Planning Commission

AGENDA EUGENE PLANNING COMMISSION Bascom‐Tykeson Room—Eugene Public Library Phone: 541‐682‐5481 100 W. 10th Avenue www.eugene‐or.gov/pc Eugene, OR 97401 The Eugene Planning Commission 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 prior to the meeting. Spanish‐language interpretation will also be provided with 48 hours notice. To arrange for these services, contact the Planning Division at 541‐682‐5675. MONDAY, OCTOBER 22, 2012 – REGULAR MEETING (11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.) 11:30 a.m. I. PUBLIC COMMENT The Planning Commission reserves 10 minutes at the beginning of this meeting for public comment. The public may comment on any matter, except for items scheduled for public hearing or pub lic hearing items for which the record has already closed. Generally, the time limit for public comment is three minutes; however, the Planning Commission reserves the option to reduce the time allowed each speaker based on the number of people requesting to speak. 11:40 a.m. II. RESIDENTIAL RE‐DESIGNATION IN THE CROW ROAD AREA Staff: Heather O’Donnell, 541‐682‐5488 12:20 p.m. III. WORK SESSION: LANE LIVABILITY CONSORTIUM Staff: Stephanie Jennings, 541‐682‐5529 1:00 p.m. IV. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION AND STAFF A. Other Items from Staff B. Other Items from Commission: TCRG Update C. Learning: How are we doing? Commissioners: Steven Baker; Jonathan Belcher; Rick Duncan; Randy Hledik, Chair; John Jaworski; Jeffery Mills; William Randall, Vice Chair PC AIS October 22, 2012 - Page 1 PC AIS October 22, 2012 - Page 2  AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY October 22, 2012 To: Eugene Planning Commission From: Heather O’Donnell, City of Eugene Planning Division Subject: Envision Eugene Implementation: Residential Re‐designation‐ Crow Road Study Area ISSUE STATEMENT This work session is an opportunity to provide an update to the Planning Commission on potential re‐ designation of property in the Crow Road Study Area. BACKGROUND Two primary goals of the Envision Eugene project are to: 1) determine how Eugene will accommodate the next 20 years of growth in our community, as required by state law, and 2) create a future that is livable, sustainable, beautiful and prosperous. The City Manager’s March 2012 Envision Eugene recommendation includes several strategies and actions to implement the Envision Eugene vision. One of the strategies is to re‐designate some areas that are currently planned for Medium Density Residential (typically apartments) but are more suitable to Low Density Residential (typically single‐family housing). Areas re‐designated to Low Density Residential reduce the amount of urban growth boundary expansion needed for single‐family housing. The Crow Road Study Area is the largest re‐designation opportunity identified, at approximately 270 acres. It is a mostly undeveloped area located on the edge of town, with a pastoral character, and a variety of development constraints such as wetlands, slopes and transportation capacity. The goal of a new land use concept plan for the area is to accommodate a portion of our single family land need, while also creating a complete neighborhood and carrying forward key neighborhood qualities in future development. Additional planning with Crow Road area property owners, residents and service providers is occurring to determine appropriate locations for not only single and multi‐family housing, but also streets, bicycle/pedestrian connections, parks, utilities, and commercial uses. As a result of planning efforts to date, a draft concept plan dated 9/27/12 has been developed (Attachment A). It incorporates feedback from several sources including property owners, residents, city staff, design professionals, and service providers. The following steps have been taken: • Initial Gauging of Property Owner Interest o June 2011 property owner letter & phone calls o January 2012 property owner meeting • Developing a Land Use Concept PC AIS October 22, 2012 - Page 3  o July 2012 property owner/resident letter & questionnaire o City and service providers site visit, develop several draft concept options o Feasibility testing of concepts with design professionals o September 27, 2012 workshop on Draft Concept o October 3, 2012 property owner/resident letter & questionnaire on Draft Concept The Draft Concept is the first draft of a land use concept for the area. The accompanying questionnaire asks for feedback on not only the potential land use locations but also how development might look in the future‐ what are the key neighborhood qualities that would help this area maintain a country/edge‐of‐town feel as it develops in the future? More information about this strategy is on‐line at www.envisioneugene.org (click on Implementation Projects and Residential Re‐designation.) NEXT STEPS Responses to the Crow Road Area Draft Concept questionnaire from study area property owners and residents are due by October 15, 2012. These responses will be incorporated into a revised draft concept for further public review. Once an appropriate draft concept is identified, the tools to implement it will need to be developed (such as new policies, code amendments or plan/zone changes). ATTACHMENTS A. Crow Road Study Area Draft Concept 9/27/12 and questionnaire FOR MORE INFORMATION Contact Heather O’Donnell at 541‐682‐5488 or at heather.m.odonnell@ci.eugene.or.us PC AIS October 22, 2012 - Page 4  Attachment A Comments on Crow Road Area “Draft Concept” – How do you envision future development here? Please answer the questions below and/or mark‐up the DRAFT Concept Plan on the other side of this sheet by Oct. 15th. The goal of the concept plan is for future development to be mostly l ow density housing, with some medium density housing, which incorporates key neighborhood character features into the development. Additional roads and bicycle/pedestrian paths, parks (subject to willing property sellers), open space and other uses (such as neighborhood commercial) are also needed to make a complete neighborhood. DRAFT CONCEPT PLAN. Do you think the locations on the Draft Concept Plan for the following uses are appropriate? If not, indicate desired changes. Low Density Residential with Single‐family Options (typically single‐family homes but with more small or clustered housing allowed for agricultural or view preservation): _______________ ______________________ ________________________________________________ _______________ ______________________ ________________________________________________ Medium Density Residential (typically smaller scale apartments): _______________ ______________________ ________________________________________________ _______________ ______________________ ________________________________________________ Commercial (typically retail or a mixture of residential and retail): _______________ ______________________ ________________________________________________ _______________ ______________________ ________________________________________________ Cottage Enterprise (more home businesses allowed): _______________ ______________________ ________________________________________________ _______________ ______________________ ________________________________________________ The main road and bicycle/pedestrian network: _______________ ______________________ ________________________________________________ _______________ ______________________ ________________________________________________ Parks, stream side pathways, and tree protection: _______________ ______________________ ________________________________________________ _______________ ______________________ ________________________________________________ NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER. Do you think these are the key neighborhood character features to b uild into future development here? If not, indicate desired features. Building Features‐ porches, garages behind the front of the house: _______________ ______________________ _________________________________________________ Street Design‐ less city and more country feel with better pedestrian & bicycle access: _______________ ______________________ _________________________________________________ Development site layout‐ clustered homes to preserve views or agricultural use, large lots to preserve natural areas, open space, etc.: _______________ ______________________ __________________________________________________ Allowable Uses: allow more home businesses, allow more types of farm animals: _______________ ______________________ __________________________________________________ YOUR PROPERTY. Please mark your property on the map and tell us any thoughts you have about future development of your property. Do you live in the study area boundary? Yes No _____________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____________________________________ __________________________________________________ _____________________________________ __________________________________________________ YOUR CONTACT INFORMATION. Your e‐mail address is preferable for project updates and meetings. _______________ ______________________ __________________________________________________ Thank you for your comments! Please send your comments to Heather O’Donnell, 99 W. 10th Avenue, Eugene, OR, PC AIS October 22, 2012 - Page 5 97401 or e‐mail to heather.m.odonnell@ci.eugene.or.us by October 15, 2012 September 27, 2012 PC AIS October 22, 2012 - Page 6  Connect to Amazon Creek Trail Protected Commercial Wetlands Area Remove Connection Medium Natural Density Area Park Residential Expanded Creek Corridor & Trail Tree/View Key Neighbor- Preservation Commercial hood Area Medium Density Park Residential DRAFT Low Density Residential with Single Family Options Cottage Enterprise Potential Parks & Trail Corridors Existing Protected Wetlands Tree Protection (Tree removal in other locations requires replacement except in tree farms) Existing Streets Potential Backbone Street Network (not all local streets) Potential Trails/Ped & Bike Access Connect to Stream Connect to Ridgeline UGB Ridgeline Corridor & Study Area Corridor & Trail 500 + Elevation DRAFT Concept 9/27/12 Trail PC AIS October 22, 2012 - Page 7 (Contributions to this concept by Rowell Brokaw Architects and Schimer & Satre Group) PC AIS October 22, 2012 - Page 8  DATE: October 15, 2012 TO: City of Eugene Planning Commission CC: Carolyn Burke Sarah Medary FROM: Stephanie Jennings, Project Manager, Lane Livability Consortium RE: Lane Livability Consortium Background and Activities The Lane Livability Consortium is a collaborative effort of eleven agencies serving the Eugene‐ Springfield metropolitan area to advance community growth and prosperity. The primary focus of the Consortium is to identify opportunities for greater impacts and linkages among our region’s core plans including land use, transportation, housing, and economic development plans and investment strategies. Other elements include work on public engagement, regional investments, organizational capacity building, and identification of catalytic projects. The Consortium’s efforts are funded through the HUD Susta inable Communities Regional Planning Grant program and through leveraged resources contributed by local partner agencies. The attached document provides an overview of the Lane Livability Consortium activities for information purposes. Commissioners will have an opportunity to discuss and comment on Consortium activities following a staff presentation. PC AIS October 22, 2012 - Page 9 PC AIS October 22, 2012 - Page 10 The Lane Livability Consortium is a collaborative effort of eleven agencies serving the Eugene- Springfield metropolitan area to advance community growth and prosperity. The primary focus of the Consortium is to identify opportunities for greater impacts and linkages among our region’s core plans including land use, transportation, housing, and economic development plans and investment strategies. Other elements include work on public engagement, regional investments, organizational capacity building, and identification of catalytic projects. The Consortium’s efforts are funded through the HUD Sustainable Communities Regional Planning Grant program and through leveraged resources contributed by local partner agencies. Work through the Consortium commenced in 2011 and will conclude in 2014. Partner agencies include City of Eugene, City of Springfield, Lane County, Eugene Water and Electric Board, Housing and Community Services Agency of Lane County, Lane Council of Governments, Central Lane Metropolitan Planning Organization, Lane Transit District, Oregon Department of Transportation, St. Vincent de Paul Society of Lane County, and University of Oregon Sustainable Cities Initiative and Community Planning Workshop. Other agencies are engaged in specific tasks or may join the Consortium in the future. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Plan and other related plans have been developed in accordance with Oregon’s 19 Statewide Planning Goals. These goals embody the state’s approach to issues ranging from Citizen Involvement, Agricultural and Forest Lands, and Natural Resources to Economic Development, Energy Conservation, Housing, and Transportation. While the Metro Plan provides and overall framework for growth and development, there are a multitude of additional plans addressing specific issues or geographic areas. Some plans have been developed in response to local initiatives or in response to federal requirements. There are many opportunities to better connect and leverage the goals and strategies embodied in these plans. Activities of the Consortium As all the participating agencies examine growth and public investment options, the Consortium will provide a regional forum for discussions regarding issues and challenges that are common to the region and are best addressed with a collaborative problem-solving model. Effectively engaging a diverse set of regional stakeholders will be the core component of our work. It will lead to new relationships within and between the partner agencies, new metrics for examining and establishing planning priorities and work plans, and will identify current gaps in how we are creating linkages among our current regional plans. This body of work will be presented to the local elected officials as they evolve the Metro Plan through their existing timeframes, and will also be applied uniquely within each organization as they seek future funding for projects identified and supported through the work of the Consortium. Lane Livability Consortium – December 8, 2011 PC AIS October 22, 2012 - Page 11 1 Sustainability Baseline Assessment - The UO Sustainable Cities Initiative will lead the Consortium effort to produce a two-part Sustainability Baseline Assessment with one component focusing on public engagement strategies and one on existing plans. This will allow the region to identify strengths, gaps and barriers in our existing sustainability efforts, and to develop new opportunities to engage traditionally underrepresented communities. Scenario Planning - The Consortium will support the Central Lane Metropolitan Planning Organization and partner agencies in developing a regional approach to scenario planning that aligns with local and state priorities. This work will include significant data and modeling development, research of equity considerations related to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and the development of scenario planning methodology, strategies, and decision-making models. Smart Communities: Closing the Gaps - The Consortium will develop new strategies and new models for more integrated planning and decision-making, especially related to the focus areas of housing, transportation, and economic development. This work will build on the recommendations from the Sustainability Baseline Assessments and will include the development of a triple bottom line analysis tool and accompanying resources, as well as recommendations for new strategies related to climate change, public health, and social equity, and a comprehensive set of practices, planning processes, and decision-making tools that the partner jurisdictions can use to orchestrate changes in their respective policies and protocols. This will ensure that community members have the skills, resources and assurances needed to develop plans and programs that address economic, environmental and social problems and opportunities and direct investments that are supportive of the community’s vision. Moving Plans to Actions - The Consortium, in collaboration with the UO Sustainable Cities Initiative, will lead the effort to develop a Regional Investment Strategy that will better link key housing, transportation, economic development and other infrastructure investments. This work includes cataloguing and evaluating planned capital investments and available funding sources to develop draft and final Implementation and Financing Plans and refining the Triple Bottom Line Analysis Tools to consider how best to equitably distribute infrastructure, amenities and services, ensure that public revenue sources are economically sustainable, promote equity, foster healthy ecosystems and create communities of opportunity. These new investment strategies, processes and tools will be put into action with the development of a concept plan and preliminary budget for a catalytic capital project in the Franklin Corridor, an area where the three general purpose governments independent planning responsibilities have common boundaries and connections, as well as a set of smaller projects based on the opportunities identified in the Regional Investment Strategy. These projects will require significant agency collaboration and stakeholder involvement, and will include detailed project scoping, preliminary project review and analysis, Triple Bottom Line Assessment, as well as development of capital and operating costs estimates and identification of preliminary funding sources. Implementation agreements will be secured to implement the projects. Lane Livability Consortium – December 8, 2011 PC AIS October 22, 2012 - Page 12 2