Hearings Official Public Hearings

AGENDA Meeting Location: Phone: 541‐682‐5377 Sloat Room – Atrium Building https://www.eugene‐or.gov/406/Hearings‐Official 99 West 10th 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, APRIL 10, 2019 (5:00 p.m.) I. PUBLIC HEARING : 4J Education Center Willamette Greenway Permit (WG 19‐2) Location: 200 North Monroe Request: Willamette Greenway Permit approval for new modular classroom building Applicant: Eugene School District 4J Representative: TBG Architects & Planners – Kristen Taylor Lead City Staff: Rodney Bohner, Assistant Planner Telephone: (541) 682‐5437 E‐mail: RBohner@eugene‐or.gov Public Hearing Format: 1. Staff introduction/presentation 2. Public testimony from applicant and others in support of application. 3. Comments or questions from interested persons who neither are proponents nor opponents of the proposal (neutral). 4. Public testimony from those in opposition to application. 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 https://www.eugene‐or.gov/406/Hearings‐Official.  Atrium Building 99 West 10th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 Phone: 541-682-5377 Fax: 541-682-5572 www.eugene-or.gov/planning WILLAMETTE GREENWAY PERMIT STAFF REPORT Application File Name (Number): 4J Education Center (WG 19-2) Applicant’s Request: Approval of a Willamette Greenway Permit to add an approximately 8,645 square foot, prefabricated classroom building on School District 4J property Applicant/Owner: Eugene School District 4J Applicant’s Representative(s): Kristen Taylor; TBG Architects + Planners Lead City Staff: Rodney Bohner, Assistant Planner, (541) 682-5437 Subject Property Location: Assessor’s Map/Tax Lot: 17-03-30-23/400 Address: 200 North Monroe Street Existing Zoning: PL Public Land with /WR Water Resources Conservation Overlay Relevant Dates: Application submitted February 6, 2019; application deemed complete on February 28, 2019; public hearing scheduled for April 10, 2019. ______________________________________________________________________________ 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 information and recommendations. The Hearings Official will also consider additional public testimony and other materials presented at the public hearing before making a decision on the 4J Education Center (WG 19-2) April 2019 1 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 for this request are described at EC 9.7065 through EC 9.7095. Background The subject site, an approximately 13.6-acre lot abutting the Willamette River, is currently developed with the Eugene School District 4J administrative offices, maintenance facilities, parking areas, and associated landscaping. The entire site is zoned PL Public Land with /WR Water Resource Conservation Overlay. The site is entirely within the Willamette River Greenway. The surrounding properties are a mixture of public land, R-2 medium-density residential, and R- 1 low-density residential zoning. To the north, the site fronts the Willamette River and associated riverfront park improvements including the Ruth Bascom Riverbank Trail, a bike and pedestrian hardscaped trail system. Along the site’s east boundary, a local connecting path extends through the length of the subject parcel, providing public access from the Whiteaker Neighborhood to the river trail. The adjacent area is developed with a mixture of housing types including single-family dwellings, multi-family apartments and townhouses, a residential treatment center, and additional public park land. The Willamette River is also a Goal 5 Water Resource and Chapter 9 of the Eugene Code establishes a /WR Water Resources Conservation Overlay Zone designated to protect waterways and riparian habitat. Since the Willamette River is a Category “A” Stream, the code prescribes a 100-foot conservation setback from the top of bank. Current Request The applicant is requesting approval of Willamette Greenway Permit to construct a prefabricated/modular classroom building. As addressed in the following evaluation, the Willamette Greenway Permit is subject to the approval criteria at EC 9.8815. For additional details about the project, please review the applicant’s written narrative which is available in the application file for reference. Application Referrals and Public Hearing Notice The applicant met with staff on February 20, 2019 to discuss the proposal, in compliance with EC 9.7005 Pre-application Conference. Public notice of the current applications was mailed and posted on March 11, 2019 in accordance with EC 9.7315. The Planning Division received one piece of written testimony from Daniel Lindley, which is included in the record and which will be provided the Hearings Official for their consideration. Lindley’s testimony is related to anticipated off-site traffic impacts and environmental impacts. 4J Education Center (WG 19-2) April 2019 2 As impacts relate to increased traffic, the applicant states and Public Works staff confirm, an application for Traffic Impact Analysis Review is not triggered by the proposed use due to the limited amount of additional traffic that would be generated by the proposed addition of classroom space. Staff have no other reason to believe that the proposed use would create excessive traffic or dangerous conditions warranting additional consideration or improvements, such as a traffic light as suggested in the testimony. The intent of the Willamette Greenway Permit criteria is primarily to address concerns related to scenic and natural resource impacts from development, and those approval criteria are addressed below. As construction relates to dangers posed by flooding, the location of the flood zone will be confirmed during the building permit review process, but the applicant states that the project site is outside of the flood zone. Lastly, the cost of the project is not relevant under the applicable approval criteria. The Planning Division also provided information concerning the application to other appropriate City 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 approval criteria and standards in the following evaluation. Any written testimony received after the date of this report but prior to the public hearing will be forwarded to the Hearings Official for consideration in making a decision on the subject application. Public testimony, written or otherwise, may also be presented at the public hearing on this matter. Willamette Greenway Permit Evaluation In accordance with EC 9.7330, the Hearings Official is required to approve, approve with conditions, or deny a Type III land use application. The decision must be based on, and be accompanied by, findings that explain the criteria and standards considered relevant to the decision. It must also state the facts relied upon in rendering the decision and explain the justification for the decision based upon the criteria, standards, and facts set forth. To assist the Hearings Official in rendering a decision on the application, staff presents the approval criteria (shown below in bold typeface), with preliminary findings related to each, based on the evidence available as of the date of this staff report. Staff also provides a recommendation to the Hearings Official following the staff evaluation, below. EC 9.8815(1): To the greatest degree possible, the intensification, change of use, or development will provide the maximum possible landscaped area, open space, or vegetation between the activity and the river. The application materials indicate that the project area is located over 360 feet (varies) from the Willamette River top-of-bank (see applicant’s site plan (sheet C1.0) and written narrative (pg. 6)). The applicant further states that there is a 150-foot public recreational easement (Maurie Jacobs Park) along the river providing a vegetation buffer between the proposed development and the river (also see sheet C1.0). Staff would add that the applicant’s site plan, 4J Education Center (WG 19-2) April 2019 3 sheet C1.0 indicates that, no development activities will occur within the 100-foot conservation setback area. The applicant’s response under this criterion does not provide much information, but clearly the applicant chose to locate the development well over 100 feet from the river, and to retain that open space area along the bike path and river. The applicant does not propose any new parking surface area as upgrades to existing parking areas satisfies parking minimums. Lastly, the applicant states that new landscaping is proposed along the entire north side of the proposed school structure with the intent of screening the new development from the river. Staff believes the applicant’s site plan and other available information showing the ample distance and existing riparian vegetation between the development and the river is sufficient to demonstrate compliance with this criterion. As shown on the landscape plan (Sheet L1.0), the applicant proposes new landscape screening to the north of the proposed classroom building. Additionally, the applicant proposes new landscaping as part of the upgrades to required parking areas, most significantly along the southern border of the subject property. As the landscaping along the north side of the proposed school building is evidence used to meet this criterion and to ensure landscaping on- site is planted in a timely manner, the following condition is recommended: • The applicant shall add a note to the site plan (Sheet C1.0) that states: “Final landscaping consistent with the Landscape Plan shall be installed before final occupancy.” Based on the available evidence and recommended condition above, staff believes this criterion is met. EC 9.8815(2): To the greatest possible degree, necessary and adequate public access will be provided along the river by appropriate legal means. Staff believes that the above criterion requires access to be provided along the river, and in this case the applicant benefits from the existence of the City’s Riverbank Path System. This existing system provides a path that is paved and runs along the river from Springfield to the Beltline Highway, providing access along the Willamette River. The applicant’s written narrative indicates that proposed development is located approximately 231 feet from the recreation easement’s southern boundary (pg. 6). Furthermore, the applicant proposes to retain the paved, north-south connection path, providing access to the river. Based on the available evidence, staff believes this criterion is met. EC 9.8815(3): The intensification, change of use, or development will conform with applicable Willamette Greenway policies as set forth in the Metro Plan. 4J Education Center (WG 19-2) April 2019 4 Pages III-D-4 and 5 of the Metro Plan contain the Willamette Greenway policies. Of these, several policies apply specifically to local government agency services. One policy seems potentially relevant to this application and is as follows: Policy D.5: New development that locates along river corridors and waterways shall be limited to uses that are compatible with the natural, scenic, and environmental qualities of those water features. As noted previously, the proposed development is within the Willamette River Greenway. As relevant here, staff believes this policy is met to the extent that the proposed development of educational uses is allowed in the applicable PL Public Land zone, and otherwise found to be consistent with the natural resource protections afforded through the Willamette Greenway Permit criteria. Those requirements in EC 9.8815 are locally adopted regulations that implement Statewide Planning Goal 15 in the context of this policy. Based on the available information, staff believes this criterion is met. EC 9.8815(4): In areas subject to the Willakenzie Area Plan, the intensification, change of use, or development will conform with that plan’s use management considerations. The applicant states, and staff agree, that the project site is not located within the Willakenzie Area Plan boundary. Staff notes that the subject property is located within the boundary of the Whiteaker Plan; therefore, this criterion is not applicable. EC 9.8815(5): In areas not covered by subsection (4) of this section, the intensification, change of use, or development shall conform with the following applicable standards: (a) Establishment of adequate setback lines to keep structures separated from the Willamette River to protect, maintain, preserve, and enhance the natural, scenic, historic, and recreational qualities of the Willamette Greenway. Setback lines need not apply to water related or water dependent activities as defined in the Oregon Statewide Planning Goals and Guidelines (OAR 660-15-000 et seq.). (b) Protection of significant fish and wildlife habitats as identified in the Metropolitan Plan Natural Assets and Constraints Working Paper. Sites subsequently determined to be significant by the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife shall also be protected. (c) Protection and enhancement of the natural vegetative fringe along the Willamette River to the maximum extent practicable. (d) Preservation of scenic qualities and viewpoints as identified in the Metropolitan Plan Natural Assets and Constraints Working Paper. (e) Maintenance of public safety and protection of public and private property, especially from vandalism and trespass in both rural and urban areas to the maximum extent practicable. 4J Education Center (WG 19-2) April 2019 5  (f) Compatibility of aggregate extraction with the purposes of the Willamette River Greenway and when economically feasible, applicable sections of state law pertaining to Reclamation of Mining Lands (ORS Chapter 517) and Removal of Material; Filling (ORS Chapter 541) designed to minimize adverse effects to water quality, fish and wildlife, vegetation, bank stabilization, stream flow, visual quality, noise, safety, and to guarantee necessary reclamation. (g) Compatibility with recreational lands currently devoted to metropolitan recreational needs, used for parks or open space and owned and controlled by a general purpose government and regulation of such lands so that their use will not interfere with adjacent uses. As used in this section, the words "the greatest possible degree" are drawn from Oregon Statewide Planning Goal 15 (F.3.b.) and are intended to require a balancing of factors so that each of the identified Willamette Greenway criteria is met to the greatest extent possible without precluding the requested use. The applicant states that the site is separated from the river by a recreation easement, and that the proposed buildings are setback about 356 feet from the Willamette River top of bank and about 265 feet from the /WR conservation setback. The applicant also provides responses to each of the subsections above, briefly noting compliance with each. The strongest case for compliance with the above standards are the applicant’s choice to set the proposed buildings back from the river, installation of new landscape screening areas, and use of existing paved areas to meet multiple development standards. Based on the statements of the applicant, and available evidence, staff believes this criterion is met. EC 9.8815(6): When site review approval is required, the proposed development will be consistent with the applicable site review criteria. The proposed project is not zoned with an /SR Site Review overlay. The proposed use is permitted in PL zones owned by a public agency, and per EC 9.2683(2), while the use is located within 300 feet of residential zoning, the applicant states and Public Works staff confirm, that the proposed use will not generate the need for a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) according to EC 9.8670. As such, no Site Review is required. EC 9.8815(7): The proposal complies with all applicable standards explicitly addressed in the application. An approved adjustment to a standard pursuant to provisions beginning at EC 9.8015 of this land use code constitutes compliance with the standard. The applicant states that the proposed development complies with all applicable standards and that no adjustments to standards are sought. However, consistent with the language of this criterion, it is incumbent upon staff to review all applicable standards as they are explicitly addressed in this application. 4J Education Center (WG 19-2) April 2019 6 EC 9.6105 Bicycle Parking Standards The applicant proposes bicycle parking, and states that the minimum required parking spaces will be provided per EC Table 9.6105(5). Staff note that the location and number of bicycle parking spaces appears to conceptually conform with code standards but will be subject to building permit review and are not expressly approved through this permit review. Therefore, as a condition of approval: • The applicant shall add a note to the site plan (Sheet C1.0) that states: “Bicycle parking shown is conceptual and the required location, number and specific design will be reviewed during the building permit process to ensure compliance with EC 9.6105.” EC 9.6410 Motor Vehicle Parking Standards The requirement of 1 parking space per 3.5 students is set by EC Table 9.6410 Required Off- Street Motor Vehicle Parking. The applicant proposes to serve up to 125 students. The applicant’s site plan sheet A1 indicates that 31 parking spaces will be upgraded to meet current standards. As discussed in the applicant’s written statement, there are 220 parking spaces overall on the subject site. The proposed classroom use is anticipated to require a minimum 27 parking spaces, while the existing administrative office use requires a minimum 171 spaces. The 220 existing parking spaces therefore exceed the required minimum total of 198 spaces for the existing and new uses combined. Staff further note that none of the 220 existing parking spaces are currently dedicated to an existing off-site parking agreement. Staff did receive public comments over the phone concerned that a portion of the existing parking lot was dedicated to off-site uses. The applicant states, and staff have confirmed, that no agreements encumber the existing parking spaces. Additional requirements for parking areas are set by EC 9.6420. The applicant’s proposal complies with parking space requirements for stalls. The applicant provides details on sheet L1.0 which demonstrate compliance with the requirements for landscaping. Staff also note that the location and number of (ADA) accessible parking spaces will be subject to building permit review and are not expressly approved through this permit review. Therefore, as a condition of approval: • The applicant shall add a note to the site plan (Sheet C1.0) that states: “Accessible parking shown is conceptual. The location, number and specific dimensions will be reviewed during the building permit process to ensure compliance with EC 9.6410.” EC 9.6730 Pedestrian Circulation On-Site The proposal includes new pedestrian walkways to provide direct access from public ways to building entrances through a mix of raised walkways and striped pedestrian crossing areas. Staff notes that the conceptual location and design of pedestrian circulation shown will be 4J Education Center (WG 19-2) April 2019 7 subject to further review at the time of building permit and are not expressly approved through this permit review. Therefore, as a condition of approval: • The applicant shall add a note to the site plan (Sheet C1.0) that states: “Pedestrian circulation shown is conceptual and the location and specific design will be reviewed during the building permit process to ensure compliance with EC 9.6730.” Otherwise, staff confirms that the applicant has provided sufficient information to indicate that the use will conceptually conform to the applicable standards explicitly addressed in the application. Staff notes that full compliance with all remaining applicable standards will be addressed as part of the building permit process for the proposed development; including but not limited to: • EC 9.6505 Public Improvement Standards • EC 9.6725 Outdoor Lighting Standards • EC 9.6775 Underground Utilities, and • EC 9.6790 – EC 9.6797 Stormwater Standards Otherwise, the applicant has not requested any adjustments pursuant to the provisions beginning at EC 9.8015 that would be subject to further review under this criterion. Based on the available information and conditions in this recommendation, the applicant complies with this criterion. Staff Recommendation Based on the available evidence, and consistent with the preceding findings, staff recommends the Hearings Official grant approval of the applicant’s requested Willamette Greenway Permit subject to the conditions listed below: 1. The applicant shall add a note to the site plan (Sheet C1.0) that states: “Final landscaping consistent with the Landscape Plan shall be installed before final occupancy.” 2. The applicant shall add a note to the site plan (Sheet C1.0) that states: “Bicycle parking shown is conceptual and the required location, number and specific design will be reviewed during the building permit process to ensure compliance with EC 9.6105.” 3. The applicant shall add a note to the site plan (Sheet C1.0) that states: “Accessible parking shown is conceptual. The location, number and specific dimensions will be reviewed during the building permit process to ensure compliance with EC 9.6410.” 4. The applicant shall add a note to the site plan (Sheet C1.0) that states: “Pedestrian circulation shown is conceptual and the location and specific design will be reviewed during the building permit process to ensure compliance with EC 9.6730.” 4J Education Center (WG 19-2) April 2019 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 Vicinity and Zoning maps are attached. 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: Applicant’s Site Plan (reduced) For More Information Please contact Rodney Bohner, Assistant Planner, City of Eugene Planning Division, at: (541) 682-5437; or by e-mail, at: rodney.t.bohner@ci.eugene.or.us 4J Education Center (WG 19-2) April 2019 9  ATTACHMENT A - VICINITY MAP N ADAMS ST SYCAMORE AVE LEWIS AVE ASH ST CHESHIRE AVE Subject Property N JEFFERSON ALY CHESHIRE AVE CHESHIRE AVE CEDAR ST ST ST MONROE STN MONROE MADISON ST N MADISON ST JEFFERSON CHESHIRE ALY N JE N ADAMS STFFERSON ST UGB MONROE ALY MADISON ALY CLARK ST JEFFERSON ALY ´ Caution: This map is based on imprecise Subject Property Feet source data, subject to change, and for general reference only. Taxlots 0 100 200 400 April 2019  ATTACHMENT B - ZONING MAP Sycamore Ave N Adams St N Adams St Lewis Ave ^ Ash St Cheshire Ave N Adams St Cheshire Ave Cheshire Ave Cedar St Cheshire Aly Zoning C-2 Community Commercial Zone Overlays Water Bodies GO General Office ^ Subject Site PL Public Land ´ R-1 Low Density Residential R-2 Medium Density Residential ATTACHMENT C - SITE PLAN