HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 6288 03/18/2013ORDINANCE NO. 6288
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EUGENE - SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN (METRO
PLAN) BY ADOPTING A NEW METRO PLAN BOUNDARY THAT IS COTERMINOUS WITH THE CITY OF
SPRINGFIELD URBAN GROWTH BOUNDARY EAST OF INTERSTATE 5; AND ADOPTING SAVINGS AND
SEVERABILITY CLAUSES.
THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD'FINDS THAT:
WHEREAS, Springfield Development Code Section 5.14 -100 sets forth procedures for the
amendment of the Eugene Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan): and
WHEREAS, on July 19, 2011, the Springfield, Eugene and Lane County Planning Commissions
jointly conducted a public hearing regarding the Metro Plan boundary amendment and the hearing was
continued to August 16, 2011 and;
WHEREAS, on October 25, 2011, the Springfield Planning Commission voted 4 to 2, to
recommend approval to the Springfield City Council of the Metro Plan boundary amendment, and to
create an intergovernmental agreement between the City of Springfield and Lane County to help govern
the drinking water source area; and
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2012, the elected officials of Lane County, the City of Springfield and
the City of Eugene jointly conducted a public hearing regarding the Metro Plan boundary amendment;
and
WHEREAS, evidence exists in the record indicating that the proposal meets the requirements of
the Eugene - Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan, Springfield Development Code and applicable
state law; and
WHEREAS, timely and sufficient notice of the public hearings, has been provided in accordance
with SDC Section 5.2 -115; and
WHEREAS, the public record contains complete documentation of the Metro Plan boundary
amendment (Springfield file number - TYP411- 00003; Lane County file number PA 11 -5092) and hereby
is incorporated into the record for this proceeding by reference; and
WHEREAS, the Springfield City Council is now ready to take action on Metro Plan boundary
amendment based upon the above recommendation and the evidence and testimony already in the
record as well as the evidence and testimony presented at this public hearing;
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: The Eugene - Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) - official Plan
Diagram Map, as depicted in Section II -G pages 17 and 18 of the Metro Plan and contained in Exhibit A
to this Ordinance is hereby amended as shown on the Plan Diagram Map contained in Exhibit B attached
and incorporated herein, to reflect a new Metro Plan boundary that is coterminous with the separate
City of Springfield Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) east of Interstate 5 as established by city and county
ordinances. Although the exhibits show Metro Plan land use designations, this Ordinance only amends
the Plan Diagram Map by relocating the Metro Plan boundary; this Ordinance does not have any effect
on plan designations that apply to properties within the current or new Metro Plan boundary and no
previously adopted land use designations shall be affected by this Ordinance.
SECTION 2: The Metro Plan — official Plan Boundary Map, depicted in Section II -G pages 19 and
20 of the Metro Plan and contained in Exhibit C to this Ordinance is hereby repealed and replaced with
the amended Plan Diagram Map contained in Exhibit D attached and incorporated herein, to reflect a
new Metro Plan boundary that is coterminous with the City of Springfield Urban Growth Boundary east
of Interstate S.
SECTION 3: The prior policies and plan designations repealed or changed by this Ordinance
remain in full force and effect to authorize prosecution of persons in violation thereof prior to the
effective date of this Ordinance.
SECTION 4: If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase or portion of this Ordinance is
for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be
deemed a separate, distinct and individual provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of this Ordinance.
SECTION 5: Notwithstanding the effective date of ordinances as provided by Section 2.110 of
the Springfield Municipal Code 1997, this Ordinance shall become effective 30 days from the date of
passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor or the date the Eugene City Council and the
Lane County Board of Commissioners have adopted substantially identical ordinances containing
provisions as described in Sections 1 and 2 of this Ordinance, whichever is later.
SECTION 6: Although not part of this Ordinance, the City of Springfield City Council adopts
findings and conclusions in support of this action as set forth in Exhibit E attached and incorporated here
by this reference.
ADOPTED by the Common Council of the City of Springfield by a vote of 6 for and 0 against,
this 18 day of March 2013.
APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Springfield, this 18 day of March 2013.
ATTEST: T
Mayor
Approved o Form
City Recorder
ORDINANCE NO. 6288
n
T'Fl
mj s =.
9 ; PEP go;.
Eff
ti
Z
0
i s �
anlr '
' b
O
2
a
35TH ® O
y ,`�
•,
'.'�• g
n
m
nn
/��
C V
z
=
0)
/
46
a
YA
r � a
n <
0
3 z n
F
m
b
a
0
C
A
G
T
0
°w
v
8
n
o
-
CD C
mN
ELI
�
�!
CD
4ii liiC�
o
aL
—
=
d
n
U
35TH ® O
y ,`�
•,
'.'�• g
n
m
nn
/��
C V
z
=
0)
/
46
a
YA
r � a
n <
0
3 z n
F
m
b
a
0
C
A
G
u
c
m
n
m
nn
/��
C V
z
=
0)
/
YA
m
b
a
0
C
A
G
T
0
°w
v
8
n
o
-
CD C
mN
ELI
00����a�:
CD
o
aL
—
=
d
n
U
\\ H 9L
/��
C V
z
=
0)
/
a a q F N o o
on
'•, 5 c o' O m a n o
no
� O Y 2_ 6 vSi Y •-r 'J' y �J
0 0
'r t°
. Y� R Y y p
I N^ R
GIMP,
n
%s•
I
t +••
•h�
11ra
�uO
O
O
L
—1 kTERRY Ira , 1 2�
►ILIA 1°
D
r
v
D
k
V
cn
0
r
M
Z
r
A
wu RD
�j
■ ■ ■� i2
Y
o
g
3
=
n
ul
3
f1
S
w
3
m'
a
y
Ac
m
�n
d
YJ
c
m
C
w
3
m
�
�
a 3
w•
4
'o
9
N
W
O
6
M
■
■
■
❑
❑
0
m
„ =
d
Y
Y
n
Y
m
Y
y
n
c
Y_
Y
m
�
■ ■ ■� i2
Y
o
g
3
=
n
ul
f1
S
w
Y
�n
d
�
a 3
w•
4
1
..w
i.
• ft.N
0
s�
_a
1'
W �
n
1
N.N.Rd
s........ .....
h
0 ndd.
05
• a
T
w
O y
Rt
=�.
0 RA O,O d Yj0 j N
�d��rlc��eo o9
O
u.N
gs��a�` °a33
�
imrtS���Y�O
w[�OOG
O
p, G
n? N
0
a
0 ndd.
05
• a
u.N
�
N •+
E
it rx lP0
RD
t
m f
u o
T
z
>
Ft
eA
AFFIL
�Ay[
atl tli(•N
♦11
•
,
£
a000p
IS
WILLAGILLESR
�
NO .[xzi PO
i
1
n
1
O/.[MLYY Pa y
q
G
O
�
,
COBU Op
a
o
1
Oa
1• •�
�
G
46
Otlw
n
46
y
1iFWAY S!
O
pad
niv, 3WV0 i
STH ST
i
Z
,
«
o
a
r
@>
rP
1
.
]eiX ST
ns sr
o
i
.6
,
�r
•
I
1
o.
zl
II
am
N
O
,
O
c
1 =r
W
O
W
CD
'
'
CL
m
o
ac
M
T
D
P
� . ............... .... Q ...............
... ...
iC WEBINLLPO �} �`�r
EN IYy Pp
0 t iEPPr C} >
. d WNEBO < e
LnwE u
•� F e Q � M
BEWEL m _
PM NVe s o
sEN � n
o I
L L1Vve Bi > I Btltl3Nn I 0 o
. TiA�IF° I i
nFB/ y F
BS $ 9
T m
�ANOIL p
/iq NILYMOSi
V v
m tio�Wr3 �
G
1. Y➢m bN1E
�� 1f
Ate^
J
0
� ff—
wEUas�sare `�
J o
g
MMAY Po
_7
co ^�
O
0
Id
3
CCD
1 1
°m o
CL
n c
n
G
r
3
C
CD
f-I
9 -
O
y
-o
0
O.
n g d n o
1�
`✓ O
N
O
0
� iiI
�
CL
CD
T
CD
wEUas�sare `�
J o
g
MMAY Po
_7
co ^�
O
0
Id
3
CCD
1 1
°m o
CL
C
Q
d
47
n
G
r
3
C
CD
f-I
a
O
y
-o
Ml
O
O.
CL
1�
`✓ O
N
O
0
� iiI
�
CL
CD
T
CD
EXHIBIT E
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
In support of Ordinance Nos. PA 1281, PA 1283, PA 1284, and Ordinance No. ,2 2
The following criteria analysis is categorized by Plan Document and Sections identified
in bold, followed by staff's findings. The elected officials of Eugene and Springfield may
limit their review the criteria solely related to LC Ch. 12, the Metro Plan and the
Statewide Planning Goals, Administrative Rules and Statues.
APPLICABLE LANE CODE CH. 16.400 RURAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
AMENDMENT CRITERIA
(6) Plan Adoption or Amendment — General Procedures. The Rural
Comprehensive Plan, or any component of such Plan, shall be adopted or
amended in accordance with the following procedures:
(a) Referral to Planning Commission. Before the Board takes any action
on a Rural Comprehensive Plan component, or an amendment to such
Plan component, a report and recommendation thereon shall be
requested from the County Planning Commission and a reasonable time
allowed for the submission of such report and recommendation. In the
event the Rural Comprehensive Plan component or amendment applies
to a limited geographic area, only the Planning Commission having
jurisdiction of that area need receive such referral.
Finding1: This Plan Amendment proposal was initiated by Land Management
Division staff at the direction of the Lane County Board of County Commissioners
(BCC) as a high priority item in the adopted 2011 Long Range Planning Program.
Therefore, Lane County is the applicant in this case.
There are five items contained in this amendment proposal. They are:
An amendment to the official Metro Plan diagram and boundary maps to modify
the Metro Plan boundary east of Interstate 5 so that the resultant boundary is
coterminous with the parcel specific Urban Growth Boundary that has been
developed by the City of Springfield;
2. An amendment to the official Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan maps to
delineate the City of Springfield's parcel specific UGB boundary location pursuant
to OAR 660- 024 - 0020(2);
3. The adoption of correctly corresponding Rural Comprehensive Plan (RCP)
designations to lands previously designated under the Metro Plan;
4. An update to the rural residential zoning of properties removed from the
Metro Plan to maintain consistency with residential zoning regulations applied to
lands within the RCP. This change will apply Lane Code 16.291 to properties
previously zoned under Lane Code 16.231 and;
Page 1 of 31
Paee 1 — Ordinance No. PA 1283
EXHIBIT E
5. An amendment to the RCP policies and Lane Code to apply existing Goal 5
Metro Plan Policies to Goal 5 resources removed from the Metro and amend
Lane Code 16.253 (Riparian Regulations) to maintain existing safe harbor
riparian setback regulations to lands removed from the Metro Plan.
Throughout these findings the amendments listed above are simply referred to as "this
amendment, "the(se) amendments" or "the(se) proposed amendments ".
These amendments include both RCP components, and an amendment to the Eugene -
Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan).
Item No. 1 is a Metro Plan Amendment and the other four items constitute an
amendments to the Lane County Rural RCP. As this Amendment deals with the Metro
Plan, specific criteria direct a tri- jurisdictional referral and review with the Lane County
Planning Commissioners (LCPC), and the Planning Commissioners of Springfield and
Eugene, and the City Councils of Springfield and Eugene.
Items 2 -5, which are RCP amendments will require the sole recommendation of the
LCPC to the BCC. This is because once the Metro Plan boundary is adjusted to
Springfield's Urban Growth Boundary, the geographic area will be subject to Lane
County's RCP within the sole planning jurisdiction the Lane County. Therefore, items
related to the RCP will be evaluated with findings in these Code sections below.
(Findings of consistency concerning the Metro Plan components can be found later in
this application in LC Ch. 12, and Metro Plan sections).
A staff report will be mailed to each of the Commissioners prior to the public hearing to
assist in their recommendations as required above. Therefore, this request is in
conformance with the criteria above.
(b) Planning Commission - Hearing and Notice.
(i) The Planning Commission shall hold at least one public hearing
before making a recommendation to the Board on a Rural
Comprehensive Plan component, or a n amendment to such Plan
component, and the hearing shall be conducted pursuant to LC
14.300.
Finding2: Again, there are five items involved in this proposal as explained
above. LMD Staff is required to harmonize and meet two different "process" criteria for
both the Metro Plan and RCP components for this proposal. Because staff is dealing
with two sets of "process" criteria, staff will use the more restrictive (or widespread)
criteria. Thus, the requirements above will be followed or exceeded for the processing of
this proposal.
The Joint Planning Commission public hearing for this Proposal is scheduled to occur
July 19, 2011 and will be conducted pursuant to Lane Code (LC) 14.300, LC 12.230-
12.340, and the Metro Plan. More than one hearing may be necessary in order for the
Planning Commissions to hear the matter and make their recommendations to the BCC
Page 2 of 31
Page 2 — Ordinance No. PA 1283
0:113120
Exhibit E to Attachment 1
and City Councils.
(ii) Notice of the time and place of hearing shall be given, pursuant to LC
14.300.
Finding3 Notice of time and place of hearing will be accomplished pursuant to
LC 14.30 0. LIVID staff will mail the required notice of the proposal to at I owners of
property located within Springfield's Metro Plan Boundary, east of the centerline of
Interstate -5 Highway and surrounding properties as required by Lane Code.
Additionally, staff will mail a required Ballot Measure 56 Notice along with the notice of
proposal to affected property owners, and will publish a legal advertisement for the
proposal as required prior to the public hearing.
(iii) If an exception to State Planning Goals is to be considered during the
hearing, such exception shall be specifically noted in the notices of
such hearing.
Finding4: An exception to State Planning Goals is not being requested, therefore
this criteria is not applicable.
(iv) The proposed Rural Comprehensive Plan component, or an
amendment to such Plan component, shall be on file with the
Director and available for public examination for at least 10 days
prior to the time set for hearing thereon.
Finding5: The proposed Amendment file is located in the LIVID office and is
available for public examination during work hours.
(c) Planning Commission Consideration with Other Agencies.
(i) In considering a Rural Comprehensive Plan component, or an
amendment to such Plan component, the Planning Commission shall
take account of and seek to harmonize, within the framework of the
needs of the County, the Comprehensive Plans of cities, and the
Plans and planning activities of local, state, federal and other public
agencies, organizations and bodies within the County and adjacent to
it.
Finding& Again, this proposal is both a RCP Amendment and a Metro Plan
Amendment. In making a recommendation to the Board, the Lane County Planning
Commissioners shall seek to harmonize within the framework of the needs of the
County, the Metro Plan, and with the Planning Commission bodies of Eugene and
Springfield according to the criteria above.
(ii) The Planning Commission, during consideration of a Rural
Comprehensive Plan component or an amendment to such Plan
component, shall consult and advise with public officials and
agencies, public utility companies, civic, educational, professional
Page 3 of 31
Page 3 — Ordinance No. PA 1283
EXHIBIT E
and other organizations, and citizens generally to the end that
maximum coordination of Plans may be secured.
Finding7: As part of the public hearing consideration of this proposal the Planning
Commissions shall consult and advise with others so that maximum coordination is
secured prior to their recommendations to the BCC and City Councils.
(iii) Whenever the Planning Commission is considering a Rural
Comprehensive Plan component, or an amendment to such Plan
component, it shall be referred to the planning agency of every city
and county affected to inform them and solicit their comments.
Finding8: Even though this is a Lane County initiated Plan Amendment, it must
be referred to and reviewed by all three governing bodies (pursuant to Metro Plan
Chapter IV Policy 5(a)) of Lane County, Eugene, and Springfield because it in -part
involves a Metro Plan Amendment. LMD Staff has coordinated with the city of Eugene
and Springfield planning agencies /staff and they are able and willing to participate in this
Amendment proposal.
(iv) The provisions of this subsection are directory, not mandatory, and
the failure to refer such Plan, or an amendment to such Plan, shall
not in any manner affect its validity.
Finding9: LMD Staff has referred this proposal to the appropriate planning
agencies affected, as such this proposal has met the above criteria. Also, refer to Finding
above.
(d) Planning Commission Recommendation and Record.
(i) Recommendation of the Planning Commission on a Rural
Comprehensive Plan component, or an amendment to a Plan
component, shall be by resolution of the Commission and carried by
the affirmative vote of not less than a majority of its total voting
members.
Finding10: Again, this proposal is a both a RCP Amendment and a Metro Plan
Amendment. Therefore, because this is a Joint Planning Commission public hearing as
explained in other Findings, the Planning Commission's vote on each of their respective
individual items in this proposal must be carried out by an affirmative quorum vote.
(ii) The record made at the Planning Commission hearings on a Rural
Comprehensive Plan component, or an amendment to such Plan
component and all materials submitted to or gathered by the Planning
Commission for its consideration, shall be forwarded to the Board
along with the recommendation.
Finding11: The Joint Planning Commission's recommendation will be forwarded
by LMD staff to the BCC and City Councils for their consideration in additional public
Page 4 of 31
Page 4 — Ordinance No. PA 1283
PYWRIT E
hearings scheduled by LIVID staff.
(e) Board Action - Hearing and Notice.
(i) After a recommendation has been submitted to the Board by the
Planning Commission on the Rural Comprehensive Plan component,
or an amendment to such Plan component, all interested persons
shall have an opportunity to be heard thereon at a public hearing
before the Board conducted pursuant to LC 14.300.
(ii) Notice of the time and place of the hearing shall be given pursuant
to LC 14.300.
(iii) If an exception to Statewide. Planning Goals is to be considered
during the hearing, such exception shall be specifically noted in the
notice of such hearing.
(iv) Hearings to consider amendments of the Plan Diagram that affect a
single property, small group of properties or have other
characteristics of a quasi-judicial proceeding shall be noticed
pursuant to LC 14.300.
Finding 12: Another public hearing process before the BCC and City Councils will
be carried out after the Planning Commissions recommendation is received in LIVID
offices [Ic1].
(f) Concurrent Consideration. The Board and Planning Commission may
hold a single joint meeting to consider the proposed Plan amendment
consistent with the requirements of LC 16.400(6)(e)(ii),(iii) and (iv) above.
(g) Board Referral. Before the Board makes any change or addition to a Plan
component, or Plan component amendment recommended by the
Planning Commission, it may first refer the proposed change or addition
to the Planning Commission for an additional recommendation. Failure
of the Planning Commission to report within 21 days after the referral, or
such longer period as may be designated by the Board, shall be
deemed to be approval of the proposed change or addition. It shall not
be necessary for the Planning Commission to hold a public hearing on
such change or addition.
Finding13: This is not a concurrent consideration proposal. Therefore, this criteria
is not applicable.
(h) Method of Adoption and Amendment.
(i) The adoption or amendment of a Rural Comprehensive Plan component
shall be by Ordinance.
Page 5 of 31
Page 5 — Ordinance No. PA 1283
EXHIBIT E
Finding14: If approved by the BCC, this proposal will be adopted with a formal
Ordinance.
(ii) The adoption or amendment shall be concurrent with an amendment
to LC 16.400(4) above. In the case of a Rural Comprehensive Plan
adoption, the Code amendment shall place such Plan in the
appropriate category. In the case of a Rural Comprehensive Plan
amendment, the Code amendment shall insert the number of the
amending Ordinance.
Findingl5: If approved by the BCC, the Code amendment shall insert the number
of the amending Ordinance.
(iii) The Board may amend or supplement the Rural Comprehensive Plan
upon making the following findings:
(aa) For Major and Minor Amendments as defined in L C 16.400(8)(a)
below, the Plan component or amendment meets all applicable
requirements of local and state law, including Statewide Planning
Goals and Oregon Administrative Rules.
Finding16: This is classified as a Major Plan Amendment. Findings of
consistency with requirements of local and state law, Statewide Planning Goals, and
Oregon Administrative Rules are explained elsewhere within this application.
(bb) For Major and Mi nor Amendments as defined in LC 16.400(8)(a)
below, the Plan amendment or component is:
(i -i) necessary to correct an identified error in the application
of the Plan; or
(ii -ii) necessary to fulfill an identified public or community need
for the intended result of the component or amendment; or
(iii -iii) necessary to comply with the mandate of local, state or
federal policy or law; or
(iv -iv) necessary to provide for the implementation of adopted
Plan policy or elements; or
(v -v) otherwise deemed by the Board, for reasons briefly set
forth in its decision, to be desirable, appropriate or proper.
Findingl7: This Major Plan Amendment is consistent with criteria of LC
16.400(6)(h)(iii)(bb) (v -v) above.
(cc) For Minor Amendments as defined in LC 16.400(8)(a) below, the
Page 6 of 31
Paee 6 — Ordinance No. PA 1283
EXHIBIT E
Plan amendment or component does not conflict with adopted
Policies of the Rural Comprehensive Plan, and if possible,
achieves policy support.
Findingl8: This proposal is not classified as a Minor Amendment. Therefore, this
criteria is not applicable.
(dd) For Mi nor Amendments as defined in LC 16.400(8)(a) below, the
Plan amendment or component is compatible with the existing
structure of the Rural Comprehensive Plan, and is consistent
with the unamended portions or elements of the Plan.
Findingl9: This proposal is not classified as a Minor Amendment. Therefore, this
criteria is not applicable.
(i) A change of zoning to implement a proposed Plan amendment may
be considered concurrently with such amendment. In such case, the
Board shall also make the final zone change decision, and the
Hearings Officials consideration need not occur.
Finding20: Zone changes are being requested as part of the Amendment. In
such cases, the BCC shall make the final zone change decision.
APPLICABLE LANE CODE CH. 16.252 CRITERIA
Lane Code Ch. 16.252 Procedures for Zoning, Rezoning and Amendments to
Requirements (RCP items)
(1) Purpose. As the Rural Comprehensive Plan for Lane County is
implemented, changes in zone and other requirements of this chapter will
be required. Such Amendments shall be made in accordance with the
procedures of this section.
Finding2l: Item No. 4 in this proposed amendment is a proposal for a zone
change for 81 Rural Residential (RR) zoned properties within the current Metro Plan
boundary area. This zone change is intended to update the rural residential zoning of
these properties removed from the Metro Plan to maintain consistency with residential
zoning regulations applied to lands elsewhere within the RCP. This change will apply
Lane Code Ch. 1 6.291 (Rural Residential) to properties previously zoned under Lane
Code Ch. 16.231 (Rural Residential).
Furthermore, the zone changes are necessary to gain consistency with the Statewide
Planning Goal 14 Rule. Lands zoned RR under LC 16.231 have not been updated to
comply with the Statewide Planning Goal 14 Rule (Oregon Administrative Rules 660-
004 -0040, effective October 14, 2000) that has been adopted in other Lane County
lands governed under the updated rural residential zoning LC 16.290. Goal 14 prohibits
urban use of rural lands. Any use, development o r division not consistent with the Goal
14 Rule will not be authorized on lands zoned under LC 16.231 within the Metro Plan
Page 7 of 31
Paee 7 — Ordinance No. PA 1283
FXHIRIT F
area. Since Lane County is amending the Metro Plan boundary and Plan, we are
required to update t he rural residential zone d lands within the Metro Plan area to
comply with the Goal 14 Rule as directed by OAR 660- 004- 0040(3)(b).
Staff has prepared a comparison analysis between uses and development authorized
under LC 16.231 and LC 16.291, which is provided as Attachment 13 to the memo that
these findings are included with.
(2) Criteria. Zonings, rezonings and changes in the requirements of this
chapter shall be enacted to achieve the general purpose of this chapter and
shall not be contrary to the public interest. In addition, zonings and
rezonings shall be consistent with the specific purposes of the zone
classification proposed, applicable Rural Comprehensive Plan elements
and components, and Statewide Planning Goals for any portion of Lane
County which has not been acknowledged for compliance with the
Statewide Planning Goals by the Land Conservation and Development
Commission. Any zoning or rezoning may be effected by Ordinance or
Order of the Board of County Commissioners or the Hearings Official in
accordance with the procedures in this section.
Finding22: The rezoning of these properties will be enacted to achieve the general
purpose of this chapter and not contrary to public interest. Findings of consistency with
other applicable RCP provisions, and the Statewide Planning Goals are found
elsewhere within this application. Should the rezoning be approved by the BCC they will
be in effect by this approved Ordinance.
(3) Initiation /Application.
(a) By Planning Commission. The zoning of unzoned properties, the
rezoning of properties and amendment of this chapter ma y be
initiated by the Planning Commission upon its own motion or upon
petition by the Planning Commission upon request of the Board as
provided in LC 16.252(3)(b) below.
(b) By Board. The zoning of unzoned properties, the rezoning of
properties and the amendment of this chapter may be initiated by
the Board in the form of a request to the Planning Commission that it
consider the proposed zoning, rezoning or amendment.
(c) By Applicant. Application for the zoning or rezoning of properties
may be made by any person as provided in LC 14.050.
Finding23: This Amendment proposal was initiated by Land Management Division
staff at the direction of the Lane County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) as a
high priority item in the adopted 2011 Long Range Planning Program. Therefore, Lane
County is the applicant in this case. The Lane County Planning Commission will
consider this proposal at the scheduled Public Hearing on July 19, 2011.
Page 8 of 31
Paee 8 — Ordinance No. PA 1283
EXHIBIT E
(5) Planning Commission Public Hearing and Notice - Legislative Matters.
(a) The Planning Commission shall hold not less than one public
hearing on each proposed legislative zoning or rezoning and
amendment to the requirements of this chapter.
(b) Notice of the time and place of hearing shall be given at least 10 days
in advance by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in
the County or in the territory concerned.
(c) The Planning Commission shall review the Application or proposal
and shall receive pertinent evidence and testimony as to why or
how the proposed change is inconsistent with the criteria provided
in LC 16.252(2) above for zoning, rezoning and amendment to the
requirements of this chapter. The Commission shall determine
whether the testimony at the hearing supports a finding that the
proposal does or does not meet the required criteria, and shall
recommend to the Board accordingly that the proposal be adopted
or rejected. The Planning Commission and Board may hold one
concurrent hearing.
Findinc124: The Lane County Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on
July 19, 2011 for this amendment proposal. Notice of hearing will exceed this provision
and will be advertised in the Register Guard, a general circulation newspaper at least 21
days prior to public hearing.
(6) Review Procedures. Applications for zoning or rezoning of specific
properties shall be heard by the Hearings Official pursuant to LC 14.300.
Finding25: This proposal is being reviewed pursuant to LC Ch. 14.300 in the
public hearing process.
(7) Action by the Board.
(a) Unless the Board and Planning Commission hold a concurrent
hearing, upon receipt of an affirmative Planning Commission
recommendation for legislative matters provided in LC 16.252(6)
above, the Board shall schedule a public hearing as provided in LC
16.252(7)(b) below. The Board may schedule such a public hearing
in the absence of an affirmative Planning Commission
recommendation.
Findinc126: This proposal is not scheduled as a concurrent hearing, therefore this
criteria is not applicable.
(b) Prior to taking any action which would alter or modify a Planning
Commission recommendation or Hearings Official's Order, the Board
may first refer the proposed alteration or modification to the Planning
Page 9 of 31
Page 9 — Ordinance No. PA 1283
EXHIBIT E
Commission or Hearings Official for a recommendation. Failure of
the Commission or Hearings Official to report within 20 days after the
referral, or such longer period as may be designated by the Board,
shall be deemed to be approval of the proposed alteration or
modification. It shall not be necessary for the Commission or
Hearings Official to hold a public hearing on the proposed alteration
or modification.
Finding27: Should the BCC modify the Lane County Planning Commission
recommendation the Board may choose to refer the proposed alteration or modification
back to the Planning Commission for their recommendation.
(8) Conditional Approval. The approving authority may impose reasonable
conditions if the application is approved to be completed within one year.
Finding 28: The approval authority may choose to impose reasonable conditions if
this application is approved within one year.
(9) Official Zoning Map.
(a) The location and boundaries of the various zones established b y
this chapter shall be shown and delineated on maps covering
portions of the County. These maps, upon their final adoption, shall
be known as the Official Zoning Map.
(b) The Zoning Map shall be established by ordinance. Subsequent
amendments to the Official Zoning Maps, either for establishing
zoning for previously unzoned property or for rezoning may be
made by Ordinance or Order of the Hearing Authority in accordance
with the provisions of LC 16.014, LC 16.015, and this section.
Finding29: Upon approval from the Board, the zoning maps will be updated and
shall be known as the Official Zoning Map(s), as established by the Ordinance.
APPLICABLE LANE CODE CH. 12 CRITERIA REVIEW
Lane Code Ch. 12.060 Eugene - Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this Chapter, compliance with the
provisions of Chapter IV of the Eugene - Springfield Metropolitan Area General
Plan is required for an y review, amendment or refinement of the Eugene -
Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan.
Finding30: Findings of consistency with the provision of Chapter IV of the Metro
Plan are provided under Finding54 -59, below.
Lane Code Ch. 12.200 Purpose. Eugene - Springfield Metropolitan Area General
Plan Element
Page 10 of 31
Paee 10 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
The Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) allows citizen - initiated Type II
Metro Plan amendments to be initiated at any time. Amendments that require a
final decision from one or two jurisdictions shall have a public hearing before the
appropriate governing bodies within 120 days of the initiation date. Amendments
that require a final decision from all three governing bodies shall be concluded
within 180-days of the initiation date. The Board of Commissioners may initiate a
Type I or Type II Metro Plan amendment at any time. Metro Plan amendments
shall be made in accordance with the standards contained in Chapter IV of the
Metro Plan and the provisions of this Code.
Findingn This Amendment proposal was initiated by Land Management Division
staff at the direction of the Lane County Board of County Commissioners (BCC) as a
high priority item in the adopted 2011 Long Range Planning Program. The proposal is
classified as a Type I Plan Amendment requiring a final decision from all three
governing bodies (Eugene and Springfield City Councils, and the Lane County BCC).
The adoption and process of this proposal shall follow the procedures and provisions
contained in Ch. IV of the Metro Plan combined with the procedures of Lane Code.
As noted in Finding1 above, there are 5 separate elements to this proposal. Item
number 1 is a Metro Plan Amendment and the other four items are amendments to
Lane County RCP. The Metro Plan component will require a joint recommendation and
the other four items related to the RCP will require the sole recommendation of the
LCPC. This is because once the Metro Plan boundary is adjusted to Springfield's
Urban Growth Boundary, the geographic area will be subject to Lane County's RCP
within the sole planning jurisdiction the Lane County. Therefore, only the item related to
the Metro Plan will be evaluated with findings in these Code sections below. (Findings
of consistency concerning the RCP components can be found in LC Ch. 16.400
section elsewhere in this application).
Lane Code Ch. 12.210 Initiation of Plan Amendments.
(1) Who Can Initiate Metro Plan Amendments. An amendment to the Metro Plan
can be initiated by the following persons or entities:
(a) Type I Non -Site Specific Text Amendments, UGB/ Plan Boundary
Changes or Other Goal Exceptions: Any of the three governing bodies.
(i) The Board of Commissioners may solicit a recommendation from the
planning commission before initiating this category of amendment.
(ii) A citizen may seek council initiation of a Metro Plan Type I
amendment by filing a written request with the County. A staff
report on the request shall be submitted to the Board of
Commissioners within 30 days of receipt of the request. At the
direction of two Board members, the request shall be placed on the
Board agenda for discussion. The request shall be considered
denied if the Board takes no action within 60 days of the date the
Page 11 of 31
Paee 1 1 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
staff report is submitted to the Board. The Board need not hold a
public hearing on a private Type I amendment request and may
deny the request for any reason. A citizen seeking Board initiation of
a site specific Metro Plan Type I amendment must own the property
subject to the amendment.
Finding32: This proposal is a Type I Metro Plan amendment initiated by the Lane
County Board of Commissioners, and therefore consistent with this criteria per (1)(a)
above.
(b) Type II Plan Diagram and Site Specific Text amendments. (i) Inside the
City limits: The Home City and citizens
(ii) Between the City limits and the Plan Boundary: Any of the three
governing bodies and citizens.
(A) The Board may solicit a recommendation from the planning
commission before initiating this category of amendment. A
citizen initiating a Metro Plan Type II amendment must own the
property subject to the amendment.
(B) A citizen may seek Board initiation of a Metro Plan Type II
amendment subject to the above requirements regarding Metro
Plan Type I amendments initiated by the Board at the request
of a citizen.
Finding33: This proposal is not a Type II amendment, therefore this criteria is not
applicable.
(2) When Plan Amendments can be initiated. Amendments to the Metro Plan
shall be initiated and considered at the following times:
(a) The Board may initiate a Type I or Type II Metro Plan amendment at
anytime. Consideration of this type of amendment shall begin
immediately thereafter.
Finding34: The BCC directed LMD staff to initiate a Type I Metro Plan
amendment as a high priority item in the adopted 2011 Long Range Planning Program.
(b) Citizen initiated Type II Metro Plan amendments may be applied for at
any time. The initial public hearing on an application shall take place
within 60 days of acceptance of a complete application.
Finding 35: This proposal is not a Type II Metro Plan amendment, therefore this
criteria is not applicable.
Page 12 of 31
Page 12 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
(c) Consideration of a privately initiated Metro Plan amendment shall be
postponed if the proposed amendment is also part of an existing
planned refinement plan or special area study adoption or amendment
process or one that is scheduled on the Planning Commission's work
program to begin within three months of the date the Metro Plan
amendment application is submitted. Such a requested Metro Plan
amendment shall be considered in the legislative proceedings on the
refinement plan or special area study. If the refinement plan or special
area study process has not begun within the three month period, the
Metro Plan amendment application process shall begin immediately
following the three month period. The Planning Director may waive a
particular plan amendment application postponement under this
subsection and require more immediate review if the Planning Director
finds that either there is a public need for earlier consideration or that
review of the proposed amendment as part of a general refinement plan
or special area study adoption or amendment process will interfere with
timely completion of that process.
Finding36: This proposal is not a citizen initiated Metro Plan amendment, therefore
this criteria is not applicable.
Lane Code Ch. 12.215 Referral of Plan Amendment.
All Metro Plan amendments affecting land outside the city limits of either city
shall be referred to the other city for consideration of Regional Impact. Lane
County shall participate in the hearing and decision of all Metro Plan
amendments outside the city limits. All Metro Plan amendments affecting land
inside the city limits of one city shall be referred to the other city and Lane
County so that they may participate as parties to the hearing. All referrals shall
occur within 10 days of the plan amendment initiation date. Any referral that is
provided for the purpose of determining Regional Impact shall be answered by
the referral jurisdiction within 45 days of receipt of the referral. Failure of a
jurisdiction to take action on the referral within 45 days from the date of referral
shall be deemed a finding of no Regional Impact. If a referral jurisdiction adopts a
resolution, ordinance, or order finding that the proposed amendment has a
Regional Impact that referral jurisdiction may participate in the decision if they so
choose. All jurisdictions participating in the plan amendment decision process
must approve the amendment in order to enact the amendment.
Finding37: This proposal was initiated by Lane County and is being referred to the
two other participating cities; Eugene and Springfield. The proposal only involves land
outside of the Urban Growth Boundary under the current plan document of the Metro
Plan. The County has been coordinating with the both the City's Planning agencies
upon initiation of this Amendment application. Both city planning jurisdictions have
chosen to participate in this Metro Plan amendment. It is understood that all
jurisdictions participating in the amendment process must approve the Metro Plan
component in order to enact this amendment.
Page 13 of 31
Paee 13 —Ordinance No. PA
FXHIRIT F
Lane Code Ch. 12.225 Metro Plan- Approval of A Plan amendment. (1) Who Must
Approve Plan Amendment.
(a) Type I.
(i) Non -Site Specific. To become effective, a non -site specific Metro
Plan text Type I amendment must be approved by all three governing
bodies.
(ii) Site Specific. To become effective, a site specific Metro Plan Type I
amendment that involves a UGB or Plan Boundary change that
crosses the Willamette or McKenzie River, or that crosses over a
ridge into a new basin, or that involves a goal exception not related
to a UGB expansion, must be approved by all three governing
bodies. (See Appendix "A)
(iii) Site Specific. To become effective, a site specific Metro Plan Type I
amendment that involves a UGB or Plan Boundary change must be
approved by the Home City and Lane County. Exception: If the non -
home City, after referral of the proposal, determines that the
amendment has Regional Impact and, as a result of that
determination, chooses to participate in the hearing, all three
governing bodies must approve the amendment.
Finding38: The Metro Plan Amendment is classified as a Type I amendment and
will be reviewed by all three governing bodies per (1)(a) above.
(b) Type II.
(i) Inside City Limits. To become effective, a Metro Plan Type II
amendment inside the city limits must be approved by the Home City.
(ii) Between the City Limits and Plan Boundary. To become effective, a
Metro Plan Type II amendment between the city limits and the Plan
Boundary must be approved by the Home City and Lane County.
Exception: If the non -home City, after referral of the proposal,
determines that the amendment has Regional Impact and, as a result
of that determination, chooses to participate in the hearing, all three
governing bodies must approve the amendment.
Finding39: This proposal is classified as a Type I Metro Plan amendment,
therefore this criteria is not applicable.
(2) Criteria for Approval of Plan Amendment. The following criteria shall be
applied by the Board of Commissioners in approving or denying a plan
amendment application:
Page 14 of 31
Page ]4— Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
(a) The amendment must be consistent with the relevant statewide
planning goals adopted by the Land Conservation and Development
Commission; and
Finding40: Findings of consistency of this proposed Metro Plan amendment with
the Statewide Planning Goals are explained elsewhere in this application.
(b) Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally
inconsistent.
Finding41: As this amendment only reduces the total land area within the Metro
Plan and does not change or affect any existing Metro Plan goals or policies, the
amendment does not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent.
Lane Code Ch. 12.230 Metro Plan - Plan Amendment Approval Process
(3) Planning Commission Consideration. Within 30 days after receipt of the
staff report, the Home City's Planning Commission shall hold a public
hearing to consider the proposed Metro Plan amendment. At least 20 days
before the hearing, notice of the hearing shall be published in a local
newspaper of general circulation and mailed to the applicant and to
persons who have requested notice. If the proposed amendment is quasi -
judicial, at least 20 days before the hearing, notice of the hearing shall also
be mailed to the owners and occupants of properties that are the subject of
the proposed amendment and to property owners of record of property
located within 300 feet of the subject property. The content of the notice
and conduct of the hearing on the amendment shall be as required by this
code and state law. The Home City's Planning Commission shall review
the proposed amendment and receive evidence and testimony on whether
the proposed change can be justified under the approval criteria. Within 30
days after the public hearing and close of the evidentiary record, the Home
City's Planning Commission shall adopt a written recommendation on the
proposed amendment. The recommendation shall contain findings and
conclusions on whether the proposal or a modified proposal meets the
approval criteria.
Finding42: Again, there are five items involved in this proposal as explained in
earlier findings. LIVID Staff is required to harmonize and meet two different criteria for
both the Metro Plan and RCP for processing this proposal. Because staff is dealing
with two set s of "process" criteria, staff will use the more restrictive (or widespread)
criteria. Thus, the requirements above will be followed or exceeded for the processing of
the proposal.
Notice of the joint Planning Commission Hearing will be mailed to property owners
within at least 300' of the Metro Plan boundary. Based off criteria of approval above,
Lane County will receive the joint Planning Commission's recommendation within 30
days after the close of the evidentiary hearing. This recommendation shall contain
Page 15 of 31
Page 15 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
findings and conclusions on whether the proposal or a modified proposal meets the
approval criteria.
Lane Code Ch. 12.235 Metro Plan -Plan Amendment Approval Process -Two
Jurisdictions.
(1) When the Two Jurisdictions Process is Used. The following process shall
be used to approve Metro Plan amendments when an amendment
concerns land located outside of the corporate limits of one of the cities
and the other city has chosen not to participate in the approval process.
(2) Investigation and Report. Within 30 days after a response is received from
both referral jurisdictions or within 50 days after the Metro Plan
amendment initiation date i f no response is received, the planning staff of
the home jurisdiction where the proposed Metro Plan amendment was
submitted shall investigate the facts bearing on the application, prepare a
report, and submit it to the Planning Commission. The report shall be
mailed or delivered to affected and interested parties at the time it is
delivered to the Commission.
(3) Planning Commission Consideration. Within 30 days after receipt of the
staff report, the Planning Commissions of both affected jurisdictions shall
hold a joint public hearing to consider the proposed Metro Plan
amendment. The provisions of LC 12. 230 above apply to the joint
Planning Commission hearing and decision on a proposed Metro Plan
amendment. Within 30 days after the joint public hearing and close of the
evidentiary record, both Planning Commissions shall make a
recommendation to their governing bodies on the proposed Metro Plan
amendment.
(4) Governing Body Action. Within 30 days after the date the last Planning
Commission acts on the Metro Plan amendment, the governing bodies of
both affected jurisdictions shall hold a joint public hearing on the proposed
amendment. The governing bodies decisions shall be based on the
evidentiary record created before the Planning Commissions. No new
evidence shall be allowed at the governing body joint hearing. Within 30
days after the joint public hearing, both governing bodies shall approve,
modify and approve, or deny the proposed Metro Plan amendment. Both
governing bodies shall take action by ordinance with adopted findings and
conclusions on whether the proposal or modified proposal meets the
approval criteria. The actions of the governing bodies are final if they
are identical. The date the last governing body acts shall be the date the
decision becomes final.
(5) Conflict Resolution Process. The following process shall be used when the
governing bodies do not enact identical decisions on the proposed Metro
Plan amendment.
Page 16 of 31
Pape 16 — Ordinance No. PA
FXHIRIT F
(a) The Metro Plan amendment shall be referred to the Metropolitan Policy
Committee within five days after the last governing body action. The
Metropolitan Policy Committee shall meet within 30 days of the referral
to hear comments on the proposed amendment from the applicant, staff
of the affected jurisdictions and interested persons. The committee may
develop a recommendation to the governing bodies on the proposed
amendment. The Metro Plan amendment shall be denied if the
committee fails to act within 30 days of the referral date or if the
governing bodies fail to adopt identical plan amendment actions within
45 days of receiving a recommendation from the committee.
(b) If the plan amendment is denied because of lack of consensus or
committee inaction, within 5 days the planning director of the home
jurisdiction where the application originated shall issue a denial
decision on the amendment containing findings and conclusions on
why the proposed amendment does not meet the approval criteria.
Those findings and conclusions ma y incorporate findings and
conclusions previously adopted by one or both of the governing bodies.
The decision of the director is final.
Finding43: All three governing jurisdictions have chosen to participate in this Metro
Plan Amendment, therefore t he process of LC 12.24 0 below along with LC Ch.
16.400(6) shall be followed.
Lane Code Ch. 12.240 Metro Plan - Plan Amendment Process -Three Jurisdictions.
(1) When The Three Jurisdiction Process is Used. The following process shall
be used to approve Metro Plan Type I amendments and Type II
amendments where all three jurisdictions participate in the decision.
Finding44: This Type I Metro Plan amendment is being processed as a three
jurisdictional process.
(2) Investigation and Report. Within 30 days after responses are received
from both referral jurisdictions or within 50 days after the initiation date if
no response is received, the planning staff of the home jurisdiction where
the proposed amendment was submitted shall investigate the facts bearing
on the application, prepare a report, and submit it to the Planning
Commissions of all three jurisdictions. The report shall be mailed or
delivered to affected and interested parties at the same time it is delivered
to the three Planning Commissions.
Finding45: LMD staff will prepare and mail a written report to the Planning
Commissions of all three jurisdictions and mail the report to all affected and interested
parties prior to the Public Hearing. The report will also be available in LMD offices during
normal business hours.
Page 17 of 31
Pa .ae 17 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
Exhibit E to Attachment 1
(3) Planning Commission Consideration. Within 30 days after receipt of the
staff report, the Planning Commissions of Eugene, Springfield and Lane
County shall hold a joint public hearing on the proposed Metro Plan
amendment. The provisions of LC 12.230(3) above apply to the joint
Planning Commission hearing. Within 30 days after the proposed Metro
Plan amendment hearing and close of the evidentiary record, each Planning
Commission shall make a recommendation to its governing body on the
proposed Metro Plan amendment.
Finding 46: A tri- jurisdictional joint Planning Commission Hearing is scheduled for
July 19, 2011. As the criteria above directs, each Planning Commission shall make a
recommendation to its governing body on the proposed Metro Plan amendment within
30 -days after the close of the evidentiary hearing. Eugene and Springfield Planning
Commission will make a recommendation to their City Councils on the Metro Plan item
of this proposed ordinance, and Lane County Planning Commission will make a
recommendation to the BCC on all five items of this proposed ordinance. The
recommendation of all three Commissions shall be forwarded to staff in LIVID to compile
and deliver the joint re commendations to the BCC for their consideration and action in a
subsequent public hearing.
(4) Governing Bodies Action. Within 30 days after the last Planning
Commission acts on the Metro Plan amendment proposal, the governing
bodies of Eugene, Springfield and Lane County shall hold a joint public
hearing on the plan amendment. The governing bodies' decisions shall be
based solely on the evidentiary record created before the Planning
Commissions. No new evidence shall be allowed at the governing body
joint hearing. Within 30 days after the joint public hearing, each governing
body shall approve, modify and approve, or deny the proposed Metro Plan
amendment. Each governing body shall take action b y ordinance with
adopted findings and conclusions on whether the proposal or modified
proposal meets the approval criteria. The actions of the governing bodies
are final if they are identical. The date the last governing body acts shall be
the date the action becomes final. The provisions of LC 12.235(5) above
apply if the governing bodies do not enact an identical plan amendment.
Finding47: After the Lane County Planning staff receives the last Planning
Commission's recommendation an within 30 days, Lane County will schedule a tri-
jurisdictional governing body public hearing to be held on the Amendment proposal.
For the Metro Plan item, the governing bodies decisions shall be based solely on the
evidentiary record created before the Planning Commission and no new evidence shall
be allowed at the governing body joint hearing. Each governing body will take action via
separate jurisdictional (but identical) Ordinances to approve, modify and approve, or
deny the proposed Metro Plan Amendment. Should the governing bodies not enact
identical ordinances, the provisions of LC 12.235(5) will apply.
i
Lane Code Ch. 12.245 Plan Amendment Processes - General Provisions.
Page 18 of 31
Page 18 —Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
Exhibit E to Attachment 1
(1) Process for Government Initiated Plan Amendments. A different process,
timeline, or both, than the processes and timelines specified in LC 12.230,
12.235 or 12.240 above, may be established by the governing bodies of
Eugene, Springfield and Lane County for any government initiated Metro
Plan amendment.
Findino48: A different process or timeline as specified in LC 12.230, 12.235, or
12 .240 may be established by the governing bodies if they deem worthy.
(2) Time Frame Waiver. The time frames prescribed in connection with Type II
Metro Plan amendment processes can be waived if the applicant agrees to
the waivers.
Finding 49: This is not a Type II amendment, therefore this criteria is not applicable.
(3) Bar on Re- submittal. No privately initiated Metro Plan amendment
application submitted to Lane County shall be considered if a substantially
similar or identical plan amendment has been denied within the year prior
to the application date unless the facts forming the basis for the denial
have changed so as to allow approval. The Planning Director shall
determine whether the proposed amendment is substantially similar or
identical after providing the applicant with an opportunity to comment on
the matter in writing.
Finding50: This is the first time this amendment has been proposed, therefore this
criteria is not applicable.
(4) Relationship to Refinement Plan Amendments. When a Metro Plan
amendment is enacted that requires an amendment to a refinement plan
diagram or map for consistency, the Metro Plan diagram amendment
automatically amends the refinement plan diagram or map if no
amendment to the refinement plan text is involved. When a Metro Plan
diagram amendment requires a refinement plan diagram or map and text
amendment for consistency, the Metro Plan and refinement plan
amendments shall be processed concurrently.
Finding51: No changes to a Metro plan Refinement Plan are being proposed.
(5) Severability of Plan Amendment Adoption Actions. When identical action
is required of two or three governing bodies on a Metro Plan Amendment,
and the amendment is a number of different plan changes, the following
applies. Unless otherwise specified in the adoption ordinance of any of
the governing bodies, action by all of the governing bodies to adopt some
but not all of the plan changes shall result in the adoption of the changes
for which there is consensus and the forwarding of only those changes
for which there is not consensus to the Metropolitan Policy Committee
under LC 12.235(5) and 12.240(4) above.
Page 19 of 31
Paee 19 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
Finding52: The Metro Plan amendment component is considered one plan
change, therefore this criteria is not applicable.
(6) Relationship Of Amendment Process To Metro Plan Update And Periodic
Review. An update of any element of the Metro Plan requires initiation
and approval by all three jurisdictions. Amendments to the Metro Plan that
result from state- mandated Periodic Review require approval by all three
jurisdictions.
Finding53: The Metro Plan amendment entails initiation and approval from all
three jurisdictions.
APPLICABLE METRO PLAN CRITERIA REVIEW
In addition to criteria identified elsewhere within this document, amendments to the
Metro Plan also require consistency with Goal IV, Policies 3 -7 and 10 of the Metro Plan,
listed below:
3. All amendments to the Metro Plan shall be classified as a Type I or
Type II amendment depending upon the specific changes sought by the
initiator of the proposal.
a. Type I amendment shall include any change to the urban growth
boundary (UGB) or the Metro Plan Plan Boundary (Plan Boundary) of
the Metro Plan; any change that requires a goal exception to be taken
under Statewide Planning Goal 2 that is not related to the UGB
expansion; and any amendment to the Metro Plan text that is non -site
specific.
b. A Type II amendment shall include any change to the Metro Plan
Diagram or Metro Plan text that is site specific and not otherwise a
Type I category amendment.
C. Adoption or amendment of some refinement plans, functional plans,
or special area plans may, in some circumstances, be classified as
Type I or Type II amendments. Amendments to the Metro Plan that
result from state mandated Periodic Review or Metro Plan
updates also shall be classified as Type I or Type II amendments
depending upon the specific changes that would result from these
actions.
Finding54: This is a Type 1 amendment as is entails a modification to the Metro
Plan Boundary and is therefore consistent with this requirement.
4. Initiation of Metro Plan amendments shall be as follows:
Page 20 of 31
Page 20 — Ordinance No. PA
10Aauu:
a. A Type I amendment may be initiated at the discretion of any one of
the three governing bodies. (Note: this correction reflects adopted
ordinance and code.)
b. A Type II amendment may be initiated at the discretion of any one of
the three governing bodies or by any citizen who owns property
that is subject of the proposed amendment.
C Only a governing body may initiate a refinement plan, a functional
plan, a special area study or Periodic Review or Metro Plan update.
d. The governing bodies of the three metropolitan jurisdictions may
initiate an amendment to the Metro Plan at any time. Citizen
initiated. Type II amendments may be initiated at any time.
Findinp55: This Type 1 amendment has been initiated by Lane County and is
therefore consistent with this requirement.
5. The approval process for Metro Plan amendments, including the
number of governing bodies who participate and the timeline for final
action, will vary depending upon the classification of amendment and
whether a determination is made that the proposed amendment will
have Regional Impact.
a. All three governing bodies must approve non - site - specific text
amendments; site specific Metro Plan Diagram amendments that
involve a UGB or Plan Boundary change that crosses the Willamette
or McKenzie Rivers or that crosses over a ridge into a new basin;
and, amendments that involve a goal exception not related to a UGB
expansion.
b. A site specific Type I Metro Plan amendment that involves a UGB
expansion or Plan Boundary change and a Type II Metro Plan
amendment between the city limits and Plan Boundary, must be
approved by the home city and Lane County (Springfield is the
home city for amendments east of 1 -5 and Eugene is the home city for
amendments west of 1 -5). Then on -home city will be sent a referral
of the proposed amendment and, based upon a determination that
the proposal will have Regional Impact, may choose to participate
in the decision. Unless the non -home city makes affirmative findings
of Regional Impact, the non -home city will not participate in the
decision.
C. An amendment will be considered to have Regional Impact if:
(1) It will require an amendment to a jointly adopted functional plan
[Eugene - Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan
Page 21 of 31
Page 21 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
(TransPlan), Eugene- Springfield Public Facilities and Services
Plan (Public Facilities and Services Plan), etc.] in order to
provide the subject property with an adequate level of urban
services and facilities; or
(2) It has a demonstrable impact on the water, storm drainage,
wastewater, or transportation facilities of the non -home city; or
(3) It affects the buildable land inventory by significantly adding to
Low Density Residential (LDR), Campus Industrial (CI), Light -
Medium Industrial (LMI), or Heavy Industrial (HI) designations or
significantly reducing the Medium Density Residential (MDR), High
Density Residential (HDR), or Community Commercial (CC)
designations.
d. A jurisdiction may amend a Metro Plan designation without
causing Regional Impact when this action is taken to: compensate
for reductions in buildable land caused by protection of newly
discovered natural resources within its own jurisdiction; or
accommodate the contiguous expansion of an existing business with
a site - specific requirement.
e. Decisions on all Type II amendments within city limits shall be the
sole responsibility of the home city.
Finding56: This amendment entails a Plan Boundary change that triggers one or
more of the criteria identified in Policy 5. A, therefore, all three governing bodies are
decision makers.
6. Public hearings by the governing bodies for Metro Plan amendments
requiring participation from one or two jurisdictions shall be held within
120 days of the initiation date. Metro Plan amendments that require a
final decision from all three governing bodies shall be concluded within
180 days of the initiation date. When more than one jurisdiction
participates in the decision, the Planning Commissions of the
participating jurisdictions shall conduct a joint public hearing and
forward that record and their recommendations to their respective
elected officials. The elected officials also shall conduct a joint public
hearing prior to making a final decision. The time frames prescribed in
connection with Type II Metro ,Plan amendment processes can be
waived if the applicant agrees to the waiver.
Finding57: As this amendment requires a decision form all three jurisdictions, a
public hearing must be held within 180 from the formal initiation date. The formal
initiation date for this amendment is June 1, 2011. A public hearing for this amendment
is scheduled for July 19, 2011, which is within the required time specified. This will be a
joint hearing of the three Planning Commissions. The recommendation from the three
Planning Commissions will be forwarded to the elected officials who shall also conduct
Page 22 of 31
Pace 22 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
a joint public hearing prior to making a final decision.
7. If all participating jurisdictions reach a consensus to approve a
proposed amendment, substantively identical ordinances affecting the
changes shall be adopted. Where there i s a consensus to deny a
proposed amendment, it ma y not be re- initiated, except b y one of the
three governing bodies, for one year. Amendments for which there is
no consensus shall be referred to the Metropolitan Policy Committee
(MPC) for additional study, conflict resolution, and recommendation
back to the governing bodies.
Finding58: If consensus is reached to approve a proposed amendment,
substantively identical ordinances affecting the changes shall be adopted by the three
jurisdictions.
10. Metro Plan updates shall be initiated n o less frequently than during
the state required Periodic Review of the Metro Plan, although the
governing bodies may initiate an update of the Metro Plan at any time.
Finding 59: This amendment is not part of a Periodic Review work program, but it
was initiated by Lane County BCC and is therefore consistent with this requirement.
APPLICABLE STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS REVIEW
As directed by Lane Code Ch. 16.400(6) (h)(ii)(aa) for the RCP amendment items, LC
12.225(2)(a) for the Metro Plan amendment item, and ORS 197.175(2)(a), the proposal
must be consistent with the relevant Statewide Planning Goals.
Goal 1: Citizen Involvement
To provide for widespread citizen involvement.
Finding60: This goal requires that citizens and affected public agencies be
provided an opportunity to comment and participate on the proposed amendments. As
part of this application review process, public notification in the form of mailed notices
was sent by LMD to affected property owners, public agencies, local service
providers, other inter - departmental departments, and the Department of Land
Conservation & Development (DLCD). Public notice of the Planning Commission
hearing and the Board of Commissioners hearings are published once for each hearing
in the Eugene Register -Guard newspaper. Additionally, a Ballot Measure 56 notice was
mailed to all property owners affected by the proposed zone changes.
LMD has done a number of outreach actions for this item. On April 21, 2011 LMD staff
held an Open House Event in Harris Hall advertized on two different dates via a display
advertisement in the Eugene Register Guard. Additionally, LMD has created an
informational webpage for this item at:
hftp / /www lanecounty org /Departments /PW/ LMD /Land Use /Pages /MetroBoundary aspx.
Given the above finding, the application is consistent with Goal 1.
Page 23 of 31
Pave 23 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
Goal 2: Planning
To establish a land use planning process and policy framework as a basis for all
decisions and actions to use of land and to assure an adequate factual base for
such decisions and actions.
Finding61: This goal requires governmental agencies to adopt land use plans and
implementation ordinances after public hearings are completed. Lane County has
conformed to the goal through adoption of the Rural Comprehensive Plan and the
implementing ordinances found in Lane Code Ch. 16. Lane County co- adopted the
Metro Plan pursuant to Ordinance No. 883 which is a component of the RCP pursuant to
LC 16.400(4)(a)(i). The County is required to provide the public opportunities to
comment and participate during the review of this (and any) plan amendment proposal.
The public hearing and notification process will be conducted pursuant to applicable
provisions in Lane Code Ch. 14.300, LC Ch. 16. 400(6), LC Ch. 12, and Metro Plan Ch
IV.
Throughout this document staff has developed findings of consistency with a wide
range of applicable criteria listed above. The proposal must meet any and all of the
criteria in order to be implemented and adopted. Consistency with Goal 2 is derived
through the public process along with the complete set of findings of consistency with all
the criteria.
Goal 3: Agricultural Lands
To preserve and maintain agricultural lands.
Finding62: This goal recognizes the importance of maintaining agricultural lands
as those that are defined under the goal. In western Oregon, agricultural land consist of
predominantly Class I through IV soils identified by the Soil Conservation Service and
other lands suitable for farm use taking into consideration soil fertility, suitability for
grazing, climatic conditions, existing and future availability of water for farm and irrigation
purposes, existing land use patterns, technological and energy input required for
accepted farm practices. Lands in other classes which are necessary to permit farm
practices to be undertaken on adjacent or nearby lands, shall be included as
agricultural land in any event. Agricultural lands shall be preserved and maintained for
farm use, consistent with existing and future needs for agricultural products.
There are many acres of agricultural lands within the Metro Plan area. This proposal is
not affecting the amount, changing the amount of agricultural lands base, nor is it
changing the uses allowed in the agricultural lands in Lane County. An item in this
ordinance is simply changing like- for -like Plan designations: from Metro Plan
"Agriculture" to Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan "Agricultural' plan
designations. Thus, lands previously governed under the Metro Plan will be governed
under the RCP should this amendment obtain approval. Lane County completed Goal 3
requirements in its acknowledged RCP. Given the above finding, the application is
consistent with Goal 3.
Goal 4: Forest Lands
Page 24 of 31
Paee 24 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
This goal defines forest lands and requires counties to inventory them and adopt
policies and ordinances that will "conserve forest lands for forest uses." .
Finding63: This goal promotes the importance of conserving forest lands for forest
uses. Forest Lands shall include lands which are suitable for commercial forest uses
including adjacent or nearby lands which are necessary to permit forest operations or
practices and other forested lands that maintain soil, air, water and fish and wildlife
resources.
There some areas of forest land within the Metro Plan area. This proposal is not
affecting the amount, changing the amount of forest lands base, or changing the uses
allowed in the forest lands in Lane County. An item in this ordinance is simply changing
like- for -like Plan designations: from Metro Plan "Forest land" to Lane County Rural
Comprehensive Plan "Forest' plan designations. Thus, lands previously governed
under the Metro Plan will be governed under the RCP should this amendment obtain
approval. Lane County completed Goal 4 requirements in its acknowledged RCP. Given
the above finding, the application is consistent with Goal 4.
Goal 5: Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces
To protect natural resources and conserve scenic and historic areas and open
spaces.
Finding64: This goal directs jurisdictions to inventory, protect, and conserve
natural resources for present and future generations. Within the Metro Plan area, Lane
County, Springfield, and Eugene jointly completed the Goal 5 requirements in the
acknowledged Metro Plan document Ch. III Environmental Resources Element, Goal 5
sections.
If adopted, the proposed amendments would apply existing Goal 5 policies currently
contained in the Metro Plan to lands removed from the Metro Plan and placed within the
jurisdiction of the RCP. Therefore no changes in existing goal 5 policies are being
implemented through by these amendments. Additionally, the "Safe Harbor" riparian
protection regulations for areas within the Metro Plan will be applied to lands removed
from the Metro Plan. Based on this finding, the application is consistent with Goal 5.
Goal 6: Air, Water and Land Resource Quality
To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the
state.
Finding65: This goal requires adequate protection measures for preservation of
air, water and I and. Within the Metro Plan area, Lane County, Springfield, and
Eugene jointly completed the Goal 6 requirements in the acknowledged Metro Plan
document Ch. 1 II Environmental Resources Element, Goal 6 sections. No changes to
Goal 6 elements are being attempted with this proposal. Lands previously governed
under the Metro Plan will be governed under the RCP should this amendment obtain
approval. Lane County completed Goal 6 requirements in its acknowledged RCP. Given
Page 25 of 31
Page 25 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
the above finding, the application is consistent with Goal 6.
Goal 7: Areas Subject to Natural Hazards
To protect people and property from natural hazards.
Finding 66: This goal directs jurisdictions to adopt comprehensive plans that
reduce the risks to people and property from natural hazards. Within the Metro Plan
area, Lane County, Springfield, and Eugene jointly completed the Goal 7 requirements
in the acknowledged Metro Plan document Ch. III Environmental Resources Element,
Goal 7 sections. No changes to Goal 7 elements are being attempted with this proposal.
Lands previously governed under the Metro Plan will be governed under the RCP
should this amendment obtain approval. Lane County completed Goal 7 requirements in
its acknowledged RCP. Given the above finding, the application is consistent with Goal
7.
Goal 8: Recreational Needs
To satisfy the recreational need s of the citizens of t he state and visitors and,
where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities
including destination resorts.
Finding67: The goal's requirements for meeting recreational needs, now and in
the future, shall be planned for by governmental agencies having responsibility for
recreation areas, facilities and opportunities. Within the Metro Plan area, Lane County,
Springfield, and Eugene jointly completed the Goal 8 requirements in the
acknowledged Metro Plan document Ch. III Parks and Recreation Facility Element,
section G. No changes to Goal 8 elements are being attempted with this proposal.
Lands previously governed under the Metro Plan will be governed under the RCP
should this amendment obtain approval. Lane County completed Goal 8 requirements in
its acknowledged RCP. Given the above finding, the application is consistent with Goal
8.
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.
Finding68: This goal states Comprehensive plans and policies shall contribute to
a stable and healthy economy in all regions of the state. Within the Metro Plan area,
Lane County, Springfield, and Eugene jointly completed the Goal 9 requirements in the
acknowledged Metro Plan document Ch. III Economic Element, section B. No changes
to Goal 9 elements are being attempted with this proposal. Lands previously governed
under the Metro Plan will be governed under the RCP should this amendment obtain
approval. Lane County completed Goal 9 requirements in its acknowledged RCP. Given
the above finding, the application is consistent with Goal 9.
Goal 10: Housing
To provide for the housing needs for the citizens of the State.
Page 26 of 31
Pa ,-e 26 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
Finding69: This goal states plans shall encourage the availability of adequate
numbers of needed housing units at price ranges and rent levels which are
commensurate with the financial capabilities of Oregon households and allow for
flexibility of housing location, type and density. Within the Metro Plan area, Lane County,
Springfield, and Eugene jointly completed the Goal 10 requirements in the
acknowledged Metro Plan document Ch. III Residential Land Use and Housing Element,
section A. No changes to Goal 10 elements are being attempted with this proposal.
Lands previously governed under the Metro Plan will be governed under the RCP
should this amendment obtain approval. Lane County completed Goal 10 requirements
in its acknowledged RCP. Given the above finding, the application is consistent with
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.
Finding 70: The goal states Urban and rural development shall be guided and
supported by types and levels of urban and rural public facilities and services
appropriate for, but limited to, the needs and requirements of the urban, urbanizable,
and rural areas to be served. A provision for key facilities shall be included in each
plan. Within the Metro Plan area, Lane County, Springfield, and Eugene jointly
completed the Goal 11 requirements in the acknowledged Metro Plan document Ch. III
Public Facilities and Services Element, section H. No changes to Goal 11 elements are
being attempted with this proposal. Lands previously governed under the Metro Plan
will be governed under the RCP should this amendment obtain approval. Lane County
completed Goal 11 requirements in its acknowledged RCP. Given the above finding, the
application is consistent with Goal 11.
Goal 12: Transportation
To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation
system.
Finding71: Under this goal, transportation a transportation plan shall (1) consider
all modes of transportation including mass transit, air, water, pipeline, rail, highway,
bicycle and pedestrian; (2) be based upon an inventory of local, regional and state
transportation needs; (3) consider the differences in social consequences that would
result from utilizing differing combinations of transportation modes; (4) avoid principal
reliance upon any one mode of transportation; (5) minimize adverse social, economic
and environmental impacts and costs; (6) conserve energy; (7) meet the needs of the
transportation disadvantaged by improving transportation services; (8) facilitate the flow
of goods and services so as to strengthen the local and regional economy; and (9)
conform with local and region al comprehensive land use plans. Each plan shall include
a provision for transportation as a key facility.
Within the Metro Plan area, Lane County, Springfield, and Eugene jointly completed the
Goal 12 requirements in the acknowledged Metro Plan document Ch. III Transportation
Page 27 of 31
Page 27 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
Element, section F. No changes to Goal 12 elements are being attempted with this
proposal. Lands previously governed under the Metro Plan will be governed under the
RCP should this amendment obtain approval. Lane County completed Goal 12
requirements in its acknowledged RCP and in the Lane County Rural Transportation
Plan; a special purpose plan of the RCP. Given the above finding, the application is
consistent with Goal 12.
Goal 13: Energy Conservation
To conserve energy
Finding72: This goal states land and uses shall be managed and controlled so
as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic
principles. Within the Metro Plan area, Lane County, Springfield, and Eugene jointly
completed the Goal 13 requirements in the acknowledged Metro Plan document Ch. III
Energy Element, section J. No changes to Goal 13 elements are being at tempted with
this proposal. Lands previously governed under the Metro Plan will be governed under
the RCP should this amendment obtain approval. Lane County completed Goal 13
requirements in its acknowledged RCP. Given the above finding, the application is
consistent with Goal 13.
Goal 14: Urbanization
To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use, to
accommodate urban population and urban employment inside urban growth
boundaries, to ensure efficient use of land, and to provide for livable communities.
Finding 73: The Metro Plan area is not within an urban growth boundary. This
proposal is seeking to move the Metro Plan boundary corresponding with the adopted
Springfield UGB in phase 1 of this proposal. There is no foreseeable connection
between the proposed Metro Plan Boundary adjustment and future U GB expansions or
annexations. Lands previously governed under the Metro Plan will be governed under
the RCP should this amendment obtain approval. Lane County completed Goal 14
requirements in its acknowledged RCP. Given the above finding, the application is
consistent with Goal 14.
Goal: 15 Willamette River Greenway
To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural, scenic, historical,
agricultural, economic and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette
River as the Willamette River Greenway.
Findino74: The goal recognizes the importance to protect, conserve, and enhance
areas along the Willamette Greenway. Areas which contain this boundary within the
Metro Plan area are located along the river banks of the Coast and Middle Fork
Willamette River. Lane County requires Greenway Development Permits for
intensification or changes of use or development as defined in LC 16.254. The
jurisdictional area of the Metro Plan was found to be in compliance with Goal 15 on
September 12, 1982.
Lands previously governed under the Metro Plan will be governed under the RCP
Page 28 of 31
Paee 28 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
should this amendment obtain approval. Lane County completed Goal 15 requirements
in its acknowledged RCP. Given the above finding, the application is consistent with
Goal 15.
Goal: 16 Estuarine Resources
Goal: 17 Coastal Shorelands
Goal: 18 Beaches and Dunes
Goal: 19 Ocean Resources
Finding75: These four goals are geographically separated from the Metro Plan
area. Therefore, they are not applicable to this application.
IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, LANE COUNTY, OREGON
ORDINANCE NO. PA 1283
Page 29 — Ordinance No. PA
IN THE MATTER OF AMENDING THE LANE COUNTY
RURAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BY APPLYING PLAN
DESIGNATIONS TO LANDS REMOVED FROM THE
METRO PLAN PURSUANT TO ORDINANCE NO. PA
1281, ADOPTING THE CITY OF SPRING FIELD
PARCEL SPECIFIC UGB BOUNDARY ON OFFICIAL LANE
COUNTY RURAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAPS TO
COMPLY WITH OAR 660 - 024 - 0020(2); AND ADOPTING
SAVINGS AND SEVERABILITY CLAUSE
Page 29 of 31
EXHIBIT E
WHEREAS, through Ordinance No. PA 1281, the partners of the Eugene - Springfield
Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) have jointly modified the boundaries of the Metro
Plan; and
WHEREAS, it is now necessary to amend the Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan (RCP) to
apply RCP plan designations to lands removed from the Metro Plan pursuant to ordinance no.
PA 1281: and
WHEREAS, it is also necessary to adopt the City of Springfield's parcel specific Urban Growth
Boundary location on official Lane County RCP plan and zone maps to comply with OAR 660-
024- 0020(2); and
WHEREAS, the proposal was reviewed at a hearing of Lane County Planning Commission on
July 19, 2011, and August 16, 2011; and
WHEREAS, the proposal was also reviewed at hearing of the Lane County Board of
Commissioners on March 13, 2012; and
WHEREAS, evidence exists in the record indicating that the proposal meets the requirements of
the RCP, Lane Code and applicable state law, and
WHEREAS, the Board of County Commissioners is now ready to take action.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of County Commissioners of Lane County ordains as follows:
Section 1. The Official Lane County Rural Comprehensive Plan (RCP) - plan maps # 1701,
1702, 1703, 1802 and 1803, which are included as Exhibits A -E to this ordinance are hereby
repealed and replaced with the amended RCP plan maps # 1701, 1702, 1703, 1802 and 1803
included as Exhibits F -J attached and incorporated herein by this reference.
Section 2. The Official RCP - zone maps # 1702, 1703, 1802 and 1803, which are included
as Exhibits K -N to this ordinance are hereby repealed and replaced with the amended RCP zone
maps # 1702, 1703, 1802 and 1803 included as Exhibits O- R attached and incorporated herein
by this reference.
Page 30 of 31
Paee 30 — Ordinance No. PA
EXHIBIT E
Section 3. The prior policies, plan and zone diagram designations repealed or changed by
this Ordinance remain in full force and effect to authorize prosecution of persons in violation
thereof prior to the effective date of this Ordinance.
Section 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause phrase of portion of this Ordinance is
for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such section
shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision, and such holding shall not affect
the validity of the remaining portions thereof.
FURTHER, although not part of this Ordinance, the Board of County Commissioners adopts
findings and conclusions in support of this action as set forth in Exhibit "E" to Ordinance No. PA
1281, incorporated here by this reference.
ENACTED this day of _, 2012.
Sid Leiken, Chair
Lane County Board of Commissioners
Recording Secretary for this Board Meeting
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Date Lane County
Office of legal Counsel
Page 31 of 31
Page 31 — Ordinance No. PA