Planning Commission

AGENDA Meeting Location: Sloat Room, Atrium Building Phone: 541-682-5481 99 West 10th Avenue www.eugene-or.gov/pc Eugene, Oregon 97401 The Eugene Planning Commission welcomes your interest in this agenda item. Feel free to come and go as you please at the meeting. 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 Department at 541-682-5675. TUESDAY, APRIL 11, 2017 – 6:00 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING/POSSIBLE ACTION: SANTA CLARA STATION REFINEMENT PLAN AMENDMENT (RA 16-1) To hold a public hearing and possibly deliberate on a proposed site-specific text amendment to the River Road-Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan to allow for a transit station on property located on the east side of River Road, north of Green Lane and south of Hunsaker Lane. Lead City Staff: Erik Berg-Johansen, 541-682-5437 erik.berg@ci.eugene.or.us PUBLIC HEARING/POSSIBLE ACTION: INDUSTRIAL CORRIDOR LAND USE CODE AMENDMENT (CA 17-2) To hold a public hearing and possibly deliberate on a proposed ordinance for a land use code amendment initiated by the City Council, intended to help facilitate economic development opportunities within an area known as the “Industrial Corridor” in northwest Eugene. Lead City Staff: Gabe Flock, 541-682-5697 gabriel.flock@ci.eugene.or.us Public Hearing Format: The Planning Commission will receive a brief presentation from staff, followed by an opportunity for public comment. Time limits on testimony may be imposed, and the Planning Commission may seek a response to testimony from City staff. At the end of the hearing, the Planning Commission Chair will announce whether the record is closed, the record will be held open, or the public hearing will be continued. Commissioners: Steven Baker; John Barofsky (Vice Chair); John Jaworski; Jeffrey Mills; Brianna Nicolello; William Randall; Kristen Taylor (Chair)  AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 11, 2017 To: City of Eugene Planning Commission From: Erik Berg-Johansen, Associate Planner, City of Eugene Planning Division Subject: Public Hearing and Possible Action for the Santa Clara Station Refinement Plan Amendment (City File #: RA 16-1) ACTION REQUESTED To hold a public hearing and possibly deliberate on a proposed site-specific text amendment to the River Road-Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan to allow for a transit station on property located on the east side of River Road, north of Green Lane and south of Hunsaker Lane (see the vicinity map included as Attachment A). BRIEFING STATEMENT Background This site-specific text amendment to the River Road-Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan has been initiated by the Lane Transit District (LTD) as the current property owner, to facilitate the development of a transit station on the subject site, which is zoned Community Commercial (C-2) with Site Review (/SR) and Planned Unit Development (/PD) overlays. One tax lot at the southwestern end of the site is zoned C-1 Neighborhood Commercial. The site consists of eleven (11) tax lots covering approximately 7.8 acres, and is located in the Santa Clara Community Organization neighborhood. The subject property is the site of the former Santa Clara Elementary School, which was de- commissioned and sold by the school district in 2006 to a real estate development entity. Since the refinement plan designated the majority of the site for Government & Education uses, and the site was zoned a mix of Public Land, Neighborhood Commercial, and Low-Density Residential, the previous owner proposed land use changes to allow construction of a commercial and residential mixed-use project called “Santa Clara Crossings.” In 2008, a decision was approved changing the Metro Plan and refinement plan designations to Commercial. The zoning was also changed to Community Commercial (C-2) with Planned Unit Development (/PD) and Site Review (/SR) overlays. As part of the approval, an ordinance was adopted on April 14, 2008 (Ordinance # 20407) that amended the River Road-Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan to include additional policies for the “River Road/Division Subarea.” One of these policies is River Road/Division Subarea Policy #6, which reads as follows (emphasis added): Page 1  6. Upon the sale from public ownership to private ownership, the City shall recognize the area of the former Santa Clara Elementary School at the southeast corner of the intersection of River Road and Hunsaker Lane, between Hunsaker Lane and Green Lane (Tax Lots 9100, 9200, 9300 of Assessor's Map 17-04-11-41 and Tax Lots 200, 300, 400 of Assessor's Map 17-04-11-44) as appropriate for Commercial development and designated Commercial. If zoned commercial, it shall be zoned C-2 and it shall be developed as Planned Unit Development in connection with the property described in Recommendation No. 5 with an emphasis on mixed-use development principles. In addition: a. No individual building footprint within the commercial development may exceed 18,000 square feet; and b. Permitted or conditional Commercial services shall not include theaters; lodging; C2 and C3 permitted manufacturing; medical, health and correctional services; motor vehicle related uses; and c. The historic character of the former Santa Clara Elementary School shall be commemorated on site by using architectural features and historic elements typical of the former Santa Clara Elementary School (e.g., brick facades, castings, etc.). Policy #6, cited above, applies to the subject property and was proposed to ensure future development is compatible with the adjacent neighborhood. The policy limits building footprints and height, and prohibits uses such as theaters, hotels, and medical offices that can generate significant traffic and parking demands. The findings that supported the adoption of Policy #6 further address this: “In addition, the proposed text amendments provide significant protections that enhance compatibility of future development with the existing and future residential development including height limitations, area limitations on building size and the provision for the use of the Planned Unit Development procedures” (Ordinance No. 20407 Findings, November 19, 2007, page 25). The policy also prohibits “motor vehicle uses,” which in turn prohibits transit facilities on the subject property1. Common motor vehicle uses, such as mechanic shops, car washes, and car sales lots, were likely banned because they have the potential to generate excessive noise and odors that could impact adjacent residents (however the findings do not address this specifically). These types of uses are also not preferable in a mixed-use neighborhood setting as they do not specifically cater to nearby residents and would be expected to draw customers from outside the Santa Clara neighborhood. A transit center, on the other hand, would have a direct benefit to residents and existing businesses in the immediate neighborhood. Following the approval of changes to the Metro Plan designations, refinement plan and zoning, the applicant acquired Planned Unit Development (PUD) and Site Review approvals in 2009 for the Santa Clara Crossings development. However, due to the economic downturn the project 1 Table 9.2160 (Commercial Zone Land Uses and Permit Requirements) of the Eugene Code lists Transit Stations under “Motor Vehicle Related Uses.” Page 2 was never constructed, and the property has since been acquired by LTD. In addition to a new bus transit station, LTD has plans to facilitate future commercial and residential development on the property through a new PUD application. LTD proposes the following text amendment (in bold) to Policy 6(b) that would allow “transit facilities” on the subject property, but would continue to prohibit all other motor vehicle related uses: “Permitted or conditional Commercial services shall not include theaters; lodging; C2 and C3 permitted manufacturing; medical, health and correctional services; motor vehicle related uses, with the exception of transit facilities;” Purpose of Staff Report To allow community members an opportunity to learn about the proposal and to review the staff analysis, the Eugene Code requires City staff to prepare a written report concerning an application for refinement plan amendment, and make the report available prior to the public hearing (see EC 9.7420). This agenda item summary and the attached findings addressing compliance with the applicable approval criteria constitute the initial staff report on this matter. The staff report provides only preliminary information and recommendations, based on the available information. Process This site-specific refinement plan amendment is subject to the Type IV application process and quasi-judicial procedures (see EC 9.7065 through EC 9.7095). The Planning Commission will consider public testimony and other materials presented at the public hearing before taking action. In this case, the Planning Commission’s action will be a recommendation to the City Council to approve, approve with modifications, or deny the application, based on the approval criteria. The request will be heard before the Eugene City Council in a separate public hearing following Planning Commission action. Application, Referrals and Public Hearing Notice Prior to submittal of the application to the City, the applicant team also convened a neighborhood meeting on December 1, 2016, consistent with Eugene Code requirements. A summary of that meeting, including questions asked by local residents, is included in the application materials. The application was submitted by the property owner (LTD) on December 20, 2016. After the applicant submitted supplemental materials to address incomplete items, the application was deemed complete on February 13, 2017. On March 7, 2017 the City mailed notice of the proposed plan amendment to the Department of Land Conservation and Development, as required by the Eugene Code and state law. Referrals concerning the pending application were sent to Lane Council of Governments, City of Springfield, Lane County, and to City departments. Page 3 Notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was mailed to the applicant, owners and occupants of property within 300 feet of the subject property, and the Santa Clara Community Organization on March 10, 2017. On March 22, 2017, notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was also published in the Register-Guard, in accordance with the Eugene Code. No written testimony has been received up to this point, and any testimony received after the issuance of this report will be provided to the Planning Commission for consideration in making a decision. Public testimony, written or otherwise, may also be presented at the public hearing before the Planning Commission. Applicable Criteria The Planning Commission must address the relevant approval criteria at EC 9.8424 (listed below) in making a recommendation to the City Council. The findings addressing these approval criteria prepared by staff are attached for the Planning Commission’s consideration (see Attachment B). 9.8424 Refinement Plan Amendment Approval Criteria. 1) The refinement plan amendment is consistent with all of the following: a) Statewide planning goals. b) Applicable provisions of the Metro Plan. c) Remaining portions of the refinement plan. 2) The refinement plan amendment addresses one or more of the following: a) An error in the publication of the refinement plan. b) New inventory material which relates to a statewide planning goal. c) New or amended community policies. d) New or amended provisions in a federal law or regulation, state statute, state regulation, statewide planning goal, or state agency land use plan. e) A change of circumstances in a substantial manner that was not anticipated at the time the refinement plan was adopted. STAFF EVALUATION The basis for this request is to facilitate the construction of a new LTD bus station in the southeastern portion of the subject site. The applicant’s written narrative addresses the approval criteria noted above to support the proposed policy text amendment. The attached findings conclude that this request meets the applicable approval criteria, including consistency with Statewide Planning Goals, the Metro Plan, and the remaining portions of the refinement plan, and also that the refinement plan amendment addresses a change in circumstances in a substantial manner not anticipated. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission hold a public hearing and review the public testimony related to the proposed refinement plan text amendment. Following the public Page 4 hearing, the Planning Commission will deliberate on the proposed amendment and provide a recommendation to City Council. In the event the Planning Commission does not finish deliberations or provide a recommendation immediately following the hearing, deliberations will be scheduled for the next available Planning Commission meeting. ATTACHMENTS A number of relevant items are attached to this report. The Planning Commission will also be provided a full set of the application materials and any public testimony for review. These materials are available for review at the Planning Division office and on the City’s land use application website. Copies of these materials can also be provided to the public upon request at a reasonable cost. A. Vicinity Map B. Findings FOR MORE INFORMATION To submit public testimony or for more information, please contact Erik Berg-Johansen, Associate Planner, at 541-682-5437 or erik.berg@ci.eugene.or.us Land use application materials online at: http://pdd.eugene-or.gov/LandUse/SearchApplicationDocuments?file=RA-16-0001 Planning Commission website: www.eugene-or.gov/pc Page 5  Attachment A Vicinity Map SILVER MEADOWS DR DALEWOOD ST Subject Property ^ CAMROSE ST LA ZY AVE QUIET LN LENOX RD EUGENE W MYOAK DR FEDERAL PL RIVE MYOAK DR R RD UGB FEDERAL LN AZALEA DR SALTY WAY IRVING RD DAFFODIL CT HUNSAKER LN BELMONT ST MINT AV SUSAN ST E MCDONALD LN MIMI ST Subject Property JONQUIL AVE GREEN LN RIVE QUINCE ST JASMINE ST R RD SANTA CLARA AVE E LON DALTON DR O AK E QUINC WAY RUBY AVE ´ ST Subject Site Caution: Ft This map is based on imprecise source data, subject to change, 0 500 1000 and for general reference only. Taxlots April 2017 Page 6  Findings Refinement Plan Amendment for Santa Clara Station (City File RA 16-1) Overview The proposal is for a refinement plan text amendment to the River Road-Santa Clara Urban Facilities Plan to enable the construction of a Lane Transit District (LTD) bus station on the subject site. The site is located on the east side of River Road, north of Green Lane and south of Hunsaker Lane. The policy formerly read as follows (emphasis added): 6. Upon the sale from public ownership to private ownership, the City shall recognize the area of the former Santa Clara Elementary School at the southeast corner of the intersection of River Road and Hunsaker Lane, between Hunsaker Lane and Green Lane (Tax Lots 9100, 9200, 9300 of Assessor's Map 17-04-11-41 and Tax Lots 200, 300, 400 of Assessor's Map 17-04-11-44) as appropriate for Commercial development and designated Commercial. If zoned commercial, it shall be zoned C-2 and it shall be developed as Planned Unit Development in connection with the property described in Recommendation No. 5 with an emphasis on mixed-use development principles. In addition: a. No individual building footprint within the commercial development may exceed 18,000 square feet; and b. Permitted or conditional Commercial services shall not include theaters; lodging; C2 and C3 permitted manufacturing; medical, health and correctional services; motor vehicle related uses; and c. The historic character of the former Santa Clara Elementary School shall be commemorated on site by using architectural features and historic elements typical of the former Santa Clara Elementary School (e.g., brick facades, castings, etc.). The following text amendment (in bold) will allow “transit facilities” on the subject property, through a revision to subsection (b): b. Permitted or conditional Commercial services shall not include theaters; lodging; C2 and C3 permitted manufacturing; medical, health and correctional services; motor vehicle related uses, with the exception of transit facilities; Findings Eugene Code (EC) Section 9.8424 requires that the following approval criteria (in bold italics) be applied to Refinement Plan amendments: 9.8424 Refinement Plan Amendment Approval Criteria. 1) The refinement plan amendment is consistent with all of the following: a) Statewide planning goals. Page 7 Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement. To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. The City of Eugene land use code implements Statewide Planning Goal 1 by requiring that notice of the amendment be given and public hearings be held prior to adoption. Consideration of the amendments began with a City of Eugene Planning Commission public hearing on April 11, 2017. On March 10, 2017, notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was mailed to the applicant, owners and occupants of property within 300 feet of the subject property, and the Santa Clara Community Organization. On March 22, 2017, notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was published in the Register-Guard, consistent with Eugene Code requirements. The applicant also facilitated a neighborhood-applicant meeting which was noticed to the affected neighborhood association and residents/property owners within 300 feet of the subject property. Following action by the Planning Commission, the Eugene City Council will hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider approval, modification, or denial of the refinement plan text amendment. In summary, the City has acknowledged provisions for citizen involvement which ensure the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. The process for adopting this amendment complies with Statewide Planning Goal 1 since it complies with the requirements of the State’s citizen involvement provisions. Goal 2 - Land Use Planning. To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decisions and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual basis for such decisions and actions. The Eugene land use code specifies the procedure and criteria that were used in considering this amendment, and the record shows that there is an adequate factual base for the amendment. The Goal 2 coordination requirement is met when the City engages in an exchange, or invites such an exchange, between the City and any affected governmental unit and when the City uses the information obtained in the exchange to balance the needs of its residents. To comply with the Goal 2 coordination requirement, the City engaged in an exchange about the subject of this plan amendment with all of the affected governmental units. Specifically, the City provided notice of the proposed action and opportunity to comment to Lane County, Lane Council of Governments, City of Springfield, and Department of Land Conservation and Development. There are no exceptions to Statewide Planning Goal 2 required for this amendment. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2. Goal 3 - Agricultural Lands. To preserve agricultural lands. The amendment is for property located within the urban growth boundary and does not affect any land designated for agricultural use. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 3 does not apply. Goal 4 - Forest Lands. To conserve forest lands. Page 8 The amendment is for property located within the urban growth boundary and does not affect any land designated for forest use. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 4 does not apply. Goal 5 - Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources. To conserve open space and protect natural and scenic resources. The OAR 660-023-0250(3) provides that “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 amendment does not impact or amend the City’s list of Goal 5 resources, does not amend a code provision adopted in order to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address specific requirements of Goal 5, does not allow new uses that could be conflicting uses with a significant Goal 5 resource site, and does not amend the acknowledged urban growth boundary. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 5 does not apply. Goal 6 - Air, Water and land Resource Quality. To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state. Goal 6 addresses waste and process discharges from development, and is aimed at protecting air, water, and land from discharge impacts. The text amendment does not affect the City’s ability to provide for clean air, water, or land resources. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 6 does not apply. Goal 7 - Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards. To protect life and property from natural disasters and hazards. Goal 7 requires that local government planning programs include provisions to protect people and property from the following natural hazards: floods, landslides, earthquakes and related hazards, tsunamis, coastal erosion and wildfires. The Goal prohibits development in natural hazard areas without appropriate safeguards. The subject property is not located within known areas of natural disasters or hazards, it is outside the flood zone, and is not subject to hazards normally associated with wildfires or tsunamis. Other hazards can be mitigated at the time of development based on building codes and building techniques. Since the text amendment does not affect the City’s restrictions on development in areas subject to natural disasters and hazards, Statewide Planning Goal 7 does not apply. Goal 8 - Recreational Needs. To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors, and where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts. Page 9 Goal 8 ensures the provision of recreational facilities to Oregon citizens and is primarily concerned with the provision of those facilities in non-urban areas of the State. Goal 8 also allows, but does not require, the City to create an inventory of recreational needs. This text amendment does not impact the City’s ability to provide parks and recreational services to future residents. The applicant also notes the following in their written findings: “Past communication from Eugene Parks and Open Space (POS) staff indicate that the City considered acquiring the portion of the site that was the former Santa Clara Elementary School site when it was put up for sale. Based on a variety of factors, POS staff stated that the site was not well-suited for park use.” To the extent Statewide Planning Goal 8 applies, the amendment is consistent with the goal. Goal 9 - Economic Development. To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon’s citizens. Goal 9 requires cities to evaluate the supply and demand of commercial and industrial land relative to community economic objectives. The Administrative Rule for Statewide Planning Goal 9 (OAR 660 Division 9) requires that the City “[p]rovide for at least an adequate supply of sites of suitable sizes, types, location, and service levels for a variety of industrial and commercial uses consistent with plan policies[.]” The subject property is planned and zoned for commercial use, and the amendment does not seek to change the property's commercial designation. Therefore, this amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 9. Goal 10 - Housing. Goal 10 requires that communities plan for and maintain an inventory of buildable residential land for needed housing units. Since the amendment is a text change to allow a certain use on a specific site that is commercially designated and zoned, and not an amendment that impacts the City’s land use designations, the proposal is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 10. Goal 11- Public Facilities and Services. To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. The amendment does not affect the City’s provision of public facilities and services. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 11 does not apply. However, it is worth noting that all necessary public services exist or are readily available in close proximity to the subject site. Goal 12- Transportation. To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. The Transportation Planning Rule (OAR 660-012-0060) contains the following requirement: (1) If an amendment to 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. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it Page 10  would: (a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan); (b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or (c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment. (A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; (B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or (C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan. Goal 12 requires a determination of whether the proposed Post Acknowledgment Plan Amendment (PAPA) will significantly impact an existing or planned transportation facility. The applicant prepared a project trip generation study from an assumed ‘worst case development’ scenario to quantify the impacts of the proposed text amendment to allow transportation facilities. The analysis for the PAPA compared the reasonable worst case scenario under the existing plan designations and zoning to a reasonable worst case scenario under the proposed plan designation and zoning. City staff concurred with the scope of the study, and the analysis is consistent with the agreed upon scope of work. The analysis and technical findings set forth in the applicant’s study showed a decline in the number of PM peak hour trips associated with a development that includes a transit station. Overall, the reasonable worst case scenario analysis found the existing zoning (C-2) could produce 67 PM peak hour trips. The reasonable worst case scenario with inclusion of a transit station is 49 PM peak hour trips (a reduction of 18 vehicle trips). The applicant’s engineer found that “If the proposed Park and Ride Transit Station use is developed consistent with the specific text amendment that allows the use, it will reduce the intensity of the land use in terms of potential motor vehicle trips generated by the site when compared to the potential for a retail commercial land use developed in place of as the alternate. In summary, the Transportation Planning Rule is satisfied under Goal 12 criteria with the proposed refinement plan amendment since the change in use permission does not represent an increase in potential build-out development level trip generation.” Public Works staff also find the proposed amendment neither changes the functional classification of a transportation facility nor changes the standards implementing a functional classification under subsections (a) or (b). Furthermore, the proposal will not result in any of the impacts listed in subsection (c). The cumulative result of the refinement plan amendment text change is no significant impact to the Page 11 proposed or planned transportation system, and the existing transportation system has adequate capacity to serve the reasonable worst case development scenario (a transit station and commercial development). Based on the above findings, the text amendment to allow transit facilities is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 12. Goal 13 - Energy Conservation. To conserve energy. The amendment does not impact energy conservation. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 13 does not apply. The applicant also finds that “Goal 13 is directed at the development of local energy policies and implementing provisions and does not state requirements with respect to other types of land use decisions. To the extent that Goal 13 could be applied to the proposed amendment, the amendment is consistent with Goal 13. The proposed site is located so that a future development can make efficient use of energy with direct and efficient access. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 13.” Goal 14 - Urbanization. To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use. The amendment does not affect the City’s provisions regarding the transition of land from rural to urban uses. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 14 does not apply. Goal 15 - Willamette River Greenway. To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural, scenic, historical, agricultural, economic and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette River as the Willamette River Greenway. The subject property is not within the Willamette River Greenway and the amendment does not contain any changes that affect the Willamette River Greenway regulations. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 15 does not apply. Goal 16 through 19 - Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean Resources. There are no coastal, ocean, estuarine, or beach and dune resources that would be effected by this amendment. Therefore, these goals are not relevant and the amendments will not affect compliance with Statewide Planning Goals 16 through 19. b) Applicable provisions of the Metro Plan. The amendment is consistent with applicable Metro Plan policies (listed below), does not conflict with Metro Plan policies, and does not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. To the degree that any Metro Plan policies apply, the applicant provides the following analysis: “As this particular refinement plan amendment is text only and includes a very minor modification to allow a transit facility on the property, there are only a few Metro Plan policies that apply. To the degree that any Metro Plan policies might apply, these are as follows: Page 12 Transportation Element Provide for transit-supportive land use patterns and development, including higher intensity, transit-oriented development along major transit corridors and near transit stations; medium- and high-density residential development within ¼ mile of transit stations, major transit corridors, employment centers, and downtown areas; and development and redevelopment in designated areas that are or could be well served by existing or planned transit. (Policy F.3) River Road is a major transit corridor. Approval of the requested refinement plan text amendment will enable transit-supportive and transit-oriented land use and development, including a new transit station, to occur on the site, which is adjacent to River Road. Require improvements that encourage transit, bicycles, and pedestrians in new commercial, public, mixed use, and multi-unit residential development. (Policy F.4) This policy directs the City to require improvements of new development. The City has adopted land use regulations to implement this policy. Those regulations will apply at the time of the site’s development. Approval of the requested refinement plan text amendment will make it possible for the applicant to implement improvements that encourage using transit, bicycling, and pedestrians. Develop or promote intermodal linkages for connectivity and ease of transfer among all transportation modes. (Policy F.11) Allowing transit-related uses to occur on the subject property will promote intermodal linkages, including vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian modes, both on-site and with the immediate neighborhood. Support transportation strategies that enhance neighborhood livability. (Policy F.13) Approving the requested refinement plan text amendment will allow the development of a new transit station to occur on the site. This action will enhance neighborhood livability by providing a new public transit facility located in the Santa Clara neighborhood. Address the mobility and safety needs of motorists, transit users, bicyclists, pedestrians and the needs of emergency vehicles when planning and constructing roadway system improvements. (Policy F.14) As described in TransPlan, the intent of this policy is to support the design and construction of systems and facilities that accommodate multiple modes. Approval of the requested refinement plan text amendment will enable mobility alternatives to be an integral component of future site development. Integral to the proposed transit center, on-site and off-site roadway improvements will be planned, designed and constructed to accommodate vehicles, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes of travel. Improve transit service and facilities to increase the system’s accessibility, attractiveness, and convenience for all users, including the transportation disadvantaged population. (Policy F.18) Page 13 Approving the requested refinement plan text amendment will enable the development of a new transit station on the property. This new station will be designed with current and future buses, station facilities, ridership, and customer needs in mind. Accessibility and convenience, including the needs of those who are transportation disadvantaged, will be improved. Establish a BRT system composed of frequent, fast transit service along major corridors and neighborhood feeder service that connects with the corridor service and with activity centers, if the system is shown to increase transit mode split along BRT corridors, if local governments demonstrate support, and if financing for the system is feasible. (Policy F.19) The new transit station will be designed and constructed with BRT (EmX) needs in mind. Approving the requested refinement plan text amendment will allow for the provision of a BRT-enabled transit station in a neighborhood where one does not otherwise exist. 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. (Policy F.26) Walking to and from the bus is integral to public transit service. Allowing the proposed transit center to occur on the subject property will enable pedestrian facilities to be developed both on-site and across the site, as well as on the adjacent roadway system and nearby sidewalks, crosswalks, and neighboring properties and destinations.” c) Remaining portions of the refinement plan. The application is consistent with the remainder of the River Road Santa-Clara Urban Facilities Plan. The policy text amendment is a site-specific revision that only impacts the subject property, which is identified in Ordinance No. 20407 as “the area of the former Santa Clara Elementary School at the southeast corner of the intersection of River Road and Hunsaker Lane, between Hunsaker Lane and Green Lane.” In other words, the amendment that would allow transit facilities to be built on the subject property does not reach to other properties within the refinement plan area, and would not allow other prohibited motor vehicle related uses, consistent with the intent of the original policy direction. The applicant also finds, “Given that the requested refinement plan amendment is text only, the request does not affect the refinement plan’s land use diagram or any of the subarea land use diagrams. The requested addition to permitted land uses – transit facilities – is normally permitted in the property’s commercial designation. The commercial designation facilitates commercial zoning, which the property is zoned. Transit facilities – i.e., transit park and ride and transit station – are permitted in the commercial zone within the Motor Vehicle Related Uses use category (EC Table 9.2160).” The text amendment is also consistent with the following refinement plan policy: Provide for land uses that conform to Metropolitan Plan goals and policies and that consider the provision of a full range of urban services in an efficient and cost-effective manner. (General Land Use Policies, Policy 3.0) Page 14 In response to this policy the applicant finds that “Public transit (mass transit in the Metro Plan) is an urban service. Metro Plan goals and policies encourage the provision of transit. Approval of this requested refinement plan text amendment will enable mass transit, i.e. an urban service, to be provided in an efficient and cost-effective manner. It will be efficient and cost-effective because the subject property is on a key mass transit corridor (River Road) and cost-effective because the property is owned by the community’s transit service provider – Lane Transit District.” Further, the text amendment to allow transit facilities does not conflict with the remaining policies of Ordinance No. 20407, and the applicant will be required to apply these policies at the time of future development. Based on the findings above, the plan diagram and policy text amendments fulfill the requirements of this criterion. 2) The refinement plan amendment addresses one or more of the following: a) An error in the publication of the refinement plan. b) New inventory material which relates to a statewide planning goal. c) New or amended community policies. d) New or amended provisions in a federal law or regulation, state statute, state regulation, statewide planning goal, or state agency land use plan. e) A change of circumstances in a substantial manner that was not anticipated at the time the refinement plan was adopted. The proposed text amendment does not relate to an error in the refinement plan, new inventory material relating to a statewide planning goal, new/amended community policies, or new/amended federal and state laws, statutes, regulations, planning goals, or land use plans. Therefore, subsections (a) - (d) do not apply to the subject request. Subsection (e) applies because the proposed text amendment is warranted due to a change of circumstances that were not anticipated at the time the refinement plan was adopted. The applicant provides the following findings addressing the change in circumstances: “Regarding EC 9.8424(2)(e), there is a significant change in circumstances since adoption of Ordinance 20407. The property is no longer in private ownership and is now owned by the community’s transit service provider, Lane Transit District. This was not anticipated at the time of the adoption of Ordinance 20407. At that time, the property was in private ownership and the focus was on developing the property as a mixed-use, residential-commercial center. Now, with LTD as the property owner, the focus remains in developing the property as a mixed-use center. While the previous uses were only commercial and residential in nature, LTD aims to provide a third component – a transit station. Clearly the current prohibition regarding motor vehicle related uses, which includes transit facilities, would not enable the new property owner to follow through with their plan.” Based on the findings above, the policy text amendment fulfills the requirements of this criterion. Page 15  AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY April 11, 2017 To: Eugene Planning Commission From: Denny Braud, Planning & Development Department Director Gabe Flock, Senior Planner, City of Eugene Planning Division Subject: Public Hearing and Possible Action for Economic Development in the Industrial Corridor (City File #: CA 17-1) ACTION REQUESTED To hold a public hearing and possibly deliberate on a proposed ordinance for a land use code amendment initiated by the City Council, intended to help facilitate economic development opportunities within an area known as the “Industrial Corridor” in northwest Eugene (see vicinity map included with Attachment A). BRIEFING STATEMENT Background Much of the subject area is currently outside the City limits but within the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB). The lack of certain urban services like sanitary sewer, and the lack of contiguity with City limits, has hindered the ability for a number of properties to annex and pursue development plans in the near term. This is a barrier to our community’s high-priority goal of supporting jobs and economic development on lands already planned for development. If left unaddressed, development proposals and job creation will continue to be constrained in this area. The proposed action is designed to address the issue while making sure City services are adequately and fairly funded. In short, the proposed land use code amendment would require binding annexation agreements, along with enabling extension of sanitary sewer and water service outside the City limits where necessary, as an efficient way to allow industrial development to proceed in the area. For more background information, please refer to the overview memo previously provided by staff on Mach 24, 2017 (see Attachment A). This policy question was posed to the City Council in November of 2016, with unanimous approval to bring the proposal forward for consideration. The draft ordinance and findings in support of the proposed land use code amendment are included as Attachment B. Purpose of Staff Report To allow community members an opportunity to learn about the proposal and to review the staff analysis, the Eugene Code (EC) requires City staff to prepare a written report, and make Page 16 the report available prior to the public hearing (see EC 9.7535). This agenda item summary and the attached findings addressing compliance with the applicable approval criteria constitute the initial staff report on this matter. The staff report provides only preliminary information and recommendations, based on the available information. Process The proposed ordinance and land use code amendment is a legislative action (subject to the Type V application procedures at EC 9.7500-9.7560), and therefore not subject to quasi-judicial procedures. The Planning Commission will consider public testimony and other materials presented at the public hearing before taking action. In this case, the Planning Commission’s action will be a recommendation to the City Council to approve, approve with modifications, or deny the proposal, based on the approval criteria for land use code amendments at EC 9.8065. The request will be heard before the Eugene City Council in a separate public hearing following Planning Commission action. Public Hearing Notice On March 7, 2017 the City mailed notice of the proposed plan amendment to the Department of Land Conservation and Development, as required by the Eugene Code and state law. Notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was also mailed on March 10, 2017 to all City-recognized neighborhood associations, the City of Springfield, Lane County, and to all other community organizations that have submitted written requests for such notifications. On March 22, 2017, notice of the Planning Commission public hearing was also published in the Register-Guard newspaper, in accordance with the Eugene Code. No written testimony has been received up to this point, and any testimony received after the issuance of this report will be provided to the Planning Commission for consideration in making a recommendation. Public testimony, written or otherwise, may also be presented at the public hearing before the Planning Commission. Applicable Criteria The Planning Commission must address the relevant approval criteria at EC 9.8065 (listed below) in making a recommendation to the City Council. The findings addressing these approval criteria prepared by staff are also attached for the Planning Commission’s consideration (see Attachment B). EC 9.8065 Code Amendment Approval Criteria. If the city council elects to act, it may, by ordinance, adopt an amendment to this land use code that: (1) Is consistent with applicable statewide planning goals as adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission. (2) Is consistent with applicable provisions of the Metro Plan and applicable adopted refinement plans. (3) In the case of establishment of a special area zone, is consistent with EC 9.3020 Criteria for Establishment of an S Special Area Zone. Page 17 STAFF EVALUATION The attached findings (see Exhibit B to Attachment B) demonstrate that the proposed land use code amendment meets the applicable approval criteria, including consistency with Statewide Planning Goals, and the Metro Plan. There are no applicable adopted refinement plans for the affected area, and the proposal does not include establishment of a special area zone. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission hold a public hearing and review any public testimony related to the proposed land use code amendment. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission will deliberate on the proposed amendment and provide a recommendation to City Council. In the event the Planning Commission does not finish deliberations or provide a recommendation immediately following the hearing, deliberations will be scheduled for the next available Planning Commission meeting. ATTACHMENTS A number of relevant items are attached to this report. The Planning Commission will also be provided with any written public testimony for review. These materials are also available for review at the Planning Division office and on the City’s land use application website. Copies of these materials can also be provided to the public upon request at a reasonable cost. A. Overview Memo and Vicinity Map B. Draft Ordinance (w/Map and Findings) FOR MORE INFORMATION To submit public testimony or for more information, please contact Gabe Flock, Senior Planner, at 541-682-5697 or gabriel.flock@ci.eugene.or.us Land use application materials online at: http://pdd.eugene-or.gov/LandUse/SearchApplicationDocuments?file=CA-17-0002 Planning Commission website: www.eugene-or.gov/pc Page 18  99 west 10th Avenue Eugene, Oregon 97401 Phone: 541-682-5377 Fax: 541-682-5572 www.eugene-or.gov/planning Memorandum Date: March 24, 2017 To: Eugene Planning Commission From: Denny Braud, Planning & Development Department Director Gabe Flock, Senior Planner, Planning Division Subject: Economic Development in the Industrial Corridor (CA 17-2) ________________________________________________________________________________ Overview The purpose of this memo is to provide a brief update on a proposed ordinance and land use code amendments which are the subject of an upcoming public hearing scheduled for the evening of April 11, 2017. Staff will provide the Planning Commission with a copy of the draft ordinance and findings as part of the packet materials one week in advance of the hearing. The goal of this City Council initiated land use code amendment is to help facilitate economic development opportunities within an area known as the “Industrial Corridor” in northwest Eugene. The area is represented by the Industrial Corridor Community Organization (“ICCO”), which is a non-profit, formally recognized community organization. The ICCO boundary is generally the large triangle of land lying between the Northwest Expressway on the east and the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) on the west (see attached map). Most of the property within the ICCO area is zoned and designated for industrial uses. The ICCO area includes many large parcels, some developed by local legacy industries, some undeveloped, and some under-developed. The ICCO area includes about 1,652 acres, approximately 96% of which is zoned industrial (38% Heavy Industrial/I-3, and 59% Light- Medium Industrial/I-2). Proximity to highways, railroad, and airport make the area highly- conducive to industrial uses. At the same time, there are development challenges associated with current policies and land use code requirements, availability of urban services such as sanitary sewer, and lack of contiguity with City limits for a large portion of the area. Consistent with the goals and objectives of the Metro Plan and Regional Economic Prosperity Plan, encouraging development and redevelopment within the ICCO area has the potential to create highly-desirable manufacturing jobs within local key industries. Most of the area is outside the City limits of Eugene and does not have access to the full range of urban services such as sanitary sewer, stormwater drainage, police, and fire protection. Page 19 Much of the area receives its necessary services through special districts, and may need on-site sewage disposal systems, until such time as individual properties are annexed to the City. In accordance with state and federal laws, as well as the Metro Plan and land use code, properties seeking development on these lands in most cases require connection to the City’s sewer system and provision of other urban services by the City of Eugene. The Metro Plan anticipates that all lands within the UGB will eventually be annexed and served by the City. However, the lack of certain urban services like sanitary sewer, and the lack of contiguity with City limits, has hindered the ability for many properties to annex in the near term. Property outside the City but inside the UGB (as is the majority of the ICCO area) was previously able to annex even if the property was not contiguous to City limits, provided that the Lane County Boundary Commission approved the request. However, with the abolishment of the Boundary Commission by the Legislature in 2008, annexations must now be contiguous to city limits. In addition to making it difficult to develop unless property first annexed, these changes also have the effect of precluding non-contiguous annexations, which in turn prevents the annexation of individual properties in the majority of the ICCO area. These changes occurred prior to the beginning of the recent recession. With development activity picking up again over the last several years, the policy question about whether to allow annexation agreements, rather than immediate annexation, warrants consideration by Council. In several cases, property owners have been unable to proceed with development plans due to lack of contiguity with City limits or the availability of urban services (which means they cannot annex). The alternative of allowing annexation agreements, along with enabling extension of sanitary sewer service outside the City limits, would be an efficient way to allow industrial development to proceed in the area, with a binding agreement to annex in the future when possible. This policy question was posed to the City Council in November of 2016, with a recommendation from the City Manager and unanimous approval by the Council of a motion to schedule a public hearing to allow property in the ICCO area to develop either by annexing or, if non-contiguous, signing an irrevocable consent to annex. The proposed land use code amendment will also create an exception to the requirements for Extra-Territorial Extension of Water or Sewer Service in Chapter 9 of the Eugene Code (see EC 9.8115-9.8121), which is a necessary component to enable development for some properties not already served with water and sewer facilities. Following the public hearing and depending on the testimony received, it may be possible to hold deliberations and make a recommendation on the same night. If not (for example, if the record is held open or commissioners need more time to deliberate), staff will schedule deliberations and action for a subsequent meeting. Attachment Map of Affected ICCO Properties For More Information Please contact Gabe Flock, Senior Planner, by phone at 541-682-5697 or via email at: gabriel.flock@ci.eugene.or.us Page 20  ATTACHMENT A Awbrey Ln Green Hill Rd 99 ∙ ¾ | E Enid Rd Irvington Dr Airport Rd Praire Rd t hw N or es t Ex p Clear Lake Rd r es s Irving Rd wa y R.P.Beltline Rd e Rd ltlin Be P. R. Maxwell Rd Industrial Corridor Barger Dr Eugene Urban Growth Boundary Industrial Corridor Boundary Taxlots 0 0.25 0.5 Miles ¯ Page 21 March 2017  ORDINANCE NO. ________ AN ORDINANCE CONCERNING UTILITY SERVICE TO SUPPORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN THE INDUSTRIAL CORRIDOR COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION AND AMENDING SECTION 9.8117 OF THE EUGENE CODE, 1971. THE CITY OF EUGENE DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Section 9.8117 of the Eugene Code, 1971, is amended to provide as follows: 9.8117 Extra-Territorial Extension of Water or Sewer Service – Applicability. (1) The provisions of EC 9.8115 through 9.8121 apply to applications requesting the extension of water service or sewer service from inside the city limits to serve property located outside of the city limits, except as provided in subsection (2) below. (2) Approval for extra-territorial extension of water or sewer service to property located within the boundary of the Industrial Corridor Community Organization as shown on Map 9.8117 Industrial Corridor, is automatic upon approval of a building or development permit so long as the property owner executes an irrevocable consent to annexation form approved by the city attorney, authorizing the city council to annex the property whenever the annexation is authorized by state law. This subsection (2) shall not apply to property that is eligible for annexation. Section 2. Map 9.8117 Industrial Corridor, depicting the Industrial Corridor Community Organization boundary is adopted as shown on Exhibit A to this Ordinance. Section 3. The findings set forth in Exhibit B to this Ordinance are adopted as findings in support of this Ordinance. Section 4. The City Recorder, at the request of, or with the concurrence of the City Attorney, is authorized to administratively correct any reference errors contained herein or in other provisions of the Eugene Code, 1971, to the provisions added, amended or repealed herein. Section 5. This Ordinance shall take effect pursuant to Section 32 of the Eugene Charter 2002, or on the date of its acknowledgement as provided in ORS 197.625, whichever is later. Page 22 Passed by the City Council this Approved by the Mayor this ___ day of _______________, 2017 ____ day of _______________, 2017 ____________________________ _____________________________ City Recorder Mayor Page 23 ATTACHMENT B EXHIBIT A Page 24  ATTACHMENT B Exhibit B Legislative Findings: Economic Development in the Industrial Corridor (City File CA 17-2) Overview The goal of this City-initiated land use code amendment is to help facilitate economic development opportunities within an area known as the “Industrial Corridor” in northwest Eugene. The area is represented by the Industrial Corridor Community Organization (“ICCO”), which is a non- profit, formally recognized community organization. The ICCO boundary is generally the large triangle of land lying between the Northwest Expressway on the east and the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) on the west (see map included as Exhibit A to the ordinance). Most of the property within the ICCO area is zoned and designated for industrial uses. The ICCO area includes many large parcels, some developed by local legacy industries, some undeveloped, and some under-developed. The ICCO area includes about 1,652 acres, approximately 96% of which is zoned industrial (38% Heavy Industrial/I-3, and 59% Light-Medium Industrial/I-2). Proximity to highways, railroad, and airport make the area highly-conducive to industrial uses. At the same time, there are development challenges associated with current policies and land use code requirements, availability of urban services such as sanitary sewer, and lack of contiguity with City limits for a large portion of the area. Consistent with the goals and objectives of the Metro Plan and Regional Economic Prosperity Plan, encouraging development and redevelopment within the ICCO area has the potential to create highly-desirable manufacturing jobs within local key industries. Most of the area is outside the City limits of Eugene and does not have access to the full range of urban services such as sanitary sewer, stormwater drainage, police, and fire protection. Much of the area receives its necessary services through special districts, and may need on-site sewage disposal systems, until such time as individual properties are annexed to the City. In accordance with state and federal laws, as well as the Metro Plan and land use code, properties seeking development on these lands in most cases require connection to the City’s sewer system and provision of other urban services by the City of Eugene. The Metro Plan anticipates that all lands within the UGB will eventually be annexed and served by the City. However, the lack of certain urban services like sanitary sewer, and the lack of contiguity with City limits, has hindered the ability for many properties to annex in the near term. Property outside the City but inside the UGB (as is the majority of the ICCO area) was previously able to annex even if the property was not contiguous to City limits, provided that the Lane County Boundary Commission approved the request. However, with the abolishment of the Boundary Commission by the Legislature in 2008, annexations must now be contiguous to city limits. In addition to making it difficult to develop unless property first annexed, these changes also have the effect of precluding non-contiguous annexations, which in turn prevents the annexation of individual properties in the majority of the ICCO area. These changes occurred prior to the beginning of the recent recession. With development activity picking up again over the last several years, the policy question about whether to allow annexation agreements, rather than immediate annexation, warrants consideration by Council. In several cases, property owners have been unable to proceed Findings - 1 Page 25  ATTACHMENT B with development plans due to lack of contiguity with City limits or the availability of urban services (which means they cannot annex). The alternative of allowing annexation agreements, along with enabling extension of sanitary sewer services outside the City limits, would be an efficient way to allow industrial development to proceed in the area, with a binding agreement to annex in the future when possible This policy question was posed to the Council in November of 2016, with a recommendation from the City Manager and unanimous approval by the Council of a motion directing the City Manager to schedule a public hearing to allow property in the ICCO area to develop either by annexing or, if non- contiguous, signing an irrevocable consent to annex. To that end, these legislative findings have been prepared in support of an ordinance which includes a land use code amendment and related provisions. The land use code amendment will create an exception to the requirements for Extra-Territorial Extension of Water or Sewer Service in Chapter 9 of the Eugene Code (see EC 9.8115-9.8121), which is a necessary component to enable development for some properties not already served with water and sewer facilities. Findings of Compliance with Applicable Approval Criteria Below are legislative findings addressing the land use code amendment, which is the only aspect of the ordinance subject to the approval criteria for code amendments at EC 9.8065 (listed below in bold, with findings addressing each). EC 9.8065(1): [The amendment] is consistent with applicable statewide planning goals as adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission. Goal 1 - Citizen Involvement. To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. The City has acknowledged provisions for citizen involvement which ensure the opportunity for community members to be involved in all phases of the planning process and set out requirements for such involvement. The amendment does not amend the citizen involvement program. The process for adopting these amendments complies with Goal 1 because it is consistent with the citizen involvement provisions. A Notice of Proposed Amendment was filed with the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development on March 7, 2017. The formal public hearings on the proposal will be duly noticed to all neighborhood organizations, community groups and individuals who have requested notice, as well as to the City of Springfield and Lane County. In addition, notice of the public hearing was published in the Register Guard. Following action by the Eugene Planning Commission (to make a recommendation on the ordinance and code amendment), the Eugene City Council will hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider approval, modification, or denial of the proposal. These processes afford ample opportunity for citizen involvement consistent with Goal 1. Therefore, the code amendment is consistent with the requirements of Statewide Planning Goal 1. Findings - 2 Page 26  ATTACHMENT B Goal 2 - Land Use Planning. To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all decisions and actions related to use of land and to assure an adequate factual basis for such decisions and actions. The Eugene Code (Land Use, Chapter 9) specifies the procedures and criteria that are to be used in considering this code amendment. The record shows that there is an adequate factual basis for the ordinance and code amendment, including findings and evidence demonstrating compliance with all applicable approval criteria. The Goal 2 coordination requirement is met when the City engages in an exchange, or invites such an exchange, between the City and any affected governmental unit and when the City uses the information obtained in the exchange to balance the needs of the citizens. To comply with the Goal 2 coordination requirement, the City will engage in an exchange about the subject of these plan amendments with all of the affected governmental units. Specifically, the City provided notice of the action and opportunity to comment to Lane County, Springfield and the Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Development. There are no exceptions to Statewide Planning Goal 2 required for this code amendment. The code amendment is therefore consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2. Goal 3 - Agricultural Lands. To preserve agricultural lands. The amendment is for property located within the UGB and does not affect any land designated for agricultural use. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 3 does not apply. Goal 4 - Forest Lands. To conserve forest lands. The amendment is for property located within the UGB and does not affect any land designated for forest use. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 4 does not apply. Goal 5 - Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources. To conserve open space and protect natural and scenic resources. OAR 660-023-0250(3) provides: 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 amendment does not create or amend the City’s adopted inventory of Goal 5 resources, does not amend a code provision adopted in order to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address specific requirements of Goal 5. It does not allow new uses that could be conflicting uses with a Findings - 3 Page 27  ATTACHMENT B significant Goal 5 resource site, and does not amend the acknowledged UGB. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 5 does not apply. 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, aimed at protecting air, water and land from impacts from those discharges. To the extent the code amendment will enable extra- territorial extension of sanitary sewer service to some ICCO properties, it will generally reduce the likelihood or need for new on-site sewage disposal systems and thereby reduce the potential for groundwater contamination. It will not change any policies or regulations with regard to Eugene Water and Electric Board’s role as the provider of water service for the City, other than to enable extension of water service for ICCO properties that may not already be connected. The amendment does not otherwise change any of the City’s regulations with regard to stormwater treatment or air quality. The amendment is therefore consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 6, to the extent it might be considered applicable. Goal 7 - Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards. To protect life and property from natural disasters and hazards. Goal 7 requires that local government planning programs include provisions to protect people and property from natural hazards such as floods, landslides, earthquakes and related hazards, tsunamis and wildfires. The goal prohibits a development in natural hazard areas without appropriate safeguards. The amendment does not directly affect the City’s existing regulatory restrictions or other adopted plan provisions for development in areas subject to natural disasters and hazards, or otherwise require further analysis as part of the amendment. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 7 does not apply. Goal 8 - Recreational Needs. To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors, and where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts. Goal 8 ensures the provision of recreational facilities to Oregon citizens and is primarily concerned with the provision of those facilities in non-urban areas of the state. The amendment does not affect the City’s provisions for or access to recreation areas, facilities or recreational opportunities. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 8 does not apply. Goal 9 - Economic Development. To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon’s citizens. The amendment will not impact any industrial or commercial use designations, nor amend the City’s required inventory for industrial and commercial lands. Nonetheless, it will help to facilitate economic development and redevelopment opportunities in the ICCO area as previously discussed, and further addressed below with regard to relevant policies of the Metro Plan. In general, it will help to enable development of industrial land in the ICCO area that is already included as part of the Findings - 4 Page 28  ATTACHMENT B City’s previously adopted inventory. The amendment is therefore consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 9, to extent that it might be considered applicable. Goal 10 - Housing. To provide for the housing needs of citizens of the state. Goal 10 requires communities to provide an adequate supply of residential buildable land to accommodate estimated housing needs for a 20-year planning period. The amendment does not impact the supply of residential buildable land. No land is being re-designated from residential use to a non-residential use, and the amendments do not otherwise diminish the lands available for residential use. Therefore, the amendments are consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 10. Goal 11- Public Facilities and Services. To plan and develop a timely, orderly and efficient arrangement of public facilities and services to serve as a framework for urban and rural development. The amendment will not impact or amend the Public Facilities and Services Plan, which is adopted as a refinement of the Metro Plan. It will be consistent with relevant policies from the Public Facilities and Services Element of the Metro Plan, as addressed below in the findings addressing consistency with its applicable provisions. The amendment also does not include any capital public infrastructure projects to extend facilities and services to the area. As previously discussed, the amendment will help to facilitate economic development opportunities in the ICCO area, where annexation may not be possible in the near term due to a lack of contiguity or availability of public services and facilities such as sanitary sewer. Specifically, the code amendment will enable extra-territorial extension of water or sewer service where needed, in combination with irrevocable annexation agreements that will thereby facilitate future annexation. As relevant here, the amendment will enable the extension of water or sanitary sewer service, as the need may arise to accommodate development in the ICCO area. The amendment is therefore consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 11, to extent that it might be considered applicable. Goal 12- Transportation. To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. Goal 12 is implemented by the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule OAR 660-012-0060. TPR contains the following requirement: (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. A plan or land use regulation amendment significantly affects a transportation facility if it would: (a) Change the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility (exclusive of correction of map errors in an adopted plan); (b) Change standards implementing a functional classification system; or Findings - 5 Page 29  ATTACHMENT B (c) Result in any of the effects listed in paragraphs (A) through (C) of this subsection based on projected conditions measured at the end of the planning period identified in the adopted TSP. As part of evaluating projected conditions, the amount of traffic projected to be generated within the area of the amendment may be reduced if the amendment includes an enforceable, ongoing requirement that would demonstrably limit traffic generation, including, but not limited to, transportation demand management. This reduction may diminish or completely eliminate the significant effect of the amendment. (A) Types or levels of travel or access that are inconsistent with the functional classification of an existing or planned transportation facility; (B) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility such that it would not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan; or (C) Degrade the performance of an existing or planned transportation facility that is otherwise projected to not meet the performance standards identified in the TSP or comprehensive plan. The amendment does not change the functional classification of a transportation facility, change the standards implementing a functional classification system or degrade the preformation of a facility otherwise projected to not meet performance standards. Therefore, the amendment does not have a significant effect under (a), (b) or (c). As such, the amendment does not significantly affect any existing or future transportation facilities and is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 12. Goal 13 - Energy Conservation. To conserve energy. The amendment does not impact energy conservation in a manner that would require further analysis under Goal 13. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 13 does not apply. Goal 14 - Urbanization. To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use. The amendment does not affect the City’s provisions regarding the transition of land from rural to urban uses. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 14 does not apply. Goal 15 - Willamette River Greenway. To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural, scenic, historical, agricultural, economic and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette River as the Willamette River Greenway. The amendment does not contain any changes that affect the Willamette River Greenway regulations. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 15 does not apply. Goal 16 through 19 - Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean Resources. There are no estuarine resources, coastal shore lands, beaches and dunes, or other ocean resources involved or otherwise affected by the amendment. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goals 16 through Findings - 6 Page 30  ATTACHMENT B 19 do not apply. EC 9.8065(2): [The amendment] is consistent with applicable provisions of the Metro Plan and applicable adopted refinement plans. The code amendment does not include any amendment of the Metro Plan text or land use designations. The findings below confirm that the code amendment is otherwise consistent with, and supported by, a number of relevant Metro Plan policies. There is no adopted refinement plan for the ICCO area, thus no further analysis is requires related to applicable adopted refinement plan provisions. Growth Management Policies 15. Ultimately, land within the UGB shall be annexed to a city and provided with the required minimum level of urban facilities and services. While the time frame for annexation may vary, annexation should occur as land transitions from urbanizable to urban. The intent of the amendment is to facilitate annexation agreements and extra-territorial extension of water and sanitary sewer services as necessary to support development activity in the ICCO area. As noted previously, the majority of properties in the ICCO area to are currently unable to annex or obtain necessary urban services (particularly sanitary sewer). The allowance of binding annexation agreements and service extension to accommodate near-term development activity in the area, will ultimately facilitate future annexation of ICCO properties. 20. When unincorporated territory within the UGB is provided with any new urban service, that service shall be provided by the following method (in priority order). a. Annexation to a city; b. Contractual annexation agreements with a city; c. Annexation to an existing district (under conditions described previously in Policy #19); or d. Creation of a new service district (under conditions described previously in Policy #14). As previously discussed, the majority of unincorporated territory in the ICCO area is unable to annex to the City as a result of several factors. The code amendment will grant automatic approval for extra-territorial extension of wastewater and water service for ICCO properties, subject to a binding agreement to annex in the future when possible. The amendment is therefore consistent with the above policy by requiring a contractual agreement for future annexation as a condition of service extension, where immediate annexation is not currently possible. 21. Cities shall not extend water or wastewater service outside city limits to serve a residence or business without first obtaining a valid annexation petition, a consent to annex agreement, or when a health hazard annexation is required. Findings - 7 Page 31  ATTACHMENT B Consistent with the above policy, the code amendment will require a consent to annex agreement as a condition of wastewater or water service extension outside the City limits but within the ICCO (and within the UGB). Economic Element B.10 Encourage opportunities for a variety of heavy industrial development in Oregon’s second largest metropolitan area. B.11 Encourage economic activities, which strengthen the metropolitan area’s position as a regional distribution, trade, health, and service center. B.17 Improve land availability for industries dependent on rail access. B.25 Pursue an aggressive annexation program and servicing of designated industrial lands in order to have a sufficient supply of “development ready” land. The code amendment is consistent with the above policies by facilitating economic development opportunities within the ICCO area, where many industrial properties are currently unable to annex or obtain urban services within the UGB. While immediate annexation of non-contiguous properties wishing to move forward with development plans in the near term cannot be allowed under current state law, any extra-territorial wastewater or water service extension will require a binding annexation agreement. In combination, annexation agreements and service extensions will encourage economic activities and opportunities for a variety of heavy industrial development with good rail access, facilitate future annexation when it becomes possible, and improve the overall “development ready” status for ICCO properties. Public Facilities and Services Element G.9 Wastewater conveyance and treatment shall be provided to meet the needs of projected growth inside the UGB that are capable of complying with regulatory requirements governing beneficial reuse or discharge of effluent and beneficial reuse or disposal of residuals. The code amendment will facilitate wastewater service to ICCO properties that may not already be served, but where service is necessary to accommodate industrial development. The ICCO area is ultimately planned for future annexation to the City and is part of the projected growth and land area needed for industrial development within the UGB. To the extent this policy is relevant, service extension to the ICCO area will facilitate wastewater treatment at the regional treatment facility prior to effluent discharge or beneficial reuse/disposal of residuals. Based on these findings, the code amendment is consistent with applicable provisions of the Metro Plan as required. EC 9.8065(3): In the case of establishment of a special area zone, [the amendment] is consistent with EC 9.3020 Criteria for Establishment of an S Special Area Zone. Findings - 8 Page 32  ATTACHMENT B The code amendment does not include the establishment of any special area zone. As such, the above criterion does not apply. Findings - 9 Page 33