change is consistent with the applicable siting requirements.
Vance, Eric & Cork, Dona (Z 15-9) October 2015 3
HO Agenda - Page 3
EC 9.8865(5): In cases where the NR zone is applied based on EC 9.2510(3), the property owner
shall enter into a contractual arrangement with the City to ensure the area is maintained as a
natural resource area for a minimum of 50 years.
This criterion does not apply as the proposed zone change does not include the NR zone.
Transportation Planning Rule Evaluation
Staff finds that Goal 12 Transportation of the Statewide Planning Goals, adopted by the Land
Conservation and Development Commission (DLCD), must be specifically addressed as part of the
requested zone change and in the context of Oregon Administrative Rules, as follows.
As adopted, OAR 660-012-0060(1) states:
(1) If an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land
use regulation (including a zoning map) would significantly affect an existing or planned
transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures as
provided in section (2) of this rule, unless the amendment is allowed under section
(3),(9), or (10) of this rule.
The City's acknowledged Transportation System Plan (TSP) is the TransPlan, which was adopted in 2001
and provides the basis for the Transportation Element of the Metro Plan. Both plans (TransPlan and
Metro Plan) serve both the cities of Eugene and Springfield.
The City of Eugene relies on the 2001 TransPlan when evaluating zone changes for consistency with the
TPR. In most cases, the City finds zone changes to be consistent with TPR if the proposed zoning is
consistent with the planned designation that was in effect at the time TSP was adopted (i.e. on or before
adoption in 2001), pursuant to OAR 660-012-0060(9). In other words, where a zone change clearly
implements a plan designation that was in effect at the time the TSP was adopted, there is a strong case
for exemption under OAR 660-012-0060(9), which states:
(9) Notwithstanding section (1) of this rule, a local government may find that an
amendment to a zoning map does not significantly affect an existing or planned
transportation facility if all of the following requirements are met.
(a) The proposed zoning is consistent with the existing comprehensive plan map
designation and the amendment does not change the plan map:
(b) The local government has an acknowledged TSP and the proposed zoning is
consistent with the TSP; and
(c) The area subject to the amendment was not exempted from this rule at the time
of an urban growth boundary amendment as permitted in OAR 660- 024-
220(1)(d), or the area was exempted from this rule but the local government has
a subsequently acknowledged TSP amendment that accounted for urbanization
of the area.
Vance, Eric & Cork, Dona (Z 15-9) October 2015 4
HO Agenda - Page 4
The proposed commercial zoning is consistent with the commercial designation established in the current
Metro Plan and the current TSP. The area was not exempted from any acknowledged TSP that accounted
for future urbanization of the area, and the current TSP would have assumed and accounted for
commercial uses during its adoption. For these reasons, the proposed C-2 zoning is consistent with the
current TSP.
Therefore, City of Eugene Public Works recommends approval of the zone change from GO to C-2 based
upon the applicants written statement and TPR findings herein.
Staff Recommendation
Based on the available evidence, and consistent with the preceding findings, staff recommends the
Hearings Official approve the requested zone change to C-2 Community Commercial.
Consistent with EC 9.7330, unless the applicant agrees to a longer time period, within 15 days following
close of the public record, the Eugene Hearings Official shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny
this application. The decision shall be based upon and be accompanied by findings that explain the criteria
and standards considered relevant to the decision, stating the facts relied upon in rendering a decision
and explaining the justification for the decision based upon the criteria, standards, and facts set forth.
Notice of the written decision will be mailed in accordance with EC 9.7335. Within 12 days of the date the
decision is mailed, it may be appealed to the Eugene Planning Commission as set forth in EC 9.7650
through EC 9.7685.
Attachments
A vicinity map is included as Attachment A. A current zoning map is included as Attachment B. The entire
application file is available for review at the Eugene Planning Division offices. The Hearings Official will
receive a full set of application materials for review prior to the public hearing. These materials will also
be made available for review at the public hearing.
For More Information
Please contact Erik Berg-Johansen, Assistant Planner, City of Eugene Planning Division, at: (541) 682-5437;
or by e-mail, at: erik.berg@ci.eugene.or.us
Vance, Eric & Cork, Dona (Z 15-9) October 2015 5
HO Agenda - Page 5
Attachment A - Vicinity Map
Legend
O Subject Properties caution:
Ft This map is based on imprecise
O C 150 ~oo source data, subject to change,
- Streets J and for general reference only. .
Taxlots 10-26-2015 HO Agenda - Page 6
Attachment B - Current Zoning Map
w
AI
L
I ~
I
r
j'i
m
_1- _
E 18TH AVE
J
Q
,
a
Y
-
Tax Lot 3200
C=2
GO
l
Tax Lot 3300
-
~ E.1►8,T.H.AL~Y
~
Q
V
im
-Wk
E 19TH AVE
Legend
O Subject Properties
Ft
Caution:
This map is based on imprecise
-VIEW;
- Streets
O
JCO i 1oo ~oo
source data, subject to change,
and for general reference only.
.
Taxlots
10-26-2015 HO Agenda - Page 7
AM
WPlanning
Atrium Building, 99 West 10" Avenue
Eugene, Oregon 97401
Phone: 541-682-5377
Fax: 541-682-5572
www.eugene-or.gov/planning
TENTATIVE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT
Application File Name (Number):
Chamotee Trails PUD (PDT 15-1; ARA 15-13)
Applicant's Request:
Tentative Planned Unit Development and Adjustment Review approvals for the creation of 10
buildable single-family lots and 1 common open space lot.
Applicant
Tom Walter, Walter Development, LLC
Subject Property/Location:
Tax Lot 1101 of Assessor's Map 18-03-20-23; Located south of Foxboro Lane and east of the
intersection of Fox Hollow Road and West Amazon Drive.
Relevant Dates:
PUD application submitted on February 18, 2015; Adjustment Review application and
supplemental materials for PUD submitted on August 10, 2015; application forced complete with
an extra 30-day review period at applicant's request on August 12, 2015; public hearing scheduled
for November 4, 2015.
Applicant's Representative / Surveyor:
Renee Clough, Branch Engineering, Inc. (541) 746-0637
Applicant's Civil Engineer:
Lane Branch, Branch Engineering, Inc. (541) 746-0637
Lead City Staff:
Erik Berg-Johansen, Assistant Planner, Eugene Planning Division, Phone: (541) 682-5437
Description of Planned Unit Development Request
The applicant requests Tentative Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Adjustment Review approvals for
11 lots (10 buildable residential lots and 1 open space parcel). The applicant proposes to develop single-
family homes consistent with the R-1 Low-Density residential zone. The proposed density will be a total of
10 units on 5.19 gross acres, which equals a calculated density of 1.9 units per acre.
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13)
October 2015
HO Agenda - Page 8
Site Context
The subject property is located in the south hills of Eugene, and is zoned R-1 Low-Density Residential (see
Attachment A). A "WR" Water Resources overlay zone was originally applied to the subject property, but
it was removed by an Overlay Zone Correction application process (OC2 12-1) that was initiated by the
current property owner in 2012. Through this process it was confirmed that no regulated Goal 5 water
resources exist on the subject site.
The area generally consists of single-family residences zoned either R-1 or AG (Agriculture). All adjacent
properties are zoned either R-1 or R-1/WR. Directly north and abutting the subject property is West
Amazon Drive, a partially improved right-of-way that provides access to the subject property. On the
other side of West Amazon Drive are eight single-family homes built along Foxboro Lane (a cul-de-sac).
Abutting and to the east is Vivian Drive, an unimproved right-of-way that ends at the southeast corner of
the property. Directly west and at the corner of Fox Hollow Road and West Amazon Drive is a privately
owned, undeveloped residential property.
To the south and southwest of the property is land owned by the City of Eugene. This land is partially
adjacent to Fox Hollow Drive, runs parallel to the right-of-way and then wraps around the southern
boundary of the subject property. That strip of land was originally intended to provide public access to a
portion of the City's recreational trail system. According to a deed restriction for the property (see
Attachment B), the property "shall be used for park purposes" and is labeled as a "riding trail" on the Lane
County Tax Assessor's maps.
As noted above, the site has access from West Amazon Drive. This street has only one connection to the
City's transportation network, which exists at Fox Hollow Drive. While the West Amazon Drive right-of-
way continues to the northeast (where it meets Martin Street and runs parallel to East Amazon Drive), no
street has been constructed that would provide a through connection for motor vehicle access. The City
of Eugene recently purchased the land abutting that unimproved right-of-way segment for park purposes,
and plans to maintain the land as a natural area and part of the ridgeline trail system. Hence, this street
connection will likely never be made.
Public Notice/Referrals
Public notice was mailed and posted on October 1, 2015, consistent with the requirements of EC 9.7315
Public Hearing Notice. The Planning Division received public testimony from neighbor Ross Williamson,
who believes there were three deficiencies with the original application: 1) the application does not
demonstrate it is for needed housing as defined by state law; 2) no 5' interval topographic map was
submitted; and 3) a tree protection plan to "insure maximum preservation of existing vegetation" was not
submitted. He also states that no documentation exists in the application in regards to certain Public
Works issues that were brought up at the applicant's neighborhood meeting. These issues were related to
paving width, sewer, and sidewalks.
Mr. Williamson also sent written testimony regarding the Adjustment Review application. He believes
that while the applicant requested an adjustment to street paving standards, they are actually trying to
adjust connectivity standards that might require a connection to Vivian Drive. Mr. Williamson also notes
that connectivity standards are not subject to an adjustment.
Neighbor Richard Zeller also submitted written testimony regarding the proposed PUD. Mr. Zeller's letter
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015
HO Agenda - Page 9
discusses fire safety and egress issues, the proposed "detention facility" for stormwater, the Vivian Drive
right-of-way, and the proposed pump system for sewage. He also states that the applicant assured him
that future homes on the lots adjacent to Vivian Drive will be constructed toward the uphill side of each
lot, but that he would like further assurance that this will be implemented. Finally, he states that he does
not oppose the proposal in general, but believes there should be various conditions of approval to address
the issues specified in his letter.
No other testimony has been received as of the publication of this staff report. Any testimony received
following the completion of this staff report, and prior to the public hearing, will be presented to the
Hearings Official at the hearing.
The Planning Division also provided information concerning the application to other appropriate City and
County departments, public agencies, service providers, and the affected neighborhood group. All referral
comments received by the Planning Division on this application are included in the application file for
reference, and addressed in the context of applicable tentative PUD approval criteria and standards in the
following evaluation.
Staff Evaluation
The general application requirements are established at Eugene Code (EC) 9.7000 through EC 9.7030. The
Type III procedures apply to the concurrent applications for tentative PUD and Adjustment Review, which
are provided at EC 9.7300 through EC 9.7340. Application requirements specific to the tentative PUD are
listed at EC 9.8310. The relevant approval criteria for the applicant's proposal under Needed Housing
criteria are addressed at EC 9.8325.
Consistent with EC 9.7005 Pre-application Conference, the applicant met with staff in April of 2014 (PC 14-
20). The applicant held a neighborhood meeting on January 27, 2015, in compliance with EC 9.7007
Neighborhood/Applicant Meetings. With regard to EC 9.8310 Tentative Planned Unit Development
Needed Housing Application Requirements, the applicant indicates that the proposed PUD includes all
property under contiguous ownership.
As required by the Type III land use application procedures beginning at EC 9.7300, the Hearings Official
must review any PUD application and consider pertinent evidence and testimony as to whether the
proposed use is consistent with the criteria required for approval (shown below in bold typeface). Based
on the evidence available as of the date of this staff report, the following findings and a recommendation
for denial of the tentative PUD are presented below.
EC 9.8325(1): The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed housing is needed housing as
defined by State statutes.
Oregon Revised Statutes define needed housing as follows:
197.303 "Needed housing" defined. (1) As used in ORS 197.307, until the beginning of the
first periodic review of a local government's acknowledged comprehensive plan, "needed
housing" means housing types determined to meet the need shown for housing within an
urban growth boundary at particular price ranges and rent levels. On and after the
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015
HO Agenda - Page 10
beginning of the first periodic review of a local government's acknowledged comprehensive
plan, "needed housing" also means:
(a) Housing that includes, but is not limited to, attached and detached single-family housing
and multiple family housing for both owner and renter occupancy;
(b) Government assisted housing,
(c) Mobile home or manufactured dwelling parks as provided in ORS 197.475 to 197.490;
and,
(d) Manufactured homes on individual lots planned and zoned for single-family residential
use that are in addition to lots within designated manufactured dwelling subdivisions.
With regard to ORS 197.303(1), the City's housing needs projection is embodied in the Eugene-
Springfield Metropolitan Area Residential Lands and Housing Study 1999 Draft Supply and Demand
Technical Analysis (ESRLS) and 1999 Draft Site Inventory Document. The City's housing needs
projection identifies a need for:
✓ Single-family detached housing, including manufactured dwellings on lots;
✓ Single family attached housing,
✓ Multi family housing, and
✓ Manufactured dwelling parks.
In order to establish that the type of housing proposed for development is "needed housing," an
applicant must show that the proposed housing falls within one of the housing types identified in the
City's housing needs projection or one of the types of housing identified in the statutes as "needed
housing." The applicant states that the site is included in Subarea 6 Southeast Eugene, in the Eugene-
Springfield Metropolitan Area Residential Lands and Housing Study Draft Site Inventory Document,
but is not given a specific site number since it is less than 10 acres. The applicant also states that local
documents identify a need for single-family housing which is an allowed needed housing type under
the state definition. The applicant's written statement confirms that their request is for 10 single-
family residential lots, which is identified as needed housing within the ESRLS and at ORS
197.303(1)(a), and consistent with this criterion.
No further analysis of the proposed housing type is necessary to demonstrate that the proposed
housing falls within a needed housing category and therefore it is allowable for the proposed
application to be reviewed under the needed housing criteria rather than the general criteria. If the
Hearings Official ultimately approves the application, to ensure compliance with this criterion, the
following condition of approval is recommended:
The applicant shall submit a "Use Restriction" or "Codes, Covenants, and Restrictions"
(CC&R's) to be recorded with the final plat that stipulates that the lots of the proposed
subdivision shall be developed only with needed housing and uses accessory to that housing.
The document shall be subject to prior review and approval by the City's Planning Director
during the final plat review process. The document shall stipulate that the use restriction is
enforceable by the City of Eugene and that any amendment to, or removal of, the established
use restriction is subject to prior review and approval by the City's Planning Director.
Based on these findings and the condition of approval noted above, this criterion is met.
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015 4
HO Agenda - Page 11
EC 9.8325(2): The proposed land uses and densities within the PUD are consistent with the land
use designation(s) shown on the Metro Plan Land Use Diagram, as refined in any applicable
refinement plan.
The applicant correctly notes that the subject property is designated Low Density Residential on the
Metro Plan, which establishes an allowed density "through 10 units per gross acres." The South Hills Stuc
is the applicable refinement plan, which further limits the allowable density to a maximum of 5 units per
gross acre for the subject area. The applicant's proposal for 10 single-family homes on 5.19 gross acres
would result in a density of 1.9 units per acre, which is within the allowable limits.
Based on these findings, this criterion is met.
EC 9.8325(3): The PUD provides a buffer area between the proposed development and
surrounding properties by providing at least a 30 foot wide landscape area along the perimeter
of the PUD according to EC 9.6210(7).
The applicant's plans show the required 30-foot wide buffer around the perimeter of the property.
The applicable landscape standard at EC 9.6210(7)(a)(5) Massed Landscape Standard (L-7) requires 70
percent of the 30-foot perimeter buffer to be covered by living plant material. The applicant asserts
that this standard is met by existing vegetation along the perimeter of the subject property, and has
provided evidence in the form of photo documentation.
Based on the available evidence, this criterion is met.
EC 9.8325(4): For areas not included on the city's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory, the PUD
preserves existing natural resources by compliance with all of the following:
(a) The provisions of EC 9.6880 to EC 9.6885 Tree Preservation and Removal Standards, (not
subject to modifications set forth in subsection (11) below).
(b) Natural resource areas designated on the Metro Plan diagram as "Natural Resource" are
protected.
The subject site is located on the City's adopted Goal 5 inventory, which includes Figure H-2 of the 1978
Scenic Sites Working Paper according to Ordinance No. 20351. That figure shows the area of the subject
property as a "Natural Site of Visual Prominence." As such, this criterion is not applicable.
EC 9.8325(5): There shall be no proposed grading on portions of the development site that
meet or exceed 20% slope.
The applicant's site plan (Sheet 1), prepared by professional/licensed surveyor Renee Clough, shows
areas on the subject site with slopes exceeding 20%. According to the application narrative, the
slopes were calculated using computer software based on Triangulated Irregular Network (TIN)
surface models. No development is proposed in areas with calculated slope exceeding 20%, and
based on the applicant's evidence it appears this criterion is met.
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015
HO Agenda - Page 12
If the Hearings Official ultimately approves the application, and to ensure compliance with this
criterion, the following condition of approval is recommended:
• The final PUD site plan shall note that no grading is allowed on any portions of the development
site that meet or exceed 20% slope. The applicant's final PUD plans shall clearly indicate those
areas consistent with what it shown on the tentative PUD site plans.
Based on these findings and the condition noted above, this criterion is met.
EC 9.8325(6): The PUD provides safe and adequate transportation systems through compliance
with all of the following:
(a) EC 9.6800 through EC 9.6875 Standards for Streets, Alleys, and Other Public Ways (not
subject to modifications set forth in subsection (11) below).
EC 9.6805 Dedication of Public Ways
Pursuant to EC 9.6805, as a condition of any development, the City may require dedication of public
ways for bicycle and/or pedestrian use as well as for streets and alleys, provided the City makes
findings to demonstrate consistency with constitutional requirements. The public ways for streets to
be dedicated to the public by the applicant shall conform with the adopted right-of-way map and EC
Table 9.6870. As discussed in EC 9.6870 Street Width below, which is incorporated herein by
reference, there is no requirement for additional right-of-way as a condition of this development.
EC 9.6810 Block Length
Block length standards are not applicable because no new local streets are proposed or required.
EC 9.6815 Connectivity for Streets
In order to meet Street Connectivity standards, the proposed development must, at a minimum,
provide extensions of the public way which are consistent with subsections (2)(b), (2)(c) and (2)(d). EC
9.6815(2)(b) requires street connections in the direction of any planned or existing streets within
mile of the development site and connections to any streets that abut, are adjacent to, or terminate
at the development site. EC 9.6815(2)(c) requires that the proposed development include streets that
extend to undeveloped or partially developed land adjacent to the development site in locations that
will enable adjoining properties to connect to the proposed development's street system. EC
9.6815(2)(d) requires secondary access for fire and emergency vehicles. EC 9.6815(2)(e) also requires
that applications proposing needed housing shall show that the proposed street alignment shall
minimize excavation and embankment and avoid impacts to natural resources, however, no streets
are proposed or otherwise required within the PUD.
EC 9.6815(2)(g)2.a. allows for an exception to the street connectivity standards if the applicant
demonstrates that a connection cannot be made because of physical conditions such as site
topography. In this case, referral comments from Public Works staff note that the maximum street
grade permitted in hillside developments is fifteen percent (15%), and as noted above, EC 9.8325(5)
prohibits grading on portions of the development site that meet or exceed 20% slope. As such, an
exception to the street connectivity standards is warranted with respect to EC 9.6815(2)(b), (2)(c) and
(2)(d). The remaining street connectivity standards at (2)(a) and (2)(f) are not applicable.
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015 6
HO Agenda - Page 13
EC 9.6820 Cul-de-Sacs and Turnarounds
These standards do not apply because no new public cul-de-sacs or streets are proposed or required.
EC 9.6830 Intersections of Streets and Alleys
These standards are not applicable because no new intersections are proposed or required.
EC 9.6835 Public Accessways
The applicant is requesting to adjust EC 9.6835(1), which requires accessways connecting to adjacent
undeveloped or publicly owned sites, citing that access to the adjacent publicly owned Tax Lot 4500
can be accessed directly from Fox Hollow Road. Public Works staff also note that a connection to this
adjacent publicly owned property would be in conflict with EC 9.8325(5) which prohibits grading on
portions of the development site that meet or exceed 20% slope. The standards of EC 9.6835(2) do
not apply, as there are no existing or potential accessways on adjacent sites that dictate the
dedication or construction of a public access way.
EC 9.6840 Reserve Strips
These standards do not apply because no new public streets are proposed or required and none of
these criteria specifically result in the need for a reserve strip.
EC 9.6845 Special Safety Requirements
These standards do not apply because no new public streets or alleys are proposed or required.
EC 9.6850 Street Classification Map
The proposal complies with this standard as discussed in EC9.6870 Street Width, which is incorporated
herein by reference.
EC 9.6855 Street Names
These standards to not apply because no new streets are proposed or required.
EC 9.6860 Street Right-of-Way Map
The proposal does not amend the right-of-way map. This criterion is not applicable.
EC 9.6870 Street Width
Pursuant to EC 9.6870, the right-of-way and paving widths of streets shall conform to those widths
designated on the adopted Street Right-of-Way map. When a street segment right-of-way width is not
designated on the adopted Street Right-of-Way map, the required street width shall be the minimum
width shown for its type in Table 9.6870 Right-of-Way and Paving Widths, although a greater width can be
required based on adopted plans and policies, adopted Design Standards and Guidelines for Eugene
Streets, Sidewalks, Bikeways and Accessways, or other factors which in the judgment of the planning and
public works director necessitate a greater street width.
As noted previously, the site is abutted by two public rights-of-way, West Amazon Drive and Vivian
Drive, neither of which are identified on the adopted Street Classification Map or adopted Right-of-
Way Map (Figs. 60-61 of the Arterial and Collector Street Plan (ACSP)). Vivian Drive, which has an
existing 60-foot right-of-way that ends at the southeast corner of the subject property, is unimproved.
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015
HO Agenda - Page 14
The applicant is requesting an adjustment to the standards for street improvements at EC
9.6505(3)(b), which would require that the developer pave the street adjacent to the development
site to the width specified in EC 9.6870 Street Width. That request is evaluated below, in the context
of the applicable public improvement standards at EC 9.6505.
West Amazon Drive is classified as a local street, with a 60-foot right-of-way width and a variable
paving width of approximately 18 feet. Paving width of West Amazon Drive is addressed in EC 9.6505
below.
Since the existing 60-foot rights-of-way in both streets meet the maximum right-of-way width
identified for local streets in EC Table 9.6870, there is no requirement for additional right-of-way or a
special setback in either street.
EC 9.6873 Slope Easements
This standard does not apply because no public streets are proposed or required.
EC 9.6875 Private Street Design Standards
This standard does not apply because no new private streets are proposed or required.
(b) Provision of pedestrian, bicycle and transit circulation among buildings located within
the development site, as well as to adjacent and nearby residential areas, transit stops,
neighborhood activity centers, office parks, and industrial parks, provided the city makes
findings to demonstrate consistency with constitutional requirements. "Nearby" means
uses within 1/4 mile that can reasonably be expected to be used by pedestrians, and
uses within 2 miles that can reasonably be expected to be used by bicyclists.
There are no nearby or adjacent office or industrial parks; however, a bus stop exists north of the site
near the intersection of Fox Hollow Road and Donald Street (LTD Bus #24), and a neighborhood
commercial center (Edgewood Center) exists less than 2 miles from the subject property. These
amenities are within 2 miles of the subject site, and could therefore be accessed by bicyclists. On the
other hand, no amenities listed in the above criterion are within X mile of the proposed PUD;
therefore it would not be expected that these amenities are used by pedestrians.
(c) The street layout of the proposed PUD shall disperse motor vehicle traffic onto more
than one public local street when the PUD exceeds 19 lots or when the sum of proposed
PUD lots and the existing lots utilizing a local street as the single means of ingress and
egress exceeds 19.
In the applicant's original narrative, the only statement they provide under this standards is as
follows:
"Under EC 9.0500, street includes both improved and unimproved right-of-way. The dedicated
West Amazon right-of-way connects from Fox Hollow to Martin Street."
While staff agrees with the applicant that the unimproved section of West Amazon Drive is right-of-
way and meets the definition of a "street" under EC 9.0500, staff expressed concern as part of
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015 8
HO Agenda - Page 15
completeness review that this standard could not be met since the street segment is unimproved and
would not allow for motor vehicle use. See Attachment C for a graphical representation of West
Amazon Drive and other streets in the vicinity. In response to the initial concerns raised by staff, the
applicant stated the following:
"Needed housing applications are to be reviewed under clear and objective standards. As
discussed in the Written Statement, EC 9.0500 clearly and objectively includes unimproved
public rights-of-way within the definition of street. Therefore the entire length of West
Amazon Drive from Fox Hollow Road to Martin Street must be included in the analysis of the
"19 Lot Rule" (EC 9.8325(6)(c)).
At this location, the sum of proposed lots and the existing lots utilizing West Amazon Drive as the
single means of ingress and egress exceeds 19 (see Attachment D), and the applicant does not appear
to dispute or otherwise challenge that finding of fact. The proposal does not include any new streets
within the PUD, and the unimproved segment of West Amazon Drive to the north precludes its use for
dispersal of motor vehicle traffic onto more than one public local street. Yet, the applicant does not
address the plain meaning of this requirement in consideration of the full text of the standard, except
to assert that the unimproved segment "must be included in the analysis of the 19-Lot Rule" based on
the definition of a street. Their application materials do not address the fact that motor vehicles
cannot actually use this unimproved right-of-way as a means of secondary access, and the reality that
there is only one way in or out, where West Amazon Drive connects to Fox Hollow Road. In other
words, to satisfy this criterion, the proposal cannot simply rely on a line on a map. As a result, staff
concludes that the standard is not met.
Serving as additional evidence of non-compliance is the Planning Commission's Final Order for
Deerbrook PUD (PDT 12-1), which provides some relevant case history under the Needed Housing
criteria that the Hearings Official should consider. The Deerbrook PUD site (Tax Lots 101, 300 and 302
of Assessor's Map 18-03-20-21) is located to the northeast of the subject property along West
Amazon Drive and south of Martin Street. Staff notes that the Deerbrook PUD approval has expired,
and the City has recently purchased the site for park purposes and protection as a natural area, but
the Planning Commission's findings on appeal stated the following regarding the "19-Lot Rule":
This standard is really about dead-end streets, where there is only one way in or out. With the
applicant's improvement of West Amazon Drive, the site can be accessed from the north via Martin
Street or from the south via Fox Hollow Road. The issue here would have been if West Amazon
Drive did not connect to Fox Hollow Road. The Applicant's improvements will complete the missing
connecting link in the street system (Page 32, PC Final Order adopted 12-17-2012).
This finding was not further challenged on appeal to LUBA by any party, and thus became part of the
City's final local approval. Unlike the Deerbrook PUD, the subject proposal does not disperse vehicle
traffic onto more than one local public street to provide more than "one way in or out."
Further, and although it is not directly relevant with respect to the applicable standard here, referral
comments from Fire Marshal staff (see Attachment E) note that Eugene Fire Code Appendix D, Section
D107.1 states that where the number of one and two-family dwellings exceed 30, there shall be
provided two separate and approved fire apparatus access roads. The referral from Eugene-
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015
HO Agenda - Page 16
Springfield Fire states that they do not support the proposed development at this time until a fire
apparatus access road meeting the requirements of EFC Appendix D, Section D104.3 and D107.1 is
provided.
Based on the above findings above, this criterion is not met. As an aside, staff notes that the "19-Lot
Rule" is not included in the PUD General Criteria. That is, the applicant could have reverted to
applying the General Criteria when staff raised concerns in regard to this standard, yet they chose to
proceed under the Needed Housing criteria anyway.
EC 9.8325(7): The PUD complies with all of the following (an approved adjustment to a standard
pursuant to the provisions beginning at EC 9.8015 of this land use code constitutes compliance
with the standard):
(a) EC 9.2000 through 9.3915 regarding lot dimensions and density requirements for the
subject zone. Within the /WR Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone or /WQ
Water Quality Overlay Zone, no new lot may be created if more than 33% of the lot, as
created, would be occupied by either:
1. The combined area of the /WR conservation setback and any portion of the Goal 5
Water Resource Site that extends landward beyond the conservation setback; or
2. The /WQ Management Area.
Lot Dimensions: All proposed lots comply with the minimum lot area requirement of 4,500 feet in the
R-1 zone. Lots #3 and #6 exceed the maximum allowable lot size of 13,500 square feet; however,
these lots are impacted by criterion EC 9.8325(5), which restricts grading or any development on
slopes greater than 20%. With implementation of this slope restriction, Lots #3 and #6 have a
developable area of less than 13,500 square feet. Based on these findings, the proposed parcels meet
lot dimension standards.
Flag Lots: While it is not clear on the submitted site plans, the applicant states that Lots #5 and #6 are
proposed as flag lots. These lots appear to meet the 6,000 square feet lot area minimum for
residential flag lots, as well as the minimum lot width of 50 feet. Consistent with flag lot standards,
Lots #5 and #6 have a combined frontage (pole width) of 25 feet.
The proposal complies with all lot dimension and density requirements for the subject zone.
The second part of this criterion does not apply as the site is not within the /WR Water Resources
Conservation Overlay Zone or /WQ Water Quality Overlay Zone.
(b) EC 9.6500 through 9.6505 Public Improvement Standards.
EC 9.6500 Easements
This section authorizes the City to require dedication of easements for public utilities and access
under certain circumstances. The applicant proposes a 7' wide Public Utility Easement (PUE) adjacent
to West Amazon Drive. The application does not propose any other public easement dedications nor
are there any public improvements that would result in the need for additional public easements on
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015 10
HO Agenda - Page 17
the subject property. Based on these findings, the development complies with these standards.
EC 9.6505 Improvements - Specifications
This section requires that all public improvements be designed and constructed in accordance with
adopted plans, policies, procedures and standards specified in EC Chapter 7. All developments are
required to make and be served by the infrastructure improvements described below.
(1) Water
Water service for the proposed development must be provided in accordance with Eugene Water and
Electric Board (EWEB) policies and procedures.
(2) Sewage
This standard requires all developments to be served by wastewater sewage systems of the City, in
compliance with the provisions of EC Chapter 6. The applicant proposes to extend the public wastewater
system to the development site from existing public manhole #49670. The manhole is located in Foxboro
Lane (a private street), which contains a PUE.
Referral comments from Public Work staff note that the proposed extension of the public system is
conceptually acceptable, with the details of the system design to be evaluated during a subsequent
Privately Engineered Public Improvement (PEPI) process. Details of the private service lines would be
evaluated at the time of building permit.
(3) Streets and (4) Sidewalks
EC 9.6505(3), (a) & (b) requires all streets in and adjacent to the development site to be paved to the
width specified in EC 9.6870, and improved according to adopted standards and specifications
pursuant to EC Chapter 7, unless such streets have already been paved to that width. As noted above
with respect to EC 9.6870, West Amazon Drive, adjacent to the proposed development, is not fully
improved to City standards including paving, curbs and gutters, storm drainage, sidewalks, street
lights, and street trees.
The applicant's site plan, and Stormwater Management Plan and Drainage Study, reference additional
paving and a setback sidewalk proposed in West Amazon Drive. Public Works staff notes that the
construction of curb, sidewalk and storm system would be evaluated and constructed under the
Privately Engineered Public Improvement (PEPI) process. Construction of additional paving to meet
the 20-foot-width minimum under the Temporary Surface Permit process, in addition to an
Irrevocable Petition for future improvements to West Amazon Drive, is also an acceptable option.
At the time of the subsequent subdivision review, the applicant would be responsible for completing
improvements in West Amazon Drive along the frontage of the subject property, by either: 1)
completing half-street improvements through the PEPI process; or 2) by indicating that additional
paving which will result in a minimum 20-foot surface will be constructed through a Temporary
Surfacing Permit, in which case an Irrevocable Petition for future improvements will be required.
The applicant has also requested an adjustment to EC 9.6505(3)(b), for the paving requirement of Vivian
Drive, citing that Lots 7-10 will not take access to Vivian Drive, and therefore Vivian Drive will not be
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015 11
HO Agenda - Page 18
impacted by the development. In the event the Hearings Official approves the request, and to ensure
compliance with the Adjustment Review approval criteria at EC 9.8030(19)(b), the following condition is
warranted:
• The Final PUD plans shall note that access connections from Vivian Drive are not permitted.
With this condition of approval, and future permitting requirements as noted above, the applicable
standards would be met.
5) Bicycle Paths and Accessways
No bicycle paths or public access ways are required per the previous findings at EC 9.6835, which are
incorporated by reference.
(c) EC 9.6706 Development in Flood Plains through EC 9.6709 Special Flood Hazard Areas -
Standards.
This standard does not apply as the site is not located within a Special Flood Hazard Area per Flood
Insurance Rate Map 41039C-1627-F.
(d) EC 9.6710(6) Geological and Geotechnical Analysis.
The applicant has stated this standard does not apply due to the exemption listed in EC 9.6710(3)(f). As
confirmed above, the property is included on the City's acknowledged Goal 5 inventory and therefore
qualifies for the exception. While not required with the PUD application, Public Works staff notes that a
geotechnical analysis will be required as part of the Privately Engineered Public Improvement (PEPI)
process for public wastewater improvements.
(e) EC 9.6730 Pedestrian Circulation On-Site.
These standards do not apply to single-family residential development.
(f) EC 9.6735 Public Access Required.
(1) Except as otherwise provided in this land use code, no building or structure shall be
erected or altered except on a lot fronting or abutting on a public street or having access
to a public street over a private street or easement of record approved in accordance
with provisions contained in this land use code.
The development site has frontage along West Amazon Drive and Vivian Drive right-of-way. All lots
will be restricted to access from West Amazon Drive, either directly or via a private easement. The
proposed PUD complies with this criterion.
(2) Access from a public street to a development site shall be located in accordance with
EC 7.420 Access Connections - Location. If a development will increase the development
site's peak hour trip generation by less than 50% and will generate less than 20
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015 12
HO Agenda - Page 19
additional peak hour trips, the development site's existing access connections are
exempt from this standard.
The proposed development site is subject to this standard. The shared access proposed for lots 4-10
meets the standards at EC 7.420 Access Connections - Location. Access for Lots 1-3 will be further
evaluated during the building permit process.
(3) The standard at (2) may be adjusted if consistent with the criteria of EC 9.030(28).
Based on the foregoing findings, the development complies with these standards and no adjustment
is necessary.
(g) EC 9.6750 Special Setback Standards.
As discussed previously at EC 9.6805 and EC 9.6870, which is incorporated herein by reference,
adjacent streets comply with applicable right-of-way width requirements. No special setbacks are
required for future right-of-way or public utility easements.
(h) EC 9.6775 Underground Utilities.
All utilities will be required to be underground, consistent with this standard.
(i) EC 9.6780 Vision Clearance Area.
No encroachments within a regulatory Vision Clearance Area are shown. Should Vivian Drive be
improved in the future, Lot 7 would be subject to these standards, and analysis of potential Vision
Clearance Area encroachments would be evaluated at the time of building permit.
(j) EC 9.6791 through 9.6797 regarding stormwater flood control, pollution reduction, flow
control for headwaters area, oil control, source control, easements, and operation and
maintenance.
The applicant has provided a Stormwater Management Plan and Drainage Study prepared by Branch
Engineering detailing how runoff from the development will be managed. Stormwater runoff from
roofs, driveways, and other impervious surfaces of the development site will be collected in a shared
private storm drainage system that will be located within private easements or shared common areas.
The runoff from the private development will be detained and released to mimic existing flows and
drainage patterns. A stormwater quality facility is proposed to treat the shared driveway.
Staff notes that a maintenance agreement for the shared system will be required at the time of the
subsequent subdivision review. Additionally, if the private storm system is not addressed in CC&R's,
they will need to be covered by private easements.
EC 9.6791 Stormwater Flood Control - Existing drainage patterns will be maintained by discharging
stormwater runoff created by the PUD through a shared, private spreader system to the unimproved
Vivian Drive right-of-way.
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015 13
HO Agenda - Page 20
EC 9.6792 Stormwater Quality -The applicant's proposal to treat the runoff from the proposed
shared driveway with a water quality treatment swale is conceptually acceptable, subject to more
detailed review for compliance with applicable standards during the building permit process.
Treatment for individual lots will be evaluated at the time of building permit review for each lot.
EC 9.6793 Stormwater Flow Control (Headwaters) applies to the site given its proximity to a
Headwaters stream located on the east side of Vivian Drive. The applicant proposes a detention
facility and spreader system, as detailed in the Stormwater Management Plan and Drainage Study, to
restrict post-development flows to pre-development rates.
EC 9.6794 Stormwater Oil Control does not apply because the development will not trigger any of the
applicability standards of EC 9.6794(2).
EC 9.6795 Stormwater Source Control does not apply because the proposed development does not
include any of the pollution sources specified in EC 9.6793(2).
EC 9.6796 Dedication of Stormwater Easements, does not apply because the proposed storm drainage
system will be privately operated and maintained.
EC 9.6797 Stormwater Operations and Maintenance applies to all facilities designed and constructed
in accordance with the stormwater development standards. This section also specifies when, and
under what conditions, the public will accept functional maintenance. Consistent with these
standards, the applicant proposes private operation and maintenance of the on-site stormwater
management facilities. To ensure compliance with EC 9.6797(3)(c), as proposed, the following
condition of approval is recommended in the event the Hearings Official approves the proposal:
• Final PUD plans shall include the note: "On-site stormwater management facilities will be
privately owned and operated. An operation and maintenance plan will be developed
consistent with the City's Stormwater Management Manual, and notice of this plan will be
recorded, during the building permit process."
With the findings, conditions, and future permit requirements noted above, this criterion is met.
EC 9.8325(8): The applicant has demonstrated that wastewater service, transportation service,
stormwater service, water service, and electrical service will be provided to the site prior to the
need for those facilities and services. Where the facility or service is not already serving the site,
this demonstration requires evidence of at least one of the following:
(a) Prior written commitment of public funds by the appropriate public agencies.
(b) Prior acceptance by the appropriate public agency of a written commitment by the
applicant or other party to provide private services and facilities.
(c) A written commitment by the applicant or other party to provide for offsetting all
added public costs or early commitment of public funds made necessary by
development, submitted on a form acceptable to the city manager.
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015 14
HO Agenda - Page 21
Public Works staff concurs with the applicant's statement that adequate public utilities and services,
including wastewater and stormwater service, are presently available to the site. Findings at EC
9.8325(7)(b) and (j), regarding public improvements and stormwater respectively, are incorporated
herein by reference as further evidence that these services are available to the site. Given these
findings, the proposal is in compliance with this criterion.
The provision of water and electric services and other utilities is subject to review by EWEB or other
utility providers.
Based on the above findings, this criterion is met.
EC 9.8325(9): All proposed dwellings within the PUD are within 1/4 mile radius (measured from
any point along the perimeter of the development site) of an accessible recreation area or open
space that is at least 1 acre in size and will be available to residents.
This criterion is met by the proposed common open space within the development site and by the
City-owned parkland located to the north of the dead-end of West Amazon Drive.
EC 9.8325(10): Lots proposed for development with one-family detached dwellings shall comply
with EC 9.2790 Solar Lot Standards (these standards may be modified as set forth in subsection
(11) below).
EC 9.2790(3)(b) allows an exception to EC 9.2790(2) if compliance with street standards requires a
configuration that prevents lots from being oriented for solar access. Additionally, an exception can be
granted if natural features prevent the lots from being oriented for solar access. Lots 1-3 comply with
solar lot standards as they have a north-south dimension greater than 75 feet and a front lot line
orientation within 30 degrees of east-west. The applicant asserts that Lots 4-10 are exempt from
these standards because the alignment of West Amazon Drive and Vivian Drive prevent a front line
orientation within 30 degrees of east-west. Therefore, in the event that the Hearings Official
approves the tentative PUD, an exception to EC 9.2790 is recommended for Lots 4-10.
As an informational item, staff notes this exception does not apply to solar setback requirements at
EC 9.2795, which would be subsequently addressed as part of the building permit process for future
development of the proposed lots.
Based on these findings, this criterion is met.
EC 9.8325(11): The PUD complies with all applicable development standards explicitly
addressed in the application except where the applicant has shown that a modification is
consistent with the purposes as set out in EC 9.8300 Purpose of Planned Unit Development.
The applicant's written statement references a paving width for the shared access easement of 28
feet to allow for fire access and parking on both sides. As an informational item, staff notes that on-
site fire access and the proposed parking along the private driveway would be subject to further
review for compliance with applicable standards at the time of future permitting processes.
Otherwise, there appear to be no other development standards explicitly addressed in the
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015 15
HO Agenda - Page 22
application, nor any requests for "modification" to standards under this criterion.
Based on these findings, this criterion is met.
EC 9.8325(12): For any PUD located within or partially within the boundaries of the South Hills
Study, the following additional approval criteria apply:
(a) No development shall occur on land above an elevation of 900 feet except that one
dwelling may be built on any lot in existence as of August 1, 2001.
The subject property is below 900 feet in elevation (the highest elevation is 842 feet).
(b) Development shall be setback at least 300 feet from the ridgeline unless there is a
determination by the city manager that the area is not needed as a connection to the
city's ridgeline trail system. For purposes of this section, the ridgeline trail shall be
considered as the line indicated as being the urban growth boundary within the South
Hills Study plan area.
The subject property is located more than 300 feet from the south hills ridgeline and thus complies
with this standard.
(c) Development shall cluster buildings in an arrangement that results in at least 40% of the
development site being retained in 3 or fewer contiguous common open space areas.
For purposes of this section, the term contiguous open space means open space that is
uninterrupted by buildings, structures, streets, or other improvements.
The development provides contiguous common open space which is configured consistent with the
above approval criterion. The applicant notes that the common open space constitutes 2.18 acres of
the 4.45-acre property. This results in 49% of the development site shown as common open space.
Staff notes that this figure of 4.45 acres is not consistent with the 5.19 gross acres noted elsewhere in
the application materials. Using the larger "gross acres" figure, the development site includes 42% of
the total area provided as common open space. However, regardless of which total area figure is
used in the calculation, the proposed layout complies with this standard.
(d) Residential density is limited as follows:
1. In the area west of Friendly Street, the maximum level of new development per gross
acre shall be 8 units per acre.
2. In the area east of Friendly Street, the maximum level of new development per gross
acre shall be limited to 5 units per acre.
3. Housing developed as Controlled Income and Rent Housing shall be exempt from the
density limitations in subsections 1 and 2 above, but are subject to the other
applicable development standards and review procedures.
The development proposed by the applicant (10 units on 5.19 acres) would result in a residential
density of about 1.9 units per acre, which is below the limitation of five units per acre required by the
property's location being east of Friendly Street.
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015 16
HO Agenda - Page 23
Based on the above findings, this criterion is met.
Staff Recommendation
For the reasons stated above, staff recommends denial of the proposed PUD. The application fails to
meet the criterion at EC 9.8325(6)(c) (i.e. the "19 Lot Rule.").
In the event the applicant is able to produce evidence or revise the proposal to meet all applicable
criteria, the following conditions of approval are provided to the Hearings Official, as discussed in
greater detail as part of the preceding evaluation:
1. The applicant shall submit a "Use Restriction" or "Codes, Covenants, and Restrictions"
(CC&R's) to be recorded with the final plat that stipulates that the lots of the proposed
subdivision shall be developed only with needed housing and uses accessory to that housing.
The document shall be subject to prior review and approval by the City's Planning Director
during the final plat review process. The document shall stipulate that the use restriction is
enforceable by the City of Eugene and that any amendment to, or removal of, the established
use restriction is subject to prior review and approval by the City's Planning Director.
2. The final PUD site plan shall note that no grading is allowed on any portions of the development
site that meet or exceed 20% slope. The applicant's final PUD plans shall clearly indicate those
areas consistent with what it shown on the tentative PUD site plans.
3. The Final PUD plans shall note that access connections from Vivian Drive are not permitted.
4. Final PUD plans shall include the note: "On-site stormwater management facilities will be
privately owned and operated. An operation and maintenance plan will be developed
consistent with the City's Stormwater Management Manual, and notice of this plan will be
recorded, during the building permit process."
Consistent with EC 9.7330, unless the applicant agrees to a longer time period, the Eugene Hearings
Official shall approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Type III application within 15 days following close
of the public record. The decision shall be based upon and be accompanied by findings that explain the
criteria and standards considered relevant to the decision, stating the facts relied upon in rendering a
decision and explaining the justification for the decision based upon the criteria, standards, and facts set
forth.
Notice of the written decision will be mailed in accordance with EC 9.7335. Within 12 days of the date the
decision is mailed, it may be appealed to the Eugene Planning Commission as set forth at EC 9.7650
through EC 9.7685.
Attachments:
Attachments are noted below and included for ease of reference, however all record materials are
available for review at the Planning Division. Copies can be also provided upon request, at cost. The
Hearings Official will be provided a full set of record materials for review, and the full record will be made
available at the public hearing.
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015 17
HO Agenda - Page 24
Attachment A: Vicinity Map
Attachment B: Adjacent Park Property Deed Restriction
Attachment C: Right-of-Way Map
Attachment D: Lots Accessing West Amazon Drive Map
Attachment E: Fire Department Referral
Attachment F: Site Plans, received 8/10/15 (reduced)
For More Information:
Please contact Erik Berg-Johansen, Assistant Planner, Eugene Planning Division, by phone at (541) 682-
5437, or by e-mail, at erik.berg@ci.eugene.or.us
Staff Report (PDT 15-1/ARA 15-13) October 2015 18
HO Agenda - Page 25
Attachment A
- Vicinity Map
_
0
E 39TH PI- P~-
y 3g'CN R
E 40TH AVE Q SU/V
1H
1 Im
-J o,
Q J
Q
p y
Q
Z
1 1 1 W
1 1 1 Q
W
a z
o
- Z
p _CO
---iNF~VjF rm
W C
E43
RD AVE 2
sr
~
T MpO~P~ ~
i
LGGN
~
~
A
w
J
L.9~
PvE
1 w
~
F E BARBERT W Q
I MONTARA Wqy OG
E 48TH- `
1 ~
t~ AV N 3 y
~ ~
~
~
J
CO
~O
N A /N
y
N OH
1 F'
1 S40 ~
-
O
z ~i
a
O
~ a ui 'S'O
Q
O
W 52ND AVE -
OV
~lq~r jt~
'
O}~
~S IV ~
r
FoXr ~
O
Z
J 1
J
R
F- L
L RO
g4
rig
v~ ~
O
1
L 1 1 RO Subject Property 1
Q
L-~ v
~a o
BRIGHTSTgR LN
o
c
e
CO
Eugene
Q
~
Q
J
_J
Map Extent
N
Legend
Caution:
x
L~ City Limits
O 0.25
0.5
S This map is based on imprecise
mile
source data, subject to change,
1 and for general reference only. .
- Streets
10-26-2015 HO Agenda - age 26
9270980
Send Tax Statements to:
City rf Eugene
c/o lananete Department
$60 Vast Park Sta. 300
Eugatt*- Origott 97401
Attachment B
A
s.
S i
X03- ~
~Z,~AEC. z s'.921~1a1t~G
clam. 15*92000 kw
I:A tT, a political subdivision(:of the State of Oregon, for the true
and actual consideration of $0 dollars, does hereby release=and quitclaim to
%h* CM OF Ei1MMt a municipal corporation of the 'State of Oregon, all
rights, title and interest in that real property situatid in Labe Co"ty,
State of Oregon, described sat
That cer;%aia property conveyed to Lane Gaunty in, its own Owe dc as
the Lane County atks_and:Reareation Commission in a bargain a".ails.daed
dated Nove0ber Y0, 1955, and recorded in the Lane Co+inty Deed IE:d"ords on
December 1, 1933, at Real No. 71, Reception No. 71956.
SUBJECT to the following restrictionst
The property shall be used for park purposes. Should this property.
be used for other than park purposes, the interest of the recipient shall
automatically terminate and omership shall revert to Lana County.
This inatrmnent will not allow use at the property desaribed.in •thlt
ina:trumw in violation of applicable land use lairs and'sagula.gions. 'Befoft
slgnirtg or accepting this Insttrument, the person acquirin#•#ntersat to h*
property should check with the appropriate City or County Fianniig 15epacisa;tt
to varl`iy approved uses.
n
IN NITHESS WERSOF, thg undersigned have executed this inatruttent'.this: :•,`c y?;
199 _ . .
t
OUITCLAIK n
page 1 - OUTIM IIN :DW
1803-20-004)4400 Spsnaer'1utte Bridle Trail ,
HO Agenda - Page 27
STATZ OF Comnty of Lane
, 29929 personally appeared
? DUWi, !-rie Frazier, Steve Cornscchia and Jerry Fimt
aay rust they are members of the-Board o_,C~unty
CoawiasloneCi[i f::isne C utY, ortgon 4fid -tha:.: sold:' 3nstruot t.°.ae :,s ned and.
ssr3ed in behilt of'friie County by authority of_its.8oard of Coaaiesionera.t
sad they acknavledged said instrument to be its voluntary act and deed.
1Jefore se4
o4
ablld de Oregon:
Hy Commission. Bxpirea:i 5-33-96
GHAAm teortzwt saaRa
w
otww
MY M~ W4Y2l.11Q0
t,
k y L ~1°' M,:', k
E 5 "3rti
. _
'Q a
C
-
f
HO Agenda - Page
Attachment B
r
V~
r
CD
n
C) O
C?
O
x
DD
X (n
> Cl)
O cn
z CO
Om
zz
D
z
0
(n
M
C)
O
z
N
O
-I
00
CCU
C
HO Agenda -;E 50e 29
Attachment E
Eugene Office
1320 Willamette Street
Eugene, OR 97401
(541) 682-5411
(541) 682-6882 FAX
Fire Marshal's Office
EUGENE
SPRINGFIELD
o
FIRE
Springfield Office
225 Fifth Street
Springfield, OR 97477
(541) 726-3737
(541) 741-2214 FAX
FIRE l)I.PAIi.TMI.NT C.OMMIJNTS FOR EI "I'ENE OR
SPRINCI IELD PIANNING" DEPARTMENTS
Date:
October 22, 2015
Project:
Chamottee Trails Planned Urban Development (PUD)
File Number:
PDT-15-01
Address:
West Amazon Drive and Owl Road
Existing Use:
Vacant
Proposal:
Construct 10 lot single family residential subdivision
Planner:
Erik Berg-Johansen
Fire Department Comments/Conditions
Access: OK
Water Supply: OK; fire hydrant shown at northeast corner of Foxboro Lane and West
Amazon Drive.
Note: This development may possibly create issues with fire department access and
evacuation for this area. Based on information provided by Eugene Planning
Department, the number of single family dwellings already exceeds nineteen that uses
West Amazon Drive as their access. This city street is in effect a dead end road that
does not reconnect with the southern section of the West Amazon Drive and Martin
Street intersection.
Eugene Fire Code Appendix D, Section D107.1 states that where the number of one-
and two-family dwellings exceed 30, there shall be provided two separate and approved
fire apparatus access roads. These roads shall be placed at a distance apart equal or
not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the lot
or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses (EFC Appendix D,
Section D104.3).
SPA1NGFIE
V.icuViJ
A shared service of the cities of Eugene and Springfield, Oregon
HO Agenda - Page 32
Attachment E
In addition, the Eugene Code, Section 9.8325(6)(c) is even more restrictive than the fire
code, requiring more than one public local street when the PUD exceeds 19 lots utilizing
a local street as a single means of ingress and egress.
Based on the above information, the location of this proposed PUD would only worsen
existing conditions that already exist on this dead end section of West Amazon Road.
Eugene Springfield Fire therefore does not support this proposed development at this
time until a fire apparatus access road meeting the requirements of EFC Appendix D,
Section D104.3 and D107.1 is provided.
SPk1NGFIE
A shared service of the cities of Eugene and Springfield, Oregon HO Agenda - Page 33
i
Attachment F
- Page 34
CHAMOTEE TRAILS PUD T
Tr'
TENTATIVE PLAN PUD
g
TAX MAP 18-03- 20-23, 7A7( LOT I100 W. AMAZON DR,
EUGENE, OREGON
c,