Hearings Official Public Hearings

AGENDA Meeting Location: Phone: 541-682-5377 Harris Hall, Lane County Public Service Building www.eugene-or.gov/hearingsofficial 125 East 8th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 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, APRIL 26, 2017 (5:30 p.m.) I. PUBLIC HEARING FOR ZONE CHANGE RNS MANAGEMENT LLC (Z 17-3) Request: Zone change from Medium Density Residential with a 10 unit per acre and Planned Unit Development overlays (R-2/10/PD) to Medium Density Residential (R-2) and from General Office with a Planned Unit Development overlay (GO/PD) to General Office (GO) Location: East side of Fairway Loop between Southwood Lane and Eastwood Lane (Assessor’s Map/Tax Lot: 17-03-29-24/05004) Applicant: RNS Management, LLC and Sanjacron, LLC Representative: Kristen Taylor, TBG Architects + Planners Lead City Staff: Althea Sullivan, Assistant Planner Telephone: (541) 682-5282 E-mail: althea.c.sullivan@ci.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  Atrium Building, 99 West 10th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 Phone: 541-682-5377 Fax: 541-682-5572 www.eugene-or.gov/planning ZONE CHANGE STAFF REPORT Applicant RNS Management, LLC and Sanjacron, LLC File Name (Number): RNS Management LLC (Z 17-3) Applicant’s Representative: Kristen Taylor, TBG Architects + Planners Applicant’s Request: Remove a 10 unit per acre and Planned Unit Development overlays (/10 & /PD) from the subject property to leave base zones of Medium-Density Residential (R-2), and General Office (GO). Subject Property: Location: East side of Fairway Loop between Southwood Lane and Eastwood Lane; Size: Approximately 4.8 acres; Assessor’s Map/Tax Lot: 17-03-29-24/ 05004. Relevant Dates: Application submitted on February 14, 2017; application deemed complete March 9, 2017; public hearing scheduled for April 26, 2017. Lead City Staff: Althea Sullivan, Assistant Planner, Eugene Planning Division, Phone: (541) 682-5282 Purpose of Staff Report Staff reports provide community members an opportunity to learn more about the land use request and to review staff analysis of the application. Staff reports are available seven days prior to the public hearing (see EC 9.7320). The staff report provides only preliminary recommendations, and information. The Hearings Official will also consider additional public testimony and other materials presented at the public hearing before making a decision on the application. The Hearings Official’s written decision on the application is generally made within 15 days following close of the public record, following the public hearing (see EC 9.7330). For reference, the quasi-judicial hearing procedures applicable to this request are described at EC 9.7065 through EC 9.7095. RNS Management (Z 17-3) April 2017 1 How Does Zoning Work? The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) is the City’s overarching policy document which helps to guide land use and zoning decisions. It includes long-range policy direction for a wide variety of land use planning and legislative decision-making, as well as guidance for property-specific land use decisions such as this zone change request. In some areas, refinement plans have also been adopted which provide additional policies and land use designation maps to further guide land use in specific geographic areas within the City. Taken together, the Metro Plan, refinement plans and other adopted functional plans constitute the City’s “comprehensive plan.” In the context of a zone change application, consistency with the applicable provisions of the Metro Plan and any applicable adopted refinement plans for the area of the request, is a fundamental part of the decision-making process. In many cases, there can be more than one zone that implements a particular land use designation, and the relevant policy direction can help to determine what the zoning should be. In other cases, it may be that the land use designation and policy direction is so specific that only one particular zone is allowed, or that overlay zoning is also appropriate to establish particular restrictions, development standards or process for determining how a specific property can be developed. In a nutshell, zoning specifies what a particular piece of land can be used for, and what standards will apply at the time of development (e.g. height, setbacks, etc.). Zoning can take several forms, the first is what can be referred to as a “base zone,” examples of which would be residential, commercial, or industrial zoning. Sometimes properties also have what is referred to as an “overlay zone.” Overlay zones are intended to provide special regulations and standards which supplement a base zone. The reason a particular property may have a base zone with an overlay zone varies, and is often specific to the history of the property and the location. In many cases overlay zones are applied because a specific refinement plan policy exists which requires an overlay, such as for Site Review, which ensures that a future public process and certain criteria (such as for “compatibility” with the surroundings) will apply at the time of future development. In some cases, an applicant can voluntarily request an overlay zone. The reason a particular applicant requests an overlay zone varies, but may be in response to neighborhood concerns about future development or to gain flexibility under applicable development standards. Either way, an understanding of the history of a specific property and its context as part of the City’s adopted plans is important to consider when attempting to understand why an overlay zone does or does not exist on the particular property. Background The subject property is a vacant site located on the east side of Fairway Loop between Southwood Lane and Eastwood Lane (see Attachment A - Vicinity Map). The property is currently split zoned with the northern 1.25 acres being zoned Medium-Density Residential with 10 units per acre and Planned Unit Development overlays (R-2/10/PD); and the southern 3.54 acres being zoned General Office with a Planned Unit Development overlay (GO/PD) (see Attachment B - Zoning Map). RNS Management (Z 17-3) April 2017 2 To the north of the property is an area zoned R-2/PD which has been developed with residential units, to the east property is zoned Community Commercial (C-2) and developed with a variety of commercial businesses. To the south property is designated Medium-Density Residential by the Metro Plan, but is currently zoned Low-Density Residential (R-1), Southwood Lane and I-105 are also located to the south of the subject property. Southwest of the site are the Elmwood Condominiums which are located on property zoned R-2 with a Site Review Overlay (R-2/SR), and to the west is the Eugene Country Club which is located on property zoned R-1. The applicant provides a detailed written statement which walks through land use history of the subject property, and portions of the Eugene Code (EC). With regards to the land use history, the applicant’s main point appears to be that the zoning overlays which exists on the subject property were requested by the property owner in 1978 (see file Z 77-47 and Ordinance No. 18114), at which time the zone overlays meant something different than they do today. The applicant also states that in 2002 a substantial update to the EC occurred which created detailed standards for commercial and residential development (see the applicant’s written statement starting at page 12). The applicant connects these two facts, arguing that while the density cap and /PD overlays may have been warranted or desired in 1978, today’s standards are sufficient to ensure compatibility with surrounding development. The applicant also provided a letter dated March 16, 2017 which clarified that the subject property is owned and managed by Robert D. Bennett, his daughter, Sarah Bennett, and son, Rob. E. Bennett. This was provided by the applicant after staff asked the applicant’s representative if something could be provided to clarify the ownership as several phones calls were received which raised this question. Referrals/Public Notice Public notice of the subject application was mailed on March 23, 2017, and posted consistent with the requirements of EC 9.7315 Public Hearing Notice. Staff notes that unfortunately some notices may have been sent which showed track changes formatting on the side. However, this clerical error was identified and the March 23, 2017 notice was correctly re-sent and did not included any track changes. The Planning Division has received many phones calls and email inquiries about the proposed zone change. At the time of publication of this staff report, two letters of written testimony and an email which poses questions have been received these materials are included as Attachment C. However, due to the date the letters were submitted (April 18, 2017), staff has not had time to review the substance of the materials and identify the places where it relates to approval criteria. A memorandum will be provided prior to the public hearing which will provide staff analysis of the testimony in the event any is warranted. Any additional 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 departments, public agencies, service providers, and the affected neighborhood group. Notice of the proposed zone change was received by the Oregon RNS Management (Z 17-3) April 2017 3 Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) on March 16, 2017. All referral comments received by the Planning Division on this application are included in the application file for reference. The substance of any relevant referral comments is addressed in the context of applicable approval criteria and standards in the following evaluation. Zone Change Evaluation The Hearings Official will review the 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 (see EC 9.7330 and EC 9.8865). 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 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 applicant requests removal of the Residential Density Range Overlay Zone (/#), which in this case exists as a 10 unit per acre cap on the Medium-Density Residential (R-2) portion of the property; and removal of the Planned Unit Development Overlay Zone (/PD) for the R-2, and General Office (GO) portions of the property. The applicant states that the Metro Plan does not call for a density cap on the site. Additionally the applicant argues that the appropriate density range for R-2, according to the Metro Plan (see page II-G-3), is over 10 through 20 units per net acre. The applicant further clarifies the exact numbers this density range translates to by citing Policy A.9 which is provided below for reference:  Policy A.9: Establish density ranges in local zoning and development regulations that are consistent with the broad density categories of this plan. *** o Medium Density: Over 10 through 20 units per gross acre (could translate to over 14.28 units per net acre through 28.56 units per net acre depending on each jurisdictions implementation measure and land use and development codes). *** Regarding the GO portion of the site, the applicant restates the purpose of the General Office zone from the EC, which is provided below for reference: EC 9.2140 Purpose of GO General Office Zone: The GO General Office zone is designed to implement the Metro Plan by providing areas that allow a compatible mix of office and residential development. The zone is intended to provide for small- to medium sized office buildings, often in transitional locations between residential and commercial uses. Developments shall be compatible with nearby residential uses in terms of scale, bulk, building and parking coverage, traffic generation, and other external factors. This zone also encourages a compatible mix of dwellings and offices on the same or adjacent properties. Retail uses are also permitted. RNS Management (Z 17-3) April 2017 4 The applicant states that the Metro Plan diagram shows the GO portion of the subject property as being designated Commercial, and the R-2 portion of the subject property as Medium Density Residential, the exact locations of which were confirmed previously by a zone change (Z 83-10). Finally, the applicant states that nowhere in the text of the Metro Plan, or on the Metro Plan Diagram is there any requirement for a /PD overlay on the site. Staff finds that the applicant provides a thorough argument in support of its requested zone change, and does not see anything in the Metro Plan text, or on the Metro Plan Diagram which is contrary to the applicant’s argument. There appear to be no mandatory policies which would require retention of the two existing overlays proposed for removal as part of this zone change request. Based on the available evidence, and findings above, staff finds the applicant’s request to remove the overlays from the R-2, and GO zoning consistent with the Metro Plan. EC 9.8865(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. The subject property is within the boundaries of the Willakenzie Area Plan (WAP), and is located in the Oakway Subarea. The applicant provides a diagram from the subarea that shows the refinement plan designations at a scale which is easier to interpret than the Metro Plan because specific parcels are shown. The area of the applicant’s request is clearly shown as being designated for Medium-Density Residential and Commercial uses, and those designations correspond to the location of existing base zoning (R-2 and GO) on the subject property. The applicant provides several policies from the WAP that are relevant to its request, for ease of reference the policies are listed below:  General Policy #1: “The City shall use the Land Use Diagram and accompanying text and policies of the Willakenzie Refinement Plan, as well as other applicable City goals, policies, and plans, to provide policy direction for public decision affecting the plan area”.  Oakway Subarea Policy 1: “The area shall continue to be recognized as appropriate for commercial general office, and medium-density or low-density residential uses”.  Oakway Subarea Policy #3: “Parcels having frontage between Eastwood Lane and Fairway Loop shall be considered appropriate for medium-density residential uses”.  Oakway Subarea Policy #6: “The City shall recognize the area east of Fairway Loop and south of Eastwood Lane (the southerly portion of Tax Lot 5004- Assessor’s Map 17-03- RNS Management (Z 17-3) April 2017 5  29-24, as depicted on the Willakenzie Land Use Diagram), as being appropriate for commercial development. This area shall be limited to General Office zoning”. The applicant provides a brief statement which addresses the policies above, stating that its request is consistent with the above policies and Oakway Subarea land use diagram. Staff agrees with the applicant’s assertion that its request is consistent with the policies listed above. The applicant also provides a detailed statement addressing General Policy #8, which is provided below:  General Policy #8: “Promote compatibility between low-density residential land uses and medium- and high-density residential land uses”. The applicant states that the above policy has a suggested action (Action 8.1) to place a /SR suffix onto parcels designated medium- or high-density residential. However, the applicant notes that policies are statements which suggest a specific course of action, and some are further clarified by proposed actions which are recognized ways to meet the intent of a policy. In this case it is important to recognize that proposed actions, like applying the /SR suffix, are not mandatory. The applicant further argues that the substantial updates to the EC which occurred in 2002 have provided development standards which are a way other than applying a /SR suffix to meet the intent of General Policy #8. Staff finds that the applicant’s analysis provides a strong argument in support of its proposed zone change, however, there is one additional policy which staff believes warrants more discussion. For ease of reference the policy is provided below:  General Policy #2: “The City shall ensure that future commercial development and redevelopment in the Willakenzie planning area is sensitive to and compatible with existing and planned development in the surrounding area”. The above policy obligates the City to carefully consider future commercial development, and the context of the area in which it is located. In this case the fact that Oakway Subarea Policy #6, which is provided above, specifically identifies the site for General Office zoning provides policy direction to further the intent of the above policy. As previously mentioned the Purpose of the General Office Zone is to allow for a mix of commercial and residential uses which can have the effect of providing a transition between less compatible commercial and residential uses (see EC 9.2140). By specifically determining that GO is an appropriate zoning classification for the portion of the subject property designated Commercial, the City has found a way for the particular property to be sensitive and compatible to existing and planned development in the surrounding area. Furthermore, none of the WAP policies explicitly require the existing overlays on the subject property or otherwise provide the City with a mandatory basis to require that they be retained. Based on the evidence provided, and findings above, staff finds that the applicant’s request to remove the overlays from the R-2, and GO zoning is consistent with the WAP. RNS Management (Z 17-3) April 2017 6  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). The applicant states that the site is less than a half-mile from Oakmont Park, the Willamette River Greenway, Alton Baker Park, and the riverside trail system. The site is located in an area served by Eugene School District 4J, and there are schools located nearby. Planning and Public Safety services are provided by the City of Eugene. The applicant also states that the proposed zone change will allow the site to be used consistent with adopted plans, the Envision Eugene vision, and the Eugene Code. Public Works referral comments, which are included as Attachment D, confirm that Wastewater, Stormwater, and Streets can serve the subject property and compliance with specific standards will be ensured at the time of future development. Based on these findings, and future permitting requirements, this 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: (a) EC 9.2150 Commercial Zone Siting Requirements No siting requirement is provided for the GO zone, therefore this criterion is not applicable. (b) EC 9.2835 Residential Zone Siting Requirements No siting requirement is provided for the R-2 zone, therefore this criterion is not applicable. As stated above, there are no applicable siting requirements for either base zone, additionally, the applicant does not request any change to the base zone. Regarding the overlay zones, neither overlay zone has specific siting requirements under this zone change criterion. Based on these findings the applicant’s proposal is consistent with EC 9.8865(4). 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 RNS Management (Z 17-3) April 2017 7 Goal 12 Transportation of the Statewide Planning Goals, adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC), 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 applicant states that it qualifies for an exception under subsection (9), as its request is consistent with the comprehensive plan designation. (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. The City’s Transportation System Plan (TransPlan 2002), was adopted in 2002 and serves as the City of Eugene’s acknowledged TSP. The applicant states that the zoning of the subject property is consistent with the Metro Plan, and was not exempted from Transplan 2002. Staff confirms that at the time TransPlan 2002 was adopted, the site was designated by the Metro Plan for Medium Density Residential, and Commercial use, which has not changed. As the applicant has not requested an amendment to the Metro Plan designation, and the proposed zoning remains consistent with the designation, the applicant is exempt from demonstrating compliance with TPR, which satisfies OAR 660-012-0060(1). Staff Recommendation Based on the available evidence, and consistent with the preceding findings, staff recommends the Hearings Official approve the requested zone change to remove the /PD and /10 overlays from the subject property. RNS Management (Z 17-3) April 2017 8 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 Type III 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 The applicant’s full-size site plans, and the entire application file, are 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. Attachment A: Vicinity Map Attachment B: Zoning Map Attachment C: Written Testimony as of April 19, 2017 Attachment D: Public Works Referral Comments For More Information Please contact Althea Sullivan, Assistant Planner, City of Eugene Planning Division, at: (541) 682-5282; or by e-mail, at: althea.c.sullivan@ci.eugene.or.us RNS Management (Z 17-3) April 2017 9  Attachment A - Vicinity Map Attachment A OAKWAY CENTE R OAKWAY RD EUGENE EASTWOOD LN FAIRWAY LP RD RG OBU C N DL W OO U TH SO 5 I-10 Legend Subject Site 0 125 250 Ft 500 Caution: This map is based on imprecise source data, subject to change, and for general reference only. ± 4/19/17 RNS Management LLC (Z 17-3) Attachment B 05004+ 17- 29- 0 23- 4- Zone change from Medium Density Residential with 10 units per acre and a Planned Unit Development overlay (10/ R-2 P D) /to Medium Density Residential (R- 2) and from General Office with a Planned Unit Development overlay (GO/PD)to General Office (GO). Westwood L n Eastwood Ln O n j i 1- 105 n N Zoning GO General Office with /PD C-2 Community Commercial R-1 Density Residential Low- R-2 Medium-Density Residential with PD and /10 Overlay Zones Subject Site 2A N Attachment C Attachment C Attachment C Attachment C Attachment C Attachment C Attachment C Attachment C  Attachment C SULLIVAN Althea C From: Steve Gross <sgross@papemachinery.com> Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 2:00 PM To: SULLIVAN Althea C Subject: RE: Assessor's Map/Tax Lot 17-03-29-24-05004 Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Ms. Sullivan; Thank you so much for your prompt response. I would like this added to the public record and passed on to the Hearings Official as you have offered. I appreciate your suggestion to call you and discuss the questions I have listed and will make arrangements to do so. You have been very helpful and I look forward to continuing our communication. Thanks again Steve Gross 2020 Westwood Land Eugene, Or 97401 From: SULLIVAN Althea C [mailto:Althea.C.Sullivan@ci.eugene.or.us] Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 1:42 PM To: Steve Gross <sgross@papemachinery.com> Subject: RE: Assessor's Map/Tax Lot 17‐03‐29‐24‐05004 Hi Steve, Thank you for taking the time to write an email, would you like this added to the public record and passed on to the Hearings Official? Regarding your questions, I unfortunately do not have a simple answer for either question. Do you have time to call me so that we can discuss your questions and some of the possible answers? Thank you, Althea Sullivan Assistant Planner City of Eugene Planning Division 99 West 10th Avenue, Eugene, OR 97401 541‐682‐5282 From: Steve Gross [mailto:sgross@papemachinery.com] Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 9:26 AM To: SULLIVAN Althea C <Althea.C.Sullivan@ci.eugene.or.us> Subject: Assessor's Map/Tax Lot 17‐03‐29‐24‐05004 Dear Ms. Sullivan; 1  Attachment C In reference to Assessor’s Map/Tax Lot 17‐03‐29‐24‐05004 and File Name/Numbers RNS Management LLC (Z 17‐3) regarding the City of Eugene Public Hearing Notice. There are several questions that arise as follows: ‐‐What does the zone change mean when changing from Medium Density Residential with 10 units per acre and Planned Unit Development overlays (R‐2/10/PD) to Medium Density Residential (R‐2) and from General Office with a Planned Unit Development overlay (GO/PD) to General Office (GO). This density appears to address townhouse or condominium development? ‐‐The Fairway Loop Road between the above property and Eastwood Lane has been blocked for over 14 years as a result of very high traffic intensity rendering this portion of Fairway Loop as a safety hazard. That was determined in a community meeting with the City Engineer at that time, Tom Larsen, who determined that Fairway Loop will be closed at that location. Prior to that, high levels of traffic resulted in significant safety issues and several accidents. It is assumed that the above planning proposal will also continue to include the closure of Fairway Loop at this location as it has been ? The addition of this development will significantly increase the traffic burden and subsequent safety thus maintaining the above Fairway Loop closure is imperative. Thank you for addressing the above questions and I appreciate plus support your efforts and look forward to further communications. Steve Gross 2020 Westwood Lane Eugene, Or 97401 2  Attachment D Land Use Referral City of Eugene Date: April 7, 2017 File Number: Z17-03 RNS Management LLC From: Deanna Smith Referral Group: Public Works Engineering, Team Central Tax Map / Lots: 17-03-29-24-05004 The following referral comments from Public Works staff reflect a preliminary evaluation of compliance with applicable approval criteria – specific to Public Works issues. These referral comments include draft findings and recommended conditions of approval, as well as related informational items, relevant to surveying, engineering, transportation, and maintenance issues identified by Public Works staff in the context of the applicable standards and criteria. These referral comments are intended for review by Planning & Development department staff, for incorporation into the City’s written decision on the subject application; however, they do not represent a final determination of compliance with the applicable approval standards and criteria. It is acknowledged that these referral comments are subject to revision upon further coordination with other affected City departments and utility providers. 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. Wastewater Public wastewater is available within Southwood Ln through a 10-inch pipe. The parcel is currently vacant, therefore there is no connection to this system. There are no liens or assessments of record due. Stormwater Our records indicate there may be an open waterway along the southerly property line. There are also public stormwater pipes within Fairway Lp and Southwood Ln. Additionally, records show that the on-site soil classification is Type B, which typically indicates good drainage and high infiltration rates. Consistency with applicable stormwater development standards will be ensured at the time of development. Streets This property abuts Southwood Ln, under the jurisdiction of ODOT, and classified by the City of Eugene as a minor arterial. The property also has frontage on Fairway Lp, a local street. Compliance with applicable street standards will be addressed at the time of development.