Planning Commission

AGENDA EUGENE, SPRINGFIELD, AND LANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONS Tuesday, April 7, 2009 Springfield Library Meeting Room 225 Fifth Street, Springfield, OR 97477 Phone: (541) 682-5481 Web site: www.eugene-or.gov The Eugene, Springfield, and Lane Planning Commissions welcome your interest in this agenda item. Feel free to come and go as you please during the meeting. This meeting location is wheelchair-accessible. For the hearing impaired, an interpreter can be provided with 48 hours notice prior to the meeting. Spanish-language interpretation can also be provided with 48 hours notice. To arrange for these services, contact the receptionist at 726-2700. JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF EUGENE, SPRINGFIELD, AND LANE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSIONS DATE: Tuesday, April 7, 2009 LOCATION: Springfield Library Meeting Room, 225 Fifth Street, Springfield TIME: Work Session: 5:30 p.m. Public Hearing: 6:00 p.m. TransPlan Horizon Year and Removal of Completed Projects (Eugene files MA 09-1; Springfield file LRP2008-00014; Lane County file PA 095108) Proposal: Non-site specific text amendments to the Eugene-Springfield Regional Transportation System Plan (“TransPlan”) to adjust the planning period from year 2015 to year 2024 to reflect actual growth rates since plan adoption; and to remove completed transportation projects from TransPlan’s project lists. Amendments to the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (“Metro Plan”) are also proposed to maintain consistency between TransPlan and the Metro Plan. Lead Staff: Kurt Yeiter, Senior Planner, City of Eugene, 682-8379 Greg Mott, Planning Manager , City of Springfield, 726-3774 Stephanie Schulz, Senior Planner, Lane County, 682-3958 (over for meeting format and Planning Commission rosters) Public Hearing Meeting Format: 1. Work Session (commences at 5:30): A. Each Commission chair declares the meeting open B. Commissioner introductions C. Staff presentation: Kurt Yeiter 2. Open public hearing (not before 6:00) 3. Questions from the Planning Commission. 4. Close public hearing. 5. Planning Commission discussion/action. 6. Each Commission Chair adjourns meeting for his/her Commission City of Eugene Planning Commission Members: Heidi Beierle, Phillip Carroll, (Chair), Rick Duncan, Randy Hledik, Ann Kneeland, (Vice Chair), John Lawless, Jeffery Mills Lane County Planning Commission Members: Lisa Arkin, (Chair), Steve Dignam, Todd Johnston, Tony McCown, Nancy Nichols, Robert Noble, (Vice Chair), Howard Shapiro, Jozef Siekiel-Zdzienicki, John Sullivan Springfield Planning Commission Members: Lee Beyer, Frank Cross, (Chair), Johnny Kirschenmann, (Vice Chair), Steve Moe, Sean VanGordon, Sheri Moore, Eric Smith,  AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 7, 2009 TO: Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County Planning Commissions FROM: Kurt Yeiter, Senior Planner, Eugene Planning Division, Greg Mott, Planning Manager, City of Springfield, Stephanie Schulz, Planner, Lane County Land Management Division ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing for TransPlan and Metro Plan Amendments: TransPlan Planning Period and Removal of Completed Projects (Eugene files MA 09-1; Springfield file LRP2008-00014; Lane County file no. PA 09-5108) I. ACTION REQUESTED: Hold a public hearing on the proposed TransPlan and Metro Plan amendments. The Planning Commissions could choose to take action after the close of the hearing. The Planning Commissions actions will consist of each Commission making a recommendation to its respective elected bodies. II. BRIEFING STATEMENT: On April 7, 2009, the Planning Commissions of Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County will hold a public hearing on the following: 1. Non-site specific text amendments to the Eugene-Springfield Regional Transportation System Plan (TransPlan) to adjust the planning period from year 2015 to year 2024 to project the average growth rate that has occurred since TransPlan’s adoption. (Attachment C) 2. Remove completed transportation projects from TransPlan’s project lists. (Attachment A) 3. Non-site specific text amendments in the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) needed to maintain consistency between TransPlan and the Metro Plan. (Attachments C and D) III. BACKGROUND: On November 8, 2007, the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) adopted an update to the federally- required Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). This update extended the RTP’s planning period to 2031, deleted projects that had been completed or that were determined to be no longer needed, moved projects from the Illustrative Project List (beyond 20-years) to the Financially Constrained 20-Year Capital Investment Actions List and made several other changes to proposed projects. MPC’s adoption of the updated RTP triggered a state Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) requirement that Eugene, Springfield and Lane County do one of the following by November 8, 2008: 1 of 4  1. Make findings that TransPlan is consistent with the RTP; or 2. Update TransPlan to be consistent with the RTP; or 3. Get approved by the state Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) a work plan for making TransPlan consistent with the RTP. Eugene, Springfield and Lane County concluded that it was unlikely that DLCD would support a finding that TransPlan is consistent with the RTP, nor could they update TransPlan by November 8, 2008, to be consistent with the RTP. Accordingly, the three jurisdictions sought LCDC’s approval of a work plan. On October 16, 2008, LCDC approved (with conditions) the Regional Transportation Work Plan (“the Work Plan”). The Work Plan represents a logical, programmatic approach to aligning and updating the regional land use and transportation plans. The Work Plan requires, as a first step, that the local jurisdictions amend TransPlan in the following manner: delete transportation projects that have been completed; delete the West Eugene Parkway (WEP); move four ODOT Highway projects from the Illustrative list to the Financially Constrained list; and, adjust TransPlan’s planning period. A copy of the Work Plan is attached to this Agenda Item Summary (AIS) as Exhibit F. This public hearing is to consider two of these required amendments: deletion of the completed projects and adjustment to TransPlan’s 20-year planning horizon. Separate hearings will be held at a later date to consider the other TransPlan amendments required by the Work Plan. IV. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS: 1. Project List Amendments: As noted above, when the MPC updated the federally- required RTP in November, 2007, among other amendments made to the RTP, the MPC deleted the projects that have been built. These built/completed projects should now be deleted from TransPlan. Since the Metro Plan incorporates by reference TransPlan’s project lists, the Metro Plan must also be “amended” to acknowledge the changes to the project lists that are contained in TransPlan and incorporated by reference in the Metro Plan. 2. TransPlan Text Amendments: The region covered by TransPlan is the “TransPlan Study Area”, which is an area extending beyond the UGB and Metro Plan boundary that is used for transportation modeling purposes. TransPlan includes provisions for meeting the transportation demand of a projected population of 296,500 in the TransPlan Study Area. When TransPlan was updated in 2001, it was anticipated that the TransPlan Study Area’s population would reach 296,500 in 2015. It is now anticipated that the TransPlan Study Area’s population will not reach 296,500 until approximately 2024. Since the transportation modeling for the TransPlan Study Area was based on a projected population of 296,500, TransPlan guides regional and transportation system planning and development in the Transportation Study Area until 2024. Accordingly, the proposed amendment updates TransPlan’s planning period to 2024. As noted above, LCDC’s Regional Transportation Work Plan requires an adjustment to TransPlan’s planning period to more accurately reflect the year that the plan’s study area would hit the projected population and to bring TransPlan’s planning period closer to the planning period of the federally- required RTP. Additionally, as year 2015 approaches, ODOT, the agency that funds many of the significant regional transportation projects, has expressed concern that this region no longer has a sufficiently long-range transportation plan. The proposed TransPlan amendment to reflect the year at 2 of 4 which the planned population will be reached is an interim measure necessary to comply with the Work Plan and to more accurately reflect current conditions for the benefit of the agencies funding transportation projects. TransPlan and the Metro Plan will be revised again over the next few years to provide integrated land use and transportation strategies for a new 20-year planning period in accordance with the Work Plan. 3. Metro Plan Text Amendments: The goals and policies in TransPlan are contained in the Metro Plan Transportation Element and are part of the adopted Metro Plan. Also, as noted above, TransPlan’s project lists and project maps are adopted as part of the Metro Plan. Although the project lists are not physically maintained in the Metro Plan, but rather maintained in TransPlan, the Metro Plan needs to be amended to simultaneously incorporate changes to the project list resulting from the removal of completed projects. Further, amendments to TransPlan’s planning period require some text amendments to the Metro Plan in order for the two documents to remain consistent. The proposed text amendments to the Metro Plan are set forth in Attachment D. V. APPLICATION, REFERRALS AND PUBLIC HEARING NOTICES: In September 2008, the Eugene City Council, Springfield City Council, and Lane County Board of Commissioners approved and submitted to LCDC a work plan that included the task of making the proposed amendments. As noted above, LCDC approved the work plan on October 16, 2008. Notice of these two proposed amendments has been given to the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development on October 16, 2008, revised on January 29, 2009 to add the proposed removal of the completed projects and to clarify that Metro Plan amendments were also necessary. The DLCD notice was revised again on February 6, 2009. Notice of this public hearing was mailed to all interested parties requesting such notice and posted on March 6, 2009. Notice of this public hearing was published in the Register Guard newspaper on March 18, 2009. The Planning Departments received no letters of public testimony at time of writing this Agenda Item Summary. Any additional written comments received after the preparation of this staff report will be provided to the Planning Commissions at the public hearing for inclusion into the public record. VI. APPLICABLE CRITERIA: The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan, this region’s Transportation System Plan) guides regional transportation system planning and development in the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. TransPlan is a functional plan of the Metro Plan, thus, the amendment process for TransPlan is the same as that for the Metro Plan. The Eugene, Springfield and Lane County Planning Commissions will address relevant approval criteria in making their recommendations on the requests to the Eugene and Springfield City Councils and the Lane County Board of County Commissioners. Criteria to be used to evaluate TransPlan and Metro Plan text amendments are found in Springfield Development Code, Chapter 5, Section 5.14-135( C )(1- 2); Eugene Code Section 9.7730(3); and Lane Code Section 12.225(2)(a) and (b) and reads as follows: (a) The amendment must be consistent with the relevant Statewide Planning Goals adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission; and (b) Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. 3 of 4 Testimony and evidence of those testifying should be directed toward the applicable criteria of the code, as described above. The Planning Commissions’ recommendations must be based on evidence and testimony in the record that is responsive to the required approval criteria. The Planning Commissions may recommend approval, approval with modifications, or denial of the requested amendments. The requests will be heard before the elected officials in a separate joint public hearing at a date to be determined following Planning Commission action. VII. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the available information and materials in the record and the preliminary findings, included as Attachment E, staff recommends approval of the proposed TransPlan and Metro Plan amendments. If the Planning Commissions would like to take action after the close of the public hearing, staff’s recommended motion is: Move to recommend that, based on the findings of consistency set forth in Attachment E, and the evidence and testimony entered into the record which also supports the conclusion of consistency with the applicable criteria, the City Council/Board of Commissioners adopt the amendments to TransPlan and the Metro Plan as set forth in Exhibits A, C, and D. VIII. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Proposed TransPlan Project List Amendments Attachment B: Preliminary Calculations for TransPlan Planning Period Attachment C: Proposed TransPlan Text Amendments Attachment D: Proposed Text Amendments to the Metro Plan Attachment E: Findings of Consistency Attachment F: LCDC Work Plan IX. FOR MORE INFORMATION: Please contact Kurt Yeiter, Associate Planner, City of Eugene Planning Division, 99 W. 10th Avenue, Eugene, OR 97401, by telephone at 541-682-8379 or via email at kurt.m.yeiter@ci.eugene.or.us. Or Greg Mott, Planning Manager, City of Springfield: 541-726-3774, gmott@ci.springfield.or.us Stephanie Schulz, Planner, Lane County: 541-682-3958, Stephanie.Schulz@co.lane.or.us 4 of 4  ATTACHMENT E FINDINGS OF CONSISTENCY Metro Plan Amendment Criteria Criteria to be used to evaluate amendments to the Eugene-Springfield Regional Transportation System Plan (TransPlan) and the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) are found in Springfield Development Code, Chapter 5, Section 5.14-135( C )(1-2), Eugene Code Section 9.7730(3), and Lane Code Section 12.225(2)(a) &(b) and all reads as follows: (a) The amendment must be consistent with the relevant Statewide Planning Goals adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission; and (b) Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. This application involves text amendments (non-site specific) and project list amendments to TransPlan, a special purpose functional plan, and text amendments (non-site specific) to the Metro Plan (hereinafter referred to as “the amendments”). The process for making the amendments to TransPlan and the Metro Plan are identical; requiring that the three jurisdictions follow the “Type I” amendment process. To become effective, the amendments to TransPlan the Metro Plan must be approved by all three governing bodies. Criterion A. STATEWIDE PLANNING GOAL CONSISTENCY: Based on the findings set forth below, the amendments are consistent with applicable Statewide Planning Goals and interpretive rules. 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 Cities of Springfield and Eugene and Lane County have acknowledged citizen involvement programs and acknowledged processes for securing citizen input on all proposed Metro Plan amendments. The governing bodies code provisions require that notice of the proposed amendments be given and public hearings be held prior to adoption. Notification of the proposed amendments and opportunities for public participation in these amendments were consistent with the acknowledged citizen involvement programs. The governing bodies’ code provisions implement Statewide Planning Goal 1 by requiring that notice of the proposed land use code amendment be given and public hearings be held prior to adoption. Consideration of the amendments will begin with a joint Planning Commission work session on April 7, 2009, followed by a public hearing. On October 16, 2008, the City of Springfield provided notice of the proposed amendment to the 20-year planning period in TransPlan from 2015 to 2023 to the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD). That notice included copies of the proposal previously approved by the Metropolitan Policy Committee for inclusion in the federal RTP in November, 2007, and a copy of the report that went to the Springfield City Council for the October 6, 2008, initiation of this amendment. The identical proposal was reviewed and approved by the Joint Elected Officials of Eugene, Springfield 1 and Lane County on September 15, 2008, prior to being submitted to the Land Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) in October as part of the proposed work program for the update of TransPlan. Each of these and activities and meetings were noticed and included opportunities for citizen involvement and comment. The October 2008 DLCD notice was revised on January 29, 2009, to add the proposed removal of the completed projects, and to clarify that Metro Plan amendments were also necessary, and that Eugene and Lane County would be participants as well. The DLCD notice was revised again on February 6, 2009, to provide specific proposed text amendments and to provide the new (postponed) date for the first evidentiary hearing. Notice of the first evidentiary hearing was mailed to all persons who had requested such notice on March 6, 2009, thirty (30) days prior to the first hearing. Notice was published in the Register Guard, the area’s general circulation newspaper, on March 18, 2009, twenty (20) days before the first hearing. The proposed amendments were available for inspection at the Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County planning offices. The process leading up to the adoption of the amendments provided numerous opportunities for public involvement. We find that the process for adopting these amendments complies with Statewide Planning Goal 1 since it complies with, and surpasses, 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 the use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) is the policy tool that provides a basis for decision-making in this area. The Metro Plan was acknowledged by the State in 1982 to be in compliance with statewide planning goals. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan) is a function plan of the Metro Plan, which forms the basis for the Transportation Element of the Metro Plan and guides surface transportation improvements in the metropolitan area. TranPlan was acknowledged by the State to be in compliance with statewide planning goal. These findings and the record show that there is an adequate factual base for City’s decision concerning the amendments. Goal 2 requires that plans be coordinated with the plans of affected governmental units and that opportunities be provided for review and comment by affected governmental units. The Goal 2 coordination requirement is met when the adopting governmental bodies engage in an exchange, or invite such an exchange, between the adopting bodies and any affected governmental unit and when the adopting bodies use the information obtained in the exchange to balance the needs of the citizens. To comply with the Goal 2 coordination requirement, the three jurisdictions coordinated the review of these amendments with all affected governmental units. Notice of the proposed amendments and information about where the materials would be available for review was mailed to all parties that had requested such notice. There are no Goal 2 exceptions required for the amendments. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2. GOAL 3 - AGRICULTURAL LANDS: To preserve and maintain agricultural lands. 2 The amendments will not change or conflict with the policies of the Metro Plan or TransPlan regarding agricultural lands since these amendments continue to reflect the growth planned for and accommodated by the existing, acknowledged Metro Plan and TransPlan. Goal 3 is not relevant and the amendments do not affect the area’s compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 3. GOAL 4 - FOREST LAND: To conserve forest lands for forest use. The amendments will not change any policies or plan diagram designations of the Metro Plan or TransPlan, nor do the amendments impact any forest lands. Goal 4 is not relevant and the amendments do not affect the area’s compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 4. Therefore, the amendments comply with Goal 4. GOAL 5 - OPEN SPACE, SCENIC AND HISTORIC AREAS, NATURAL RESOURCES: To conserve open space and protect natural and scenic resources. The following administrative rule (OAR 660-023-0250) is applicable to this post-acknowledgement plan amendment (PAPA) request: (3) Local governments are not required to apply Goal 5 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 5; (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. The amendments do not affect a Goal 5 resource. Specifically, the amendments do not create or amend a list of Goal 5 resources, do not amend a plan or 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 particular Goal 5 resource site, and do not amend the acknowledged Urban Growth Boundary. Therefore, Goal 5 does not apply to these plan amendments. GOAL 6 - AIR, WATER, AND LAND RESOURCES 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 of those discharges. TransPlan currently contains policies related to nodal development, transportation demand management and the encouragement of additional alternative modes of transportation, including transit, bicycles and pedestrian use. These policies are related to the need to maintain and improve the air quality in the metropolitan area. The amendments will not impact any of these policies and no new projects are proposed; the project list amendments consist only of deleting completed projects. Projects already identified in TransPlan will be designed 3 and constructed in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Goal 6. GOAL 7 - AREAS SUBJECT TO NATURAL 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 natural hazards such as land slides. The amendments do not address potential natural disasters. Further, the amendments do not affect the current restrictions on development in areas subject to natural hazards, nor allow for new development that could result in a natural hazard. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Goal 7. 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 destinations resorts. Goal 8 ensures the provision of recreation facilities to Oregon citizens and is primarily concerned with the provisions of those facilities in non-urban areas of the State. The amendments do not affect the current provisions for recreation areas, facilities or recreational opportunities, nor will the amendments affect access to existing or future recreational facilities. Further, the amendments do not change the Metro Plan and TranPlan policies that support access to recreational facilities with the Metropolitan area and to recreations opportunities outside the area or delete any planned transportation projects that would make recreational facilities more available. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Goal 8. GOAL 9 - ECONOMY OF THE STATE: To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon’s citizens. The amendments will not impact the supply of industrial or commercial lands and will not change or conflict with the economic policies of Metro Plan. The amendments do not change the TransPlan and Metro Plan policies directed toward enhancing the economic opportunity available within the Eugene- Springfield area by assuring adequate public facilities and infrastructure to provide a transportation system that is efficient, safe, interconnected and economically viable and fiscally stable. Additionally, the amendments do not change the TransPlan and Metro Plan policies related to the movement of goods; those policies adopted to further the goal of using the public facilities infrastructure to support responsible economic development. The Oregon Transportation Plan recognizes that goods movement of all types makes a significant contribution to the region’s economy and wealth and contributes to residents’ quality of life. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Goal 9. GOAL 10 – HOUSING: To provide for the housing needs of the citizens of the state. The amendments will not impact the supply or residential lands and will not result in any change or conflict with the housing policies of the Metro Plan. Additionally, the amendments will not change any of the policies in TransPlan and the Metro Plan related to nodal development and transit-supportive land use patterns and development; those policies adopted to expand housing opportunities for the region’s citizens. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Goal 10. 4 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 Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area has an acknowledged Public Facilities and Services Plan (PFSP). The amendments will not result in any change or conflict with the PFSP. GOAL 12 – TRANSPORTATION: To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. Goal 12 is implemented through the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule OAR 660-012-0000, et seq. The proposed amendments are consistent with all applicable provisions of OAR 660-012-0016. Further, the amendments are consistent with, and required by, the Regional Transportation Work Plan approved pursuant to OAR 660-012-0016(2)(b) by the Land Conservation and Development Commission on October 16, 2008. The TPR states that when amendments to a functional plan would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility the local government shall put in place measures to assure that the allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity and performance standards (level of service, volume to capacity ratio, etc.) of the facility. Adoption of the amendments will not significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Goal 12. GOAL 13 - ENERGY CONSERVATION: To conserve energy. The Energy Goal is a general planning goal that calls for land and uses developed on the land to be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles. The proposed amendments will not change the Metro Plan or TransPlan provisions related to promoting more compact development, encouraging the use of alternate modes of transportation and providing a transportation system design to increase the efficiency of travel wherever possible. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Goal 13. GOAL 14 – URBANIZATION: To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use. The amendments will not change the TransPlan and Metro Plan provisions adopted to preserve the distinction between urban and rural uses through the development of policies and programs that provide for more efficient urban uses within the UGB, thus preserving rural lands for rural uses. Accordingly, the amendments comply with Goal 14. 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 Willamette River Greenway area with the Urban Growth Boundary is governed by existing local provisions that have been acknowledged as complying with Goal 15. Those provisions will be unchanged 5 by the amendments. The amendments will not change TransPlan’s and the Metro Plan’s provisions related to the protection and maintenance of the scenic, historical, economic and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette River. Further, the amendments will not affect TransPlan’s and the Metro Plan’s compliance with Goal 15. Therefore, the amendments comply with Goal 15. GOALS 16-19 – COASTAL GOALS: (Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelines, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean Resources) There are no estuarine resources, shorelines, beaches, dunes, or ocean resources located within the Metro Plan or TransPlan boundary. Accordingly, Goals 16, 17, 18, and 19 are not applicable. Criterion B. Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. TransPlan guides regional transportation system planning and development in the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. The region covered by TransPlan is the “TransPlan Study Area”, which is an area extending beyond the UGB and Metro Plan boundary that is used for transportation modeling purposes. TransPlan includes provisions for meeting the transportation demand of a projected population of 296,500 in the TransPlan Study Area. When TransPlan was updated in 2001, it was anticipated that the TransPlan Study Area’s population would reach 296,500 in 2015. It is now anticipated that the TransPlan Study Area’s population will not reach 296,500 until approximately 2024. Since the transportation modeling for the TransPlan Study Area was based on a projected population of 296,500, TransPlan guides regional and transportation system planning and development in the Transportation Study Area until 2024. The proposed amendments to the Metro Plan and TransPlan will not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. While the proposed TransPlan amendments necessitate that the text of the Metro Plan’s Transportation Element be amended to ensure internal consistency of the Metro Plan; these needed Metro Plan text amendments are proposed along with the TransPlan amendments. Together, the proposed amendments to the Metro Plan and to TransPlan are consistent with each other and the other provisions of the Metro Plan. Additionally, the amendments are consistent with applicable Metro Plan findings and policies; specific findings and policies being discussed below. B. Economic Element B.18 Encourage the development of transportation facilities which would improve access to industrial and commercial areas and improve freight movement capabilities by implementing the policies and projects in the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan) and the Eugene Airport Master Plan. The amendments to TransPlan’s project lists, which delete transportation projects that have been constructed, demonstrate consistency with Policy B.18. Specifically, the deletions from TransPlan’s project lists identify the following transportations projects as having been completed: Jasper Road Extension, Project No. 66 (Construct 4-lane arterial); Pioneer Parkway Extension, Project No. 768 (Construct 4-5 lane minor arterial); Beltline Highway, Project No. 409 (Widening to 4 lanes, construction of Roosevelt extension). F. Transportation Element 6 F.4 Require improvements that encourage transit, bicycles, and pedestrians in new commercial, public, mixed use, and multi-unit residential development. The amendments to TransPlan’s project lists, which delete transportation projects that have been constructed, demonstrate consistency with Policy F.4. Specifically, the deletions from TransPlan’s project lists identify the following transit, pedestrian and bicycle projects as having been completed: Expansion of Glenwood [Bus] Operating Base, Project 1320 (expansion of existing operation and maintenance); Autzen Stadium, Project No. 1140 (construction of transfer station and park-and-ride lot); LCC Station Expansion, Project No. 1125 (expansion of LCC station); 11th and Beltline Station, Project No. 1340 (construction of transfer station); Gateway and Beltline Station, Project No. 1350 (construction of transfer station); Springfield Station, Project No. 1355 (construction of new transit station); 42nd Street Pathway, Project No. 795 (multi-use path); East Bank Trail, Project No. 641 (multi-use path); Fern Ridge Path #2, Project No. 423 (multi-use path); Garden Way/Knickerbocker Bridge Connector, Project No. 660 (multi-use path); Oakway Road to Coburg Road, Project No. 678 (route, multi-use path). F.9 Adopt by reference, as part of the Metro Plan, the 20-Year Capital Investment Actions project lists contained in TransPlan. Project timing and estimated costs are not adopted as policy. The proposed amendments to the project lists contained in TransPlan will be adopted by reference into the Metro Plan, demonstrating consistency with this policy. F.18 Improve transit service and facilities to increase the system’s accessibility, attractiveness, and convenience for all users, include the transportation disadvantaged population. The amendments to TransPlan’s project lists, which delete transportation projects that have been constructed, demonstrate consistency with Policy F.18. Specifically, the deletions from TransPlan’s project lists identify the following transit projects as having been completed: Expansion of Glenwood Operating Base, Project 1320 (expansion of existing operation and maintenance); Autzen Stadium, Project No. 1140 (construction of transfer station and park-and-ride lot); LCC Station Expansion, Project No. 1125 (expansion of LCC station); 11th and Beltline Station, Project No. 1340 (construction of transfer station); Gateway and Beltline Station, Project No. 1350 (construction of transfer station); Springfield Station, Project No. 1355 (construction of new transit station) F.21 Expand the Park-and-Ride system within the metropolitan area and nearby communities. The amendments to TransPlan’s project lists, which delete transportation projects that have been constructed, demonstrate consistency with Policy F.21. Specifically, the deletions from TransPlan’s project lists identify the following park-and-ride project as having been completed: Autzen Stadium, Project No. 1140 (construction of transfer station and park-and-ride lot). F.22 Construct and improve the region’s bikeway system and provide bicycle system support facilities for both new development and redevelopment/expansion. The amendments to TransPlan’s project lists, which delete transportation projects that have been constructed, demonstrate consistency with Policy F.22. Specifically, the deletions from TransPlan’s project lists identify the following bicycle projects as having been completed: 42nd Street Pathway, Project No. 795 (multi-use path); East Bank Trail, Project No. 641 (multi-use path); Fern Ridge Path #2, 7 Project No. 423 (multi-use path); Garden Way/Knickerbocker Bridge Connector, Project No. 660 (multi- use path); Oakway Road to Coburg Road, Project No. 678 (route, multi-use path). F.26 Provide for a pedestrian environment that is well integrated with adjacent land uses and is designed to enhance the safety, comfort, and convenience of walking. The amendments to TransPlan’s project lists, which delete transportation projects that have been constructed, demonstrate consistency with Policy F.26. Specifically, the deletions from TransPlan’s project lists identify the following pedestrian and bicycle projects as having been completed: 42nd Street Pathway, Project No. 795 (multi-use path); East Bank Trail, Project No. 641 (multi-use path); Fern Ridge Path #2, Project No. 423 (multi-use path); Garden Way/Knickerbocker Bridge Connector, Project No. 660 (multi-use path); Oakway Road to Coburg Road, Project No. 678 (route, multi-use path). F.27 Provide for a continuous pedestrian network with reasonably direct travel routes between destination points. The amendments to TransPlan’s project lists, which delete transportation projects that have been constructed, demonstrate consistency with Policy F.27. Specifically, the deletions from TransPlan’s project lists identify the following pedestrian projects as having been completed: 42nd Street Pathway, Project No. 795 (multi-use path); East Bank Trail, Project No. 641 (multi-use path); Fern Ridge Path #2, Project No. 423 (multi-use path); Garden Way/Knickerbocker Bridge Connector, Project No. 660 (multi- use path); Oakway Road to Coburg Road, Project No. 678 (route, multi-use path). CONCLUSION The proposed amendments meet all applicable standards and criteria in the Eugene Land Us Code OR Springfield Development Code OR Lane County Code. The proposed amendments are consistent with the applicable Metro Plan policies as discussed in these findings. 8 00223443.DOC;1 00223286.DOC;1 9  ATTACHMENT F Regional Transportation Work Plan 4th QUARTER 2008 Transportation Work Plan ƒ October 1: Submit draft to LCDC ƒ October 16: LCDC Meeting Post-Acknowledgement Plan Amendment (PAPA) ƒ Finalize schedule and responsible parties for initiation/participation/co-adoption, including: o Remove completed projects o Remove West Eugene Parkway o Move ODOT projects from Illustrative to Financially Constrained list for consistency with RTP o Adjust plan horizon Regional Transportation System Plan (RTSP) ƒ Continue RTSP framework discussion ƒ Create definition of regional system ƒ Agree on geographic boundary ƒ Determine relationship to or method of incorporation within other plans Public Involvement ƒ Develop multi-agency public involvement plan ƒ Determine public outreach components ƒ Identify public outreach schedule relative to work schedule 1ST QUARTER 2009 PAPA Adoption(s) ƒ Appropriate jurisdictions to amend TransPlan to achieve RTP- TSP consistency o Remove completed projects o Remove West Eugene Parkway o Move ODOT projects from Illustrative to Financially Constrained list for consistency with November 2007 RTP project list o Adjust plan horizon Performance Measures ƒ Assess existing performance measures in TransPlan ƒ Estimate Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT)/capita for 2004, 2015 and 2031 ƒ Confirm vehicle trip reduction requirements and determine relationship between RTSP and TSPs in meeting the requirements ƒ Undertake additional performance measure assessment and reporting at city level  ƒ Complete reporting on TransPlan benchmarks for 2005, including qualitative discussion about nodal implementation 2nd QUARTER 2009 Performance Measures ƒ Begin development of Performance Measure position paper ƒ Identify potential additional actions/procedures for successful performance measure implementation 3rd QUARTER 2009 Regional Transportation System Plan (RTSP) ƒ Draft RTSP structural and policy framework based upon elected official discussions and public input ƒ Begin developing RTSP policy language Public Involvement ƒ Publish transportation work outcomes to date for public comment as appropriate ƒ Seek public comment on regional transportation framework 4th QUARTER 2009 Performance Measures ƒ Consider and develop adjustments to performance and/or implementation measures to achieve benchmarks ƒ Consider modified benchmarks and performance measures for the extended planning period 1ST QUARTER 2010 THROUGH 3RD QUARTER 2011 [Regional transportation planning progressing in coordination with long-range land use planning efforts] 4TH QUARTER 2011 Regional Transportation System Plan (RTSP) ƒ Policy develop based upon multi-jurisdictional elected official direction ƒ Components drafted for public comment ƒ Public outreach on RTSP framework 2013 Regional Transportation System Plan (RTSP) ƒ Take Action to meet RTSP requirements including multi- jurisdictional co-adoption actions ƒ Take action as necessary to eliminate TransPlan, including multi- jurisdictional co-adoption plans