HomeMy WebLinkAboutMisc. Notice of Adoptionregon Department of Land Conservation and Development
63.:5 Capitol 5tre-tt \E ate 150
Salem Oregon 97301-_540
:ate&a--xzt, Cctiarc= Phone: 503-373-0050
Fax: 503-37S-551S
v-? iv.ore;on.`ov/-LCD
NOTICE OF ADOPTED CHANGE TO A
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR LAND USE REGULATION
Date: December 02, 2015
Jurisdiction: Eugene/Springfield
Local file no.: MA 15-1/Z 15-1
DLCD file no.: 002-15
The Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) received the attached notice of
adopted amendment to a comprehensive plan or land use regulation on 12/01/2015. A copy of the
adopted amendment is available for review at the DLCD office in Salem and the local government
office.
Notice of the proposed amendment was submitted to DLCD 40 days prior to the first evidentiary
hearing.
Anneal Procedures
Eligibility to appeal this amendment is governed by ORS 197.612, ORS 197.620, and
ORS 197.830. Under ORS 197.830(9), a notice of intent to appeal a land use decision to LUBA
must be filed no later than 21 days after the date the decision sought to be reviewed became final.
If you have questions about the date the decision became final, please contact the jurisdiction that
adopted the amendment.
A notice of intent to appeal must be served upon the local government and others who received
written notice of the final decision from the local government. The notice of intent to appeal must
be served and filed in the form and mariner prescribed by LUBA, (OAR chapter 661, division 10).
If the amendment is not appealed, it will be deemed acknowledged as set forth in
ORS 197.625(1)(a). Please call LUBA at 503-373-1265, if you have questions about appeal
procedures.
DLCD Contact
if you have questions about this notice, please contact DLCD's Plan Amendment Specialist at 503-
934-0017 or plan. amendments(iL!state.or.us
4~"
DLCD"FORM 2 NOTICE.OF ADOPTED CHANGE , FOR DLCD USE
002-15 {2 855}
TO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR File No.
- ~ «w
LAND USE£REGU,LATION Received.. 12/101
Local, governments areo,.quired to send notice of an adopted change to a comprehensive plan or land:.use regulation
no more' "than 2..0 da s after theradoption. (See
y r Che rules require that the notice include a
completed copy of.thi's form. This notice form is not for submittal of a:completed periodic review task or a'plan
amend men Ureviewed in the manner of periodic review. Use _ for arr.adopted urban growth boundary
including over 50 acres by a city with a population greater than 2,500 within the t)GB or an urban growth boundary
ainendnitnt .wer 100 acres adopted by a metropolitan service district. Use s, t for an adopted urban reserve
designatiuu uramendment to add e.r 50 acres, by a city with a.populatiori greater than 2,500 within the UGB. Use
with submittal=of an adopt, ~l p; iodic review task
y Jurisdiction: City of Eugene E/S Metro
nP ..8•
Local file no.: MA 15-1/Z 15-1
Date. of adoption: 11/23/15 Date sent: 12/1/2015
Was Notice of a Proposed Change (Form 1) submitted to DLCD?..
Yes: Date (use the date of last revision if a revised Form l.was submitted):. 6/9/15
No
is.1he adopted change'different ft cm what was de§eribed.in the Notice of Proposed Change? Yes No
.If yes, describe bow the adoption differs front the proposal:
No
Local contact (name and title):_ Heather O'Donnell
Po ,
Phone"::'541-682-5488 E-mail::.heather.m.odonnell@ci.eugene.or.us
Street address: 99 \,Vest 101h Avenue' City: Eugene. "Zip: 97401
PLEASE COMPLETE ALL OF THE FOLLOWING SECTIONS•Tff T APPLY
For a chanae'to..comprehensive plan test:
ems.. _dd
Ideritify,the sections of the plan that were aed or amended and whi ch statewide planning goals those.sectiom
L L"
implement, if any: w, .
YLI. No-text amendment included': in this application
For a change to a comprehensive-plan map:
Identity the former and new. mapdesignations and the area affected:
Change from Parks and=Open Space to Low Density. Residential 73.9 acres. A goal
exception was required for.this'.change.
-C hange'from to acres. w
' Change: from to acres.., ....A goal exception wa§ r66uired forihis
change.
_Change"from to :..,w >n a acres. A goal exception was required for this change.
Location ofaffected property 'J, R, Sec., TL and address): 3900 Willamette/ 18.03-07-43-02100-& 18-03-:18-00-
x,
00300;.
The subject property is entirely within an urban growth boundary - Yes
1 Form updated November 1, 2013
-Veil 4
The subject property is partially within an urban:growth' boundary
If the comprehensive plan map change is a UGB: amendment including less than 50 acres and/or by a city with a
population. less., than 2,500 in .the urban area. `indicate the number of acres, ofthe former rural plan designation. by
type, included in the boundarv,..
E,xclusiveFarm Use - Acres: - Non-resource - Acres:
Forest - Acres: Marginal Lands - Acres:
Rural Residential - Acres: Natural Resource/Coastal/Open Space - Acres:
Rural Commercial or Industrial Acres: Other: Acres:
If the. comprehensive plan map change is an urban reserve amendment including less than 50 acres, or
establishment or amendment.of an urban `reserve by a city with a population less '.than 2,500 in the urban, area,
indicate the number of acres-"by plan'designation, included in the boundary
Exclusive. Farm Use.-Acres: Non-resource - Acres
Forest=Acres:... liar`^inal Lands - Acres:
Rural Residential - Acres: Natural Resource/Coastal/Open Space Acres:
Rural Commercial or Industrial= Acres:.;. Other: -Acres:
For a. change to the text of an ordinance or code:.
Ident4 the'sections of the ordinance or code that wet added or amended by title and number:
For a change to a zoning map:
Identify the fonner and new base zone designations and tie area affected:
Change from Publicland, . to Low Density Residential';. Acics.:.27.63
Change- from to Acres:
Chan ge`froin. to Acres:
Change from to Po= , Acres:
Identify additions to or removal from an-overlay zone designation` and the area aftmcd
Overlay zone designation:- Acres added: Acres removed:
Location of affected, property J, R,Sec., TL and address): 3900 Willamette / 18-03707-43-02100 & 18-03-18-00-
00300..
List affected.state.or federal agencies,. local goverriments and special' districts:
Identify supplemental infornnation,that ►s.:tncludcd because it may be useful to inform DLCD or members of the
public of the effect of the actual change that has been submitted with this Notice of Adopted Change. if any. If the
submittal,, including supplementary material's, exceeds 100 pages,. include a 'summary-,of the amendment bi=icily
describing its purpose and requirements.
City Council Ordinance, findings and map exhibits::
For updated November 1, 2013
__.-occa
COUNCIL ORDINANCE NO. 20558
COUNCIL BILL 5148
AN ORDINANCE TO REDESIGNATE AND REZONE "THE REST-
HAVEN MEMORIAL PARK SITE" BY AMENDING THE EUGENE-
SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN
DIAGRAM; AND AMENDING THE EUGENE ZONING MAP.
ADOPTED: November 23, 2015
SIGNED: November 24, 2015
PASSED: 7:1
REJECTED:
OPPOSED: Taylor
ABSENT:
EFFECTIVE: December, 24, 2015
M
ORDINANCE NO. 20558
AN ORDINANCE TO REDESIGNATE AND REZONE "THE REST-HAVEN
MEMORIAL PARK SITE" BY AMENDING THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD
METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN DIAGRAM; AND AMENDING
THE EUGENE ZONING MAP.
THE CITY OF EUGENE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Metro Plan Diagram is amended to change the land use
designation from Parks & Open Space to Low Density Residential Zone, for the properties
identified as Assessor's Map 18-03-18-00, Tax Lot 00300 and Assessor's Map 18-03-07-
43, Tax Lot 02100, as depicted on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by
this reference.
Section 2. The Eugene Zoning Map is amended to change the zone from R-1
Low Density Residential Zone and PL Public Land to R-1 Low Density Residential Zone,
for the property identified as Assessor's Map 18-03-18-00, Tax Lot 00300. The Eugene
Zoning Map is also amended to change the zone from PL Public Land Zone to R-1 Low
Density Residential Zone, for the property identified as Assessor's Map 18-03-07-43, Tax
Lot 02100, as depicted on Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this
reference.
Section 3. The findings set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto are adopted as
findings in support of this Ordinance.
Passed by the City Council this
23rd day of November, 2015
Approved by the Mayor this
4?`~ day of h4i,, 2015
r
tFr
City Recorder
Mayor G
Ordinance - Page 1 of 1
Exhibit A
p Subject Site
Low Density Residential
Parks and Open Space
N
Exhib@ A
Page 2 of 2
r- Rest Haven Memorial Park (Z 15-1 & MA 15-1)
Proposed Metro Plan Designation
Metro Plan Land Use Designation Change from Parks and Open Space
to Low Density Residential
18-03-07-43102100 & 18-03-18-00100300
W38THAVE z.?
J
z
z
E 39THAVE
V W39TH AVF
w E 35TH PL
Lot ' 2100
c
z .
W 40TH Nv'1 O
ATI-lAV=
N I-P.LxNL`~WAY'
Lot ?00
a _
m
I
DAKSS
Q Subject Site
Low Density Residential
N
Exhibit B
I 01 2
0 Subject Site
" PL Public Land
R-1 Low-Density Residential
N
Exhibit B
Q Subject Site
R-1 Low-Density Residential W
N
Exhibit C
Findings for City File MA 15-1 & Z 15-1
Rest-Haven Memorial Park
Overview
The subject property is the Rest-Haven Memorial Park. The proposed Metro Plan re-designation and
zone change includes the following:
x,Rest-Haven Memorial:Park
Map & -tax lot-numbers: 1803180000300 & 1803074302100
Jab,o6t 27.63 acres-for. cernetery,°46.27 acres.fo.r new housing)
Total
Application
Current
acres
Proposed
acres
acres
Metro Plan
Parks & Open Space
73.9
Low Density Residential
73.9
Amendment
R-1 Low Density
No
73.9
.27
46
R-1 Low Density
Zone Change
Residential
change
PL Public Land
27.63
Residential
27.63
The following findings address the required criteria for the proposed metro plan amendment and
zone change.
Metro Plan Amendments (file no. MA 15-1)
The Metro Plan land use diagram is proposed for amendment for the entire 74 acre property, from
Parks and Open Space to Low Density Residential designation. Eugene Code (EC) Section 9.7730
requires that the following approval criteria (in bold italics) be applied to Metro Plan amendments:
(1) The amendment is consistent with applicable statewide planning goals adopted by the Land
Conservation and Development Commission.
Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement. To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity
for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process.
The City has acknowledged provisions for citizen involvement which insure the opportunity for
citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process and set out requirements for such
involvement. The amendments do not amend the citizen involvement program. The process for
adopting these amendments complies with Goal 1 because it is consistent with the citizen
involvement provisions.
The City of Eugene land use code implements Statewide Planning Goal 1 by requiring that notice of
the proposed amendments be given and public hearings be held prior to adoption. Consideration of
the amendments begins with a City of Eugene Planning Commission public hearing on July 14, 2015.
The applicant also held a neighborhood-applicant meeting which was noticed to the affected
neighborhood organization and property owners and residents within 300 feet of the subject
property, per EC 9.7007.
Findings - 1
Exhibit C
Subsequent to deeming the applications complete, on June 9, 2015 the City mailed notice of the
proposed plan amendments to the Department of Land Conservation and Development, as required
by the Eugene Code and in accordance with State statutes. Referrals concerning the pending
applications were sent to the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT), City of Springfield, Lane
County, the affected Neighborhood Association (which at the time was Southeast Neighbors), and to
City departments. On June 12, 2015, notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was mailed to
the applicant, owners and occupants of property within 500 feet of the subject property and the
Southeast Neighbors and notice was also posted in accordance with EC 9.7415(5). On June 24, 2015,
notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was published in the Register-Guard, in accordance
with the Eugene Code. The Planning Commission public hearing was held on July 14, 2015, with
deliberations held on {INSERT DATE} and action take on f INSERT DATE}. Following action by the
Planning Commission, the Eugene City Council will hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider
approval, modification, or denial of the plan amendments and zone changes, scheduled for f INSERT
DATE}.
The process for adopting these amendments complies with Statewide Planning Goal 1 since it
complies with the requirements of the State's citizen involvement provisions.
Goal 2 -Land Use Planning. To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis
for all decisions and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual basis for such
decisions and actions.
The Eugene land use code specifies the procedure and criteria that were used in considering these
amendments. The record shows that there is an adequate factual base for the amendments. The
Goal 2 coordination requirement is met when the City engages in an exchange, or invites such an
exchange, between the City and any affected governmental unit and when the City uses the
information obtained in the exchange to balance the needs of the citizens. To comply with the Goal 2
coordination requirement, the City engaged in an exchange about the subject of these plan
amendments with all of the affected governmental units. Specifically, the City provided notice of the
proposed action and opportunity to comment to Lane County, Springfield and the Department of
Land Conservation and Development. There are no exceptions to Statewide Planning Goal 2 required
for these amendments. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2.
Goal 3 -Agricultural Lands. To preserve agricultural lands.
The amendments are for property located within the urban growth boundary and do not affect any
land designated for agricultural use. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 3 does not apply.
Goal 4 - Forest Lands. To conserve forest lands.
The amendments are for property located within the urban growth boundary and do not affect any
land designated for forest use. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 4 does not apply.
Goal 5 -Oven Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources. To conserve open space and
protect natural and scenic resources.
Findings - 2
Exhibit C
OAR 660-023-0250(3) provides: Local governments are not required to apply Goals in consideration
of a PAPA unless the PAPA affects a Goal 5 resource. For purposes of this section, a PAPA would affect
a Goal 5 resource only if.
(a) The PAPA creates or amends a resource list or a portion of an acknowledged plan or land use
regulation adopted in order to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address specific
requirements of Goal S;
(b) The PAPA allows new uses that could be conflicting uses with a particular significant Goal 5
resource site on an acknowledged resource list; or
(c) The PAPA amends an acknowledged UGB and factual information is submitted demonstrating
that a resource site, or the impact areas of such a site, is included in the amended UGB area.
While the subject property does include a Goal 5 protected stream. these map amendments do not
create or amend the City's list of Goal 5 resources, do not amend a code provision adopted in order
to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address specific requirements of Goal 5, do not allow
new uses that could be conflicting uses with a significant Goal 5 resource site and do not amend the
acknowledged urban growth boundary. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 5 does not apply.
Goa16 - Air, Water and land Resource Quality. To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water
and land resources of the state.
Goal 6 addresses waste and process discharges from development, and is aimed at protecting air,
water and land from impacts from those discharges. The map amendments do not affect the City's
ability to provide for clean air, water or land resources. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 6 does
not apply.
Goal 7 - Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards. To protect life and property from natural
disasters and hazards.
Goal 7 requires that local government planning programs include provisions to protect people and
property from the following natural hazards: floods, landslides, earthquakes and related hazards,
tsunamis, coastal erosion and wildfires. The Goal prohibits a development in natural hazard areas
without appropriate safeguards. The subject property is not located within known areas of natural
disasters or hazards. The subject property is outside the flood zone and is not subject to hazards
normally associated with wildfires or tsunamis. Other hazards can be mitigated at the time of
development based on accepted building codes and building techniques. The map amendments do
not affect the City's restrictions on development in areas subject to natural disasters and hazards
Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 7 does not apply.
Goal 8 - Recreational Needs. To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors,
and where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including
destination resorts.
Goal 8 ensures the provision of recreational facilities to Oregon citizens and is primarily concerned
with the provision of those facilities in non-urban areas of the state. Goal 8 also allows, but does not
require, the City to create an inventory of recreational needs. To the extent that Goal 8 is applicable,
Findings - 3
Exhibit C
the City has two documents related to long-range parks planning: the Parks, Recreational and Open
Space Comprehensive Plan (PROS) and its list of implementing projects in the PROS Project and
Priority Plan. Only the Project and Priority Plan has been adopted however, it was not adopted as a
land use plan. Therefore it cannot be used as a basis for determining compliance with the applicable
criteria in this case. Acknowledging this limitation, the City has consulted these documents and
determined the following:
This 74 acre site is privately owned by the Rest-Haven Memorial Park. The property owners have
indicated that approximately 27.63 acres is needed for existing or future cemetery use and they
would like to make the remaining 46.27 acres available for residential uses. The PROS Project and
Priority Plan identifies the need for a neighborhood park in this vicinity; however the PROS Project
and Priority Plan states that the location of proposed acquisitions are approximate and subject to
change based on land availability and public involvement. The property owner has indicated no
interest in selling any portion of their site for parks at this time. Regardless, City parks are allowed in
LDR/R-1 therefore re-designation of the entire site to LDR would not preclude a future park nor affect
the City's provisions for or access to recreational areas, facilities or recreational opportunities.
To the extent Statewide Planning Goal 8 applies, the amendments are consistent.
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.
Goal 9 requires cities to evaluate the supply and demand of commercial and industrial land relative to
community economic objectives. The Administrative Rule for Statewide Planning Goal 9 (OAR 660
Division 9) requires that the City "[p]rovide for at least an adequate supply of sites of suitable sizes,
types, location, and service levels for a variety of industrial and commercial uses consistent with plan
policies[.]" Among other things, the rule requires that cities complete an "Economic Opportunities
Analysis." OAR 660-009-0015. Based on the Economic Opportunities Analysis, cities are to prepare
Industrial and Commercial Development Policies. OAR 660-009-0020. Finally OAR 660-009-0025
requires that cities designate industrial and commercial lands sufficient to meet short and long term
needs. OAR 660-009-0010(2) provides that the detailed planning requirements imposed by OAR 660
Division 9 apply "at the time of each periodic review of the plan (ORS 197.712(3))." The Eugene
Commercial Lands Study (1992) and the Industrial Metropolitan Industrial Lands Inventory Report
(1993) were adopted by the City of Eugene as a refinement of the Metro Plan, and complies with the
requirements of Goal 9 and the corresponding Administrative Rule.
The proposed map amendments do not add or subtract any commercial or industrial land from the
adopted inventories; therefore Goal 9 is not applicable.
Goal 10 - Housing.
Goal 10 requires that communities plan for and maintain an inventory of buildable residential land for
needed housing units. The Administrative Rule for Statewide Planning Goal 10 (OAR 660 Division 8)
states that "the mix and density of needed housing is determined in the housing needs projection.
Sufficient buildable land shall be designated on the comprehensive plan map to satisfy housing needs
by type and density range as determined in the housing needs projection. The local buildable lands
Findings - 4
Exhibit C
inventory must document the amount of buildable land in each residential plan designation." The
comprehensive plan map for the city is the Metro Plan land use diagram. The Residential Lands Study
(1999) was adopted by the City of Eugene as a refinement of the Metro Plan, and complies with the
requirements of Goal 10 and the corresponding Administrative Rule. According to the 1999
Residential Lands Study (RLS), there is sufficient buildable residential land to meet the identified land
need.
The subject site is proposed to be re-designated to a residential designation. The RLS identifies the
undeveloped residential land supply (inventory) based on the designation or zoning and the size of
the parcel. Some demand was also assumed to be accommodated through redevelopment and infill.
This subject site was not identified as part of the RLS since although it was partially zoned R-1, it was
not vacant or in agricultural or timber use at that time; therefore this re-designation does not reduce
the RLS inventory and is consistent with Goal 10. However, the proposal will add approximately 46
acres of housing capacity to the existing land supply (excluding any protected area).
Based on the above, the amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 10.
Goal 11- Public Facilities and Services. To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement
of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development.
The amendments do not affect the City's provision of public facilities and services. Therefore,
Statewide Planning Goal 11 does not apply.
Goal 12- Transportation. To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation
system.
The Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 660-012-0060) contains the following requirement:
(1) If an amendment to o 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.
A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it
would:
(a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility
(exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan);
(b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or
(c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on
projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted
TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be
generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes
an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation,
including, but not limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may
diminish or completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment.
(A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification
of an existing or planned transportation facility;
(B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it
Findings - 5
Exhibit C
would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive
plan; or
(C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is
otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or
comprehensive plan.
The proposed map amendments do not change the functional classification of a transportation
facility or change the standards implementing a functional classification system. Therefore, the
amendments do not have a significant effect under (a) or (b).
In regards to (c), the type of development currently permitted through the existing plan designation
and zoning will change for the subject property. As detailed in the following findings, the applicant's
analysis indicates that: (A) the types and levels of travel and access are consistent with the functional
classification of existing transportation facilities; (B) none of the transportation facilities studied will
be degraded beyond their identified performance standard identified in TransPlan as a result of the
proposed amendments; and, (C) none of the existing transportation facilities are otherwise projected
to fall below the performance standards identified in TransPlan.
To address the TPR, the applicant submitted findings and a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA),
dated April 24, 2015, which was prepared by the consulting firm of Branch Engineering, Inc. Staff
clarifies that this is not a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Review pursuant to EC 9.8650, although one is
expected to be provided at the time of a new development application. The TIA responds to
comments from the City provided during the application completeness review process. The TIA
evaluates the current performance of impacted transportation facilities, the performance of these
facilities in 2027 with the proposed amendments and the performance of the facilities in 2027
without the proposed amendments. Since there are no transportation facilities planned for the study
area, the applicant's analysis considers the impacts on only the existing transportation facilities within
the study area.
Comparison of Existing and Proposed Land Uses
In comparing the existing and the proposed land uses, the applicant's TIA assumes in both scenarios
that the area currently used or platted as cemetery will remain cemetery. For the unused portion of
the property currently designated POS and zoned R-1, the applicant's TIA uses regional park as the
existing land use and uses a "reasonable worst-case" scenario of single-family housing limited to five
homes per acre (per the South Hills Study policy) for the proposed use (Table 3 of the TIA).
According to the applicant's TIA, the number of PM peak hour trips projected to be generated by
development allowed under the reasonable worst case scenario are as follows:
Rest-Haven -
Projected PM. Peak`
Projected'VPM Peak Difference
Memorial Park
Trips; Existin`
Trips Proposed between land
POS designation R-
LDR designation:& use trips
_
1/PL zone -
R-1 zone
Existing land uses:
Cemetery
23
Findings - 6
Exhibit C
regional park
9
Proposed land uses:
Cemetery
23
single-family
residential (S
homes per acre)
231
1
1
+222
Because the trips generated by the proposed land use exceed the trips of the existing land use (222
more trips), an analysis of whether any applicable transportation facilities will be "significantly
impacted" by the development is necessary.
City staff was consulted in the scoping and development of the applicant's TIA and generally agrees
that the analysis methods used in the applicant's TIA are acceptable. The Applicant's TIA included
analysis of the following existing transportation facilities:
Transportation Facilities
Street Classification Jurisdiction
Willamette Street
Minor Arterial
City of Eugene
Donald Street
Major Collector
City of Eugene
Crest Drive
Local
City of Eugene
E. 33rd Avenue
Neighborhood Collector
City of Eugene
W. 39th Avenue
Neighborhood Collector
City of Eugene
E. 40th Avenue
Major Collector
City of Eugene
Determination of Significant Effect
The TPR requires a determination of which existing and planned transportation facilities will
experience a significant effect as a result of the proposed plan amendment, and defines what
constitutes a significant effect. One way in which an amendment will significantly affect an existing
or planned transportation facility is, if at the end of the planning period, the amendment will reduce
the performance of a transportation facility below the minimum acceptable performance standard or
will worsen the performance of a transportation facility that is otherwise projected to perform below
the minimum acceptable performance standard (OAR 660-012-0060(1)(c)(B) and (C)).
In determining whether there is a significant effect, different measurements are used to identify and
analyze each facility for the minimum level of performance standard. Level of Service D (LOS D) is the
minimum acceptable performance standard for the transportation facilities within the applicant's
study area. As identified in TronsPlon, LOS A represents the least congested conditions and LOS F the
most congested.
The end of the planning period in the City's adopted transportation system plan (TransPlan) is 2027.
Accordingly, the applicant's analysis under OAR 660-012-0060 is for the 2027 planning period.
Regarding subsections OAR 660-012-0060(1)(c)(A), (1)(c)(B) and (1)(c)(C), the applicant's TIA analyzed
Findings - 7
Exhibit C
the projected performance of intersections in the study area under four development scenarios
during the planning horizon. The analysis shows that the proposed map amendments will not
significantly affect existing transportation facilities because, as shown in the following table, none of
the intersections are projected to perform below the minimum standard of LOS D. Specifically, the
proposal will not result in the types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the
functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility per (1)(c)(A), degrade the
performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would. not meet the
performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan per (1)(c)(B), or degrade the
performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet
the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan (1)(c)(C). Since no facilities
will be significantly affected, no mitigation is required.
Transportation Facilities
2027 2027 Planning 2027 Planning
2015 "Background" Horizon Horizon "Build-
Street "Existing (no build-out on "build-out" with the out" with
Conditions" the subject site) Existing Zone and Proposed Zone and
POS designation Use
Willamette
LOS B
LOS B
LOS B
LOS B
Street
At Donald Street
Willamette
LOS B
LOS B
LOS B
LOS B
Street
At Crest Drive
Willamette
LOS C
LOS C
LOS C
LOS D
Street
At E. 33rd Avenue
Willamette
LOS C
LOS C
LOS C
LOS C
Street
At W. 39th
Avenue
Willamette
LOS B
LOS B
LOS B
LOS C
Street at E. 40th
Avenue
E. 401h Avenue at
LOS A
LOS B
LOS B
LOS B
Donald Street
Willamette
LOS A
LOS A
LOS B
LOS C
Street at site
access
Because the proposed amendment will not result in traffic generation that exceeds allowable
performance standard, the proposed plan amendment is consistent with Goal 12. Based on the above
findings, the plan amendment and zone change is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 12.
Findings - 8
Exhibit C
Goal 13 - Eneray Conservation. To conserve energy.
The amendments do not impact energy conservation. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 13 does
not apply.
Goal 14 - Urbanization. To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use.
The amendments do not affect the City's provisions regarding the transition of land from rural to
urban uses. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 14 does not apply.
Goal 15 - Willamette River Greenway. To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural, scenic,
historical, agricultural, economic and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette River as the
Willamette River Greenway.
The amendments do not contain any changes that affect the Willamette River Greenway regulations,
therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 15 does not apply.
Goal 16 through 19 - Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean
Resources.
There are no coastal, ocean, estuarine, or beach and dune resources related to the property effected
by these amendments. Therefore, these goals are not relevant and the amendments will not affect
compliance with Statewide Planning Goals 16 through 19.
(2) The amendment is consistent with applicable provisions of the Metro Plan and applicable
adopted refinement plans.
Applicable Metro Plan Policies
The following policies from the Metro Plan (identified below in italics) are applicable to these
amendments. Based on the findings provided below, the amendments are consistent with and
supported by the applicable provisions of the Metro Plan.
Growth Management Goals, Findings, and Policies
The UGB and sequential development shall continue to be implemented as an essential means
to achieve compact urban growth. The provision of all urban services shall be concentrated
inside the UGB. (Policy 1)
As stated in the response to Statewide Goal 11 (above), the re-designations will not affect the city's
ability to serve the area inside the UGB. The glossary of the Metro Plan defines "compact urban
growth" as follows:
The filling in of vacant and underutilized lands in the UGB, as well as redevelopment inside the
UGB.
Consistent with this policy, re-designation of Rest-Haven will make it easier to do housing or other
Findings - 9
Exhibit C
low density residential uses on a portion of the cemetery property that is no longer needed for future
cemetery uses, inside the UGB.
A. Residential Land Use and Housing Element
Residential Density Policies
A.13 Increase overall residential density in the metropolitan area by creating more
opportunities for effectively designed infill, redevelopment, and mixed use while
considering impacts of increased residential density on historic, existing and future
neighborhoods.
Consistent with this policy, the proposed re-designation will allow for low density residential
development on a portion of land no longer needed for future cemetery uses, within an existing low
density residential neighborhood. Consideration of specific development impacts will occur at the
time of future land use application or application of zoning development standards.
The applicant cited Residential Land Use and Housing Element policies A.10 and A.11 as applicable
policies supporting the proposed amendments. Staff finds that these policies are not applicable
because they are related to planning for higher density housing. If they are found to be applicable,
they are met as indicated in the applicant's written statement which is incorporated herein by
reference.
Housing Type and Tenure Policies
A.17 Provide opportunities for a full range of choice in housing type, density, size, cost and
location.
Consistent with policy A.17, the re-designation provides an opportunity for more low density
residential housing types on the Rest-Haven site and within the neighborhood.
The applicant cited Residential Land Use and Housing Element policy A.19 as an applicable policy
supporting the proposed amendments. Staff finds that this policy is not applicable because it is
related to planning for housing near downtown. If it is found to be applicable, it is met as indicated in
the applicant's written statement which is incorporated herein by reference.
The applicant also cited Residential Land Use and Housing Element policy A.30 as an applicable policy
supporting the proposed amendments. Staff finds that this policy is not directly applicable because
no specific housing development is proposed at this time. If it is found to be applicable, it is met as
indicated in the applicant's written statement which is incorporated herein by reference.
E. Transportation Element and J. Energy Element
The applicant cited Transportation policy F.3 and Energy policies J.7 and J.8 as applicable policies
supporting the proposed amendments. Staff finds that these policies are not applicable because they
Findings - 10
Exhibit C
are related to planning for higher density housing. If they are found to be applicable, they are met as
indicated in the applicant's written statement which is incorporated herein by reference.
Metro Plan Amendment Conclusion
Based on the above findings, the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is consistent with EC
9.7730.
Zone Change (file no. Z 15-1)
The proposal includes rezoning of approximately 27.63 acres of the 73.9 acre site from PL Public Land
to R-1 Low Density Residential, so that the entire property will be zoned R-1 Low Density Residential.
Most of that property for rezoning lies within the portion of the property currently in active cemetery
use or platted with cemetery lots. EC 9.8865 requires that the zone change proposals meet the
following approval criteria (listed in bold and italic). Findings are provided below with respect to
each of the applicable criteria.
(1) The proposed 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.
Some of the policies addressed in the Metro Plan amendment findings are applicable here, and to the
extent they are applicable the findings under EC 9.7730(3)(b) are incorporated herein by reference as
demonstration of consistency with applicable Metro Plan policies.
(2) The proposed zone change is consistent with applicable adopted refinement plans. In the
event of inconsistencies between these plans and the Metro Plan, the Metro Plan controls.
Approval of the zone change is dependent upon approval of the Metro Plan land use diagram
amendments. The applicable refinement plan, the South Hills Study, does not have an adopted land
use diagram. Therefore the proposal does not have to address consistency or amend a refinement
plan land use diagram.
The applicant also address the proposed re-designation and rezone with respect to the South Hills
Study Policies (1-3) regarding property over 901' elevation, density, and criteria regarding when
certain land use applications are applicable (such as subdivision, site review or planned unit
development). The applicant states that these policies are either not applicable to the subject
property or may be applicable as determined at the time of development. Staff generally concurs
with this and the applicant's findings are incorporated herein by reference. Specifically, staff concurs
that whether or not development on the site triggers the need for a subdivision, site review or
planned unit development is a question to be determined at the time of development and therefore
an overlay zone requiring any of these applications is not necessary. Staff further concurs that there
is no policy basis in the applicable adopted plans that call for the imposition of an overlay at the time
of rezoning.
Based on the above, the adopted refinement plan is either not applicable or the proposal is
consistent.
Findings - 11
Exhibit C
(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.
The findings of compliance with Goal 11- Public Facilities and Services, and Goal 12 - Transportation
above are incorporated herein by reference. With the findings established and referenced herein,
the proposal complies with this criterion.
(4) The proposed zone change is consistent with the applicable siting requirements set out for
the specific zone in:
(f) EC 9.2735 Residential Zone Siting Requirements.
There are no applicable siting requirements for the R-1 zone; therefore, this criterion does not apply.
(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.
The NR zone is not requested or applicable in this instance. Therefore, the above criterion is
inapplicable.
Zone Change Conclusion
Based on the above findings, compliance with the zone change approval criteria of EC 9.8865 is met.
Findings - 12