The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutOrdinance 5944 11/08/1999 . . "'T , _Jl ORDINANCE NO 5944 AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE AMENDED GLENWOOD REFINEMENT PLAN AND RELATED AMENDMENTS TO THE SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE; INCLUDING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY The Springfield City Council finds that: 1. In 1984, Glenwood was included in Eugene's urban growth boundary and that City was given jurisdiction for the purposes of planning and the provision of urban services; 2. On July 14, 1986, the Glenwood Refinement Plan, Phase I (Ordinance No. 19392) and on July 14,1990 the Glenwood Refinement Plan (Ordinance No. 19713) were adopted by Eugene as a refinement of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan). 3. On July 25,1990 the Glenwood Refinement Plan (PA 913) was adopted and approved by the Lane County Board of Commissioners as a refinement of the Metro Plan. 4. In 1994, the current effort to review the question of appropriate jurisdictional boundaries for Glenwood began with a petition signed by over 450 members of the community presented to the Springfield City Council. 5. From 1994 to 1998 several studies were prepared by L-COG and Springfield concerning the Glenwood jurisdictional issue culminating in the 1998 Glenwood Jurisdictional Study. That study called for a Metro Plan amendment to allow Glenwood to be transferred from Eugene to Springfield. 6. The 1998 Glenwood Jurisdictional Study also called for Springfield to adopt and implement the Glenwood Refinement Plan as the land use policy document in those areas where jurisdiction was transferred. 7. On November 16, 1998 Springfield (Ordinance 5900) and Lane County (Ordinance PA 1123) approved the Metro Plan amendment changing the jurisdiction of Glenwood from Eugene to Springfield. 8. On December 7, 1998 Eugene (Ordinance 20137) approved the Metro Plan amendment changing the jurisdiction of Glenwood from Eugene to Springfield. 9. The Intergovernmental Agreement that was part of the Metro Plan amendment approval process also called for Springfield to officially adopt the Glenwood Refinement Plan. 10. On January 28, 1999 the Glenwood Planning Advisory Committee held the first of 8 meetings to review the Glenwood Refinement Plan prior to adoption by Springfield and Lane County. As required by the 1998 Glenwood Jurisdictional Study, the Springfield Planning Commission acting as the City's Committee for Citizen Involvement, approved the re-establishmenfof the Glenwood Planning Advisory Committee in November 1998. The Glenwood Planning Advisory Committee made the following revisions with no substantive changes to the Glenwood Refinement Plan: · The standard name changes -- "Eugene" to "Springfield", where applicable; "EWEB" to "SUB" (including the statement that SUB will be the ultimate electric and water provider for Glenwood); and "Southern Pacific" to "Union Pacific"; · Resolution of inconsistencies caused by changes to ORS since the adoption of the GRP -- the . change from "mobile homes" to "manufactured dwellings"; -1- Ordinance. 5944 _ t page., 2 · Resolution of inconsistencies between Eugene and Springfield Municipal Code regulations concerning street improvement projects, storm drainage improvements and Bancrofting methods. · Resolution of inconsistencies between Eugene and Springfield land use regulations -- Eugene's Site Review Overlay District vs. Springfield's Site Plan Review process, Conditional vs. Discretionary Use approval, types of streets - "principal" vs. "arterial", and Eugene's Historic Preservation Ordinance vs. SDC Article 30; · Establishment of the Greenway Setback Line along the Willamette River within one year of the adoption of the GRP; · Deletion of portions of the GRP that no longer apply -- outdated land use data, language pertaining to allowing "mobile homes" on individual lots, reference to the small "mobile home" park at the southwest corner of Nugget Way and the McVay Highway, reference to the "remnant" parcel owned by Lane Transit District along Henderson Avenue that is no longer available as a future park site, reference to the stand of mature fir trees on the west side of McVay Highway that have been cut down, and infrastructure projects that have been completed since the adoption of the GRP - extension of the sanitary sewer line across the Willamette River, the bikeway connector to the Knickerbocker bike bridge, and park policies requiring coordination between Eugene and Willamalane; · Inclusion of TransPlan topics such as "nodes" and BRT (Bus Rapid Transit); · Revision of the refinement plan diagram - the only change has been to show that the Lane County Transfer Facility is designated Public Land, rather than Light-Medium Industrial, consistent with the current Metro Plan diagram; and · Minor modification to numerous maps in the plan. · The Springfield Development Code (Article 5 Non Conforming Uses, specifically adding Subsections (5) and (6) to Section 5.030 and adding Section 5.070; and amending Article 16 Residential Zoning Districts, specifically adding Subsection (15) to Section 16.100. These amendments address non-conforming uses in Glenwood with the purpose of maintaining consistency with Eugene's regulations. . . . 11. On May 4 and July 7, 1999 the Springfield Planning Commission conducted two Work Sessions to review the amended Glenwood Refinement Plan and related amendments to the Springfield Development Code. 12. On August 2, 1999 the Springfield City Council conducted a Work Session to review the amended Glenwood Refinement Plan and related amendments to the Springfield Development Code. 13. On September 21, 1999 the Springfield and Lane County Planning Commissions conducted a public hearing on the amended Glenwood Refinement Plan and related amendments to the Springfield Development Code. The public hearing was closed and deliberation was continued until October 19 to consider two issues that were raised. This public hearing was advertised in accordance with Springfield Development Code Section 14.030. 14. On October 19, 1999 the Springfield and Lane County Planning Commissions continued deliberation on the two issues raised at the September 21 public hearing. The Planning Commissions voted unanimously to adopt the changes submitted by staff with a recommendation of adoption to the Springfield City Council and Lane County Board of Commissioners. 15. On November 8, 1999 the Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of Commissioners conducted a joint public hearing on the amended Glenwood Refinement Plan and related amendments to the Springfield Development Code. This joint public hearing was advertised in accordance with Springfield Development Code Section 14.030. -2- Ordinance 5944 .. page"'3 . 16. The Springfield and Lane County Planning Commissions and the Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of Commissioners have reviewed the amended Glenwood Refinement Plan and related amendments to the Springfield Development Code. Based upon the recommendation of both Planning Commissions, the public testimony and preceding findings, the Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of Commissioners have determined that the amended Glenwood Refinement Plan and related amendments to the Springfield Development Code are consistent with the Metro Plan, as acknowledged by the Land Conservation and Development Commission. The Glenwood Refinement Plan and related amendments to the Springfield Development Code conform to applicable Statewide Goals, Administrative Rules and State Statutes. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The findings set forth above and in the Staff Report, Attachment A, attached hereto, are hereby adopted. Section 2. The City of Springfield as described in the Staff Report, Attachment A, hereby . adopts the goals and policies contained in the amended Glenwood .Refinement Plan dated November 8, 1999 and related amendments to the Springfield Development Code as attached hereto. Section 3. The amended Glenwood Refinement Plan dated November 8, 1999, Attachment C, is a refinement to the Metro Plan. Section 4. The Plan diagram included in the amended Glenwood Refinement Plan dated November 8, 1999, Attachment C, is hereby adopted, consistent with and as a refinement of the Metro Plan diagram. The explanatory text discussing each segment of the amended Glenwood Refinement Plan diagram is recognized as clarifying and providing further explanation of the intent of the Metro Plan diagram. . Section 5. The Springfield Development Code (Article 5 Non Conforming Uses, specifically adding Subsections (5) and (6) to Section 5.030 and adding Section 5.070; and amending Article 16 Residential Zoning Districts, specifically adding Subsection (15) to Section 16.100 is hereby amended as described in Attachment D. Section 6. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this ordinance is for any reason held invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct and independent provision and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions hereof. ADOPTED by the Common Council of the City of Springfield this 8th day of November 1999, by a vote of ~ for and --2.. against. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Springfield this 8th day.of November 1999. ~~~ Mayor ~ ATTEST: . ( C\~ o -3- City Recorder REVIEWED & APPROVED AS TO FORM ~ (;:)"~'4 ~ ~--C->I\~" ( DATE:~ '2. \ "\~. OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY '.: ' 'i': ~ . , Uj ,. . . 'h " ODD .. . . . , . . . ':;?i-;':~';';,'; . ,', :. . " : ::. , : -, , ~, . ;'> co'".. - .~:'j;~"" :?-~: :~.. ':'{. ~:,.::::; .:::; ~,~;,~'" " ~ "','._o:~':'" ..:., -" -:, '"'. ,.", ~].: . .: ': ,':. . R~:rlNE:M~NT PL November 1999 \, . . ~ . . GLENWOOD REFINEMENT PLAN GLENWOOD PLANNING TEAMS Phase I Phase II (4/85-3/86) (10/86-4/89) Steve Moe, Chair Marge Marino, Vice Chair Susan Anderson Ruth Dynes Eric Gordon Randy Hledik Don Jones Bill Moynier Gary Pape Jim Spicer Steve Moe, Chair Jim Spicer, Vice Chair Steve Barton Lola Crandall Randy Hledik Don Jones Steve Pardo John Rasmussen Howard Smith Springfield Jurisdiction (1/99-4/99) Joan Armstead William Cassara Tom Draggoo Fred Collier Randy Hledik Steve Moe Erik Myrmo Steve Pardo Keith Schneider Howard Smith The following people also served on the Glenwood Phase II Planning Team, but were unable to finish their terms: Ruth Dynes Gaylen Provost This plan was prepared by the Phase I and II Planning Teams aided by staff from the City of Eugene, including the departments of Planning and Development; Parks, Recreation and Cultural Services; Public Safety; and Public Works. Staff of other public agencies, including Eugene Water and Electric Board, Glenwood Water District, Lane County, the Lane Council of Governments, and the City of Springfield also provided assistance. Special thanks to Polly Furr for the use of her drawings on Pages 88 and 102 and to Steve Moe for use of his historic flood photographs of Glenwood. This document has been modified as part of the Glenwood transition process from Eugene to Springfield. For more information about the Glenwood Refinement Plan, contact: City of Springfield, Development Services Department 225 Fifth. Street Springfield OR 97477 541.726.3759 TABLE OF CONTENTS - TEXT Page r INTRODUCTION I. PLAN PURPOSE 1 . II. INTRODUCTION TO THE PLAN AREA 1 III PLAN PHASING 1 IV. HISTORY OF THE PLANNING PROCESS AND JURISDICTIONAL RESPONSIBILITY 3 V. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS AND POLICIES 4 COMMUNITY VISION AND DIRECTION 7 I. INTRODUCTION 7 II. COMMUNITY VISION 7 III. COMMUNITY DIRECTION 7 LAND USE ELEMENT 9 I. ORGANIZATION OF THE LAND USE AREA 9 II. GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO LAND USE 9 III. GENERAL LAND USE POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION POLICIES 16 IV. PLAN DIAGRAM 19 SUBAREA 1 CENTRAL RESIDENTIAL AREA 21 SUBAREA 2 SOUTH 17TH AVENUE TRANSITIONAL AREA 22 SUBAREA 3 GLENWOOD BOULEVARD/17TH AVENUE INDUSTRIAL AREA 23 SUBAREA 4 GLENWOOD INDUSTRIAL AREA 25 SUBAREA 5 OPEN SPACE 26 SUBAREA 6 RIVER INDUSTRIAL 28 SUBAREA 7 FRANKLIN BOULEVARD COMMERCIAL-INDUSTRIAL STRIP 30 SUBAREA 8 RIVER OPPORTUNITY AREA 31 SUBAREA 9 MCVAY MIXED USE AREA 33 SUBAREA 10 SOUTH MCVAY INDUSTRIAL 35 ..' WILLAMETTE RIVER SITE DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES 37 INDUSTRIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES 39 . FRANKLIN BOULEVARD DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES 40 MCVAY HIGHWAY SITE DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES 42 V. PHASE I LAND USE ELEMENT 43 TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT 47 I. INTRODUCTION 47 II. PHASE I TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT 55 PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES ELEMENT 67 I. INTRODUCTION 67 II. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES GOAL 68 III. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES POLICIES 68 WATER AND ELECTRIC SERVICES 68 PUBLIC SAFETY 71 PARKS AND RECREATION 73 STORM SEWERS AND DRAINAGE 77 SANITARY SEWERS 78 URBAN TRANSITION AND ANNEXATION 84 ENVIRONMENT AL DESIGN ELEMENT 87 I. NATURAL FEATURES 87 II. HISTORIC QUALITIES 93 III. URBAN DESIGN 97 PLAN IMPLEMENTATION 105 . I. OVERVIEW 105 II. PRIORITIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION. 105 III. PLAN UPDATE 108 .,\' INTRODUCTION . I. PLAN PURPOSE The Glenwood Refinement Plan is intended to provide bac~ground information and policy . direction for public and private decisions affecting the growth and development of the Glenwood area. The refinement plan will guide the provision of public services, such as sanitary sewers and'street improvements. It will serve as a basis for evaluating private development proposals, . such as zone change requests. It will also provide a common framework for those engaged in the conservation, development, and redevelopment of the area. II. INTRODUCTION TO THE PLAN AREA Glenwood is located between the cities of Eugene and Springfield. The Willamette River bounds Glenwood on the north and east and Interstate 5 on the south and west. The plan area is approximately one square mile (618 acres) in size and there are about 1,300 residents. The area is developed with a mixture of residential, industrial, and commercial land uses and there is also a large amount of undeveloped or underdeveloped land. Franklin Boulevard serves as the main transportation link to both Eugene and Springfield. The area has , excellent access to 1-5 and the two Union Pacific Railroad lines that traverse Glenwood, While most of the area is outside Springfield's city limits, the city limits do extend into the westerly portion of Glenwood. The Plan Area Map on Page 2 shows the entire plan area and the current . city limit line. The Glenwood area was initially settled in the mid- to late 1800s as a farming community. While portions of Glenwood had been annexed to Eugene over time, the area has a history of strong community identification and retains a sense of separate identity. Over the years, numerous discussions and attempts to annex the entire area have not been successful. III. PLAN PHASING Because some portions of the area are experiencing more development pressure, the Glenwood Refinement Plan is divided into two phases. The Plan Area Map on Page 2 illustrates the Phase I area which is capable of receiving urban level services in the near future. The Phase 1 area contains approximately 65 acres and is located on the east side of Glenwood Boulevard between the Union Pacific Railroad tracks and 1-5. The area is now a mixture of residential, industrial, and vacant land. The western portion of the Phase I area is already inside the Springfield city limits. The planning process for the Phase I area was adopted by the Eugene City Council and Board of County Commissioners in 1986. -1- . -i , '1- ,\ ' ~ .,.-',". ',', ~';" - . . PLAN AREA July, 1999 _ Phase 1 - City Limits N A o 500 1000 Feet I I . GLENWOOD -2- ~ The Phase II area includes the rest of Glenwood, which is about 552 acres in size. There are . some aspects of the refinement plan that are specific to the Phase I area, in particular the Phase I transportation strategies, but otherwise the goals, policies, and implementation strategies within the plan pertain to both phases. .", "" IV. HISTORY OF THE PLANNING PROCESS AND JURISDICTIONAL RESPONSIBiliTY In 1982, when the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan was adopted, Glenwood was the only portion of the metropolitan area where Eugene and Springfield remained undecided about which jurisdiction should ultimately provide urban-level services. As a result, policies within the Metropolitan Plan called for a jurisdictional study to be jointly conducted by Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County to determine which city would have eventual jurisdictional responsibility for Glenwood. The Glenwood Jurisdictional Study was adopted by all three jurisdictions in 1984 and concluded that Eugene should eventually annex Glenwood and provide the area with urban services. In its rple as the service provider for the Glenwood area, Eugene also agreed to work with Glenwood . residents and property owners on a refinement plan to study land use, transportation, and services issues in the community. The City of Eugene began a planning process for Glenwood in conjunction with the Glenwood Community Organization. In February 1985, the Glenwood Community Organization held an "issues session" for the Phase I area to determine important community issues that should be addressed in the first phase of the plan. Detailed information on the results of that session can be found in the Appendix to the plan dated April 1989. . As a result of the issues session, the Glenwood Community Organization appointed a ten-member planning team consisting of residents and property owners in both the Phase I and II areas of Glenwood. The purpose of the planning team was to develop a draft plan, assisted by Eugene and Lane County staff, and recommend it for adoption by Eugene and Lane County. The composition and operating procedures followed by the Glenwood Planning Team during. both phases are in the Appendix dated April 1989. In March 1986, the Phase I.planning team reviewed and approved the draft of the first phase of the plan. It was then printed and distributed to all property owners, residents, and businesses in the Phase I area. The planning team held a public meeting to receive community comments on the draft plan, made needed revisions, and forwarded its recommendations to the Eugene and Lane County planning commissions. The planning commissions held a joint public hearing on the draft plan and forwarded its recommendations to the Eugene City Council and the Board of County Commissioners. After both elected bodies conducted public hearings-.J!.1ey adopted the Phase I Glenwood Refinement Plan. The effective date of this plan was August 13, 1986. In October 1986, work began on the second phase of the plan. The Glenwood Community Organization appointed a new planning team and sponsored an issues session for the Phase II area in November 1986. The results of the issues session are in the Appendix dated April 1989. -3- . \. ~ . . . In January 1989, the Phase II planning team reviewed the draft of the second phase of the plan. The draft plan was then printed and distributed to all property owners, residents, and businesses in Glenwood. After holding a public meeting to receive community comments on the draft plan, the. planning team. made needed revisions and forwarded its recommendations to the Eugene and Lane County planning commissions. The planning commissions held a pUblic hearing and forwarded their recommendations to the Eugene City Council and Board of County Commissioners who held public hearings and acted to adopt the plan in July, 1990. However, the question of which city should have jurisdiction over Glenwood was still unresolved. The current effort to review the question of appropriate jurisdictional boundaries for Glenwood began with a petition signed by 450 members of the community that was presented to the Springfield City Council in 1994. The Springfield City Council commissioned several studies to analyze the costs and benefits of a jurisdictional transfer from Eugene to Springfield and to identify associated issues and options. The most recent ofthese studies resulted in the Glenwood Jurisdictional Study, adopted in May 1998. After extensive discussion between the two City Councils and the MPC, it was determined the transfer of the entire Glenwood area would occur as an amendment to the Metro Plan. The Metro Plan amendment was approved in December 1998 by all three jurisdictions, giving Springfield comprehensive land use jurisdiction over Glenwood. Springfield's adoption of the Glenwood Refinement Plan is part of the jurisdictional transfer process. V. PLAN ORGANIZATION AND HIGHLIGHTS . The Glenwood Refinement Plan consists of an introductory chapter, a section on Community Vision and Direction, four chapters or elements on specific issues, and a section on Plan Implementation. The specific elements of the plan are Land Use, Transportation, Public Facilities and Services, and Environmental Design. The Community Vision and Direction Section beginning on Page 7 consists of broadly stated goals for the Glenwood community and guidelines for achieving these goals. The Land Use Element beginning on Page 9 includes specific development standards for areas along Franklin Boulevard and the McVay Highway, for development within the Willamette River Greenway, and for industrial development adjacent to residential areas. It creates two mixed-use opportunity areas along the river in recognition of the unique opportunities that the. river area in Glenwood provides. This element also includes a specific section on Phase I, which provides for this area's transition from an existing residential/industrial mix to industrial uses in the future. -4- ~ The Transportation Element beginning on Page 47 contains policies and implementation strategies to ensure safer, better-developed, and more accessible transportation networks in Glenwood, including proposed improvements to Franklin Boulevard and improvements to pedestrian and bicycle circulation and access. Transportation was a major focus in the Phase I area. The Phase I section of the Transportation Element includes goals and policies as well as short and long-range transportation strategies. The strategies recognize the need for improvements in access if new development is to take place, the need to minimize transportation impacts on the remaining residential development, and the need for guidelines for the street system that will eventually be required to serve the area. . :..::1 The Public Facilities and Services Element beginning on Page 67 describes what services are now available in Glenwood and what services will be required as more development takes place. Services reviewed in the plan include water and electric, public safety, sanitary and storm sewers, and parks. The plan's most important service issues include: provision and timing of sanitary sewers; annexation policies; coordination and timing of the dissolution of the Glenwood Water District (including interim measures for fire protection); and coordination of parks services with the Willamalane Park and Recreation District. ',.."';..t:... The Environmental Design Element beginning on Page 87 discusses issues around both the natural and developed environment in Glenwood and how the image of the area might be strengthened through the use of urban design techniques. It contains a capsule history of the area and its highlights include discussions on the Willamette River Greenway, the impact of flooding, and the preservation of wetland areas in Glenwood. It also includes an urban design section that makes recommendations regarding appropriate urban design for Glenwood. .. l ~~'i Each element has findings in a discussion format, along with stated policies and implementation . strategies. Some elements also include goal statements. The Environmental Design Element includes design recommendations. Goals are broad statements of philosophy and are adopted by the City Council and Board of County Commissioners. They may never be completely attainable, but they describe the hopes of the community and they help to establish direction. Findings are factual statements resulting from analysis of information gathered and/or community perceptions. They reflect issues to be addressed in the plan and provide support for policy statements. Policies provide the basis for consistent action to move the community toward its goals. The City Council and Board of County Commissioners adopt policies. These policies will be used to evaluate actions such as zone changes to ensure that those actions are consistent with the adopted plan. Implementation Strategies are recognized as methods to implement the pOlIcies in the plan. Specific actions will be evaluated based on their ability to effectively implement plan policies . and goals, taking into consideration community priorities, funding options, and legal concerns. -5- . ~ ~ . . . ~, l,\- ,,~.'l. Design Recommendations are suggestions for public and private actions that would result in better urban design in Glenwood. Plan Implementation lists priorities for actions that will implement the plan. These implementation priorities are recognized by the elected officials as the most important actions to consider in carrying out the intent of the plan. This $ection also describes the plan amendment processes. The Glenwood Refinement Plan also includes an Appendix dated April 1989 printed under separate cover. The Appendix contains background material used in developing the plan, including materials from both issues sessions; history of zoning and annexation; Bancroft and assessment practices; and detailed information on the planning team's.discussions on the vacation of 21st Avenue in the Phase I area. VI. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS AND POLICIES The Glenwood Refinement Plan is a refinement of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan, adopted in 1982. This plan is the guiding document for public decisions affecting the metropolitan area. Refinementplans must be consistent with the direction established by the Metropolitan Plan. Any inconsistencies are addressed through amendments to the Metropolitan Plan at the time of the refinement plan adoption. -6- ., COMMUNITY VISION AND DIRECTION, . I. INTRODUCTION The two issues sessions held as part of the development of the refinement plan provided a statement of vision and direction for the future of Glenwood. This vision and direction reflects the diversity of interests in Glenwood. The Vision section consists of broadly stated goals for the community while the Direction section provides guidance for achieving these goals. II. COMMUNITY VISION Glenwood as an area that provides a strong sense of residential community and neighborliness and affordable housing. Glenwood as a prime industrial location which allows industrial and residential development to be compatible with one another. ;;~ . ,. Franklin Boulevard and the McVay Highway as attractive commercial corridors with safe pedestrian and bicycle access. " .... The Willamette River frontage as an area that is accessible to the public and is developed with a compatible mixture of uses that take advantage of the river's aesthetic and recreational assets. Glenwood as an area that is easily accessible for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists to both Eugene and Springfield. . Glenwood as an area in which full urban services will become available over time, with particular attention to provision of sanitary sewers. III. COMMUNITY DIRECTION 1. Maintain and improve Glenwood's sense of identity and community as it transitions into the City. 2. Maintain the viability of the residential area within Glenwood by conserving and upgrading the quality of existing housing wherever possible while retaining its affordable character. 3. Promote Glenwood as an attractive industrial area because of its easy access to 1-5 and rail service, its convenient location between Eugene and Springfield, anathe availability of a variety of sizes of vacant industrial parcels. 4. Reduce conflicts between industrial and residential development through use of site review procedures. -7- . " . . . II 5. Foster Franklin Boulevard and the McVay Highway as a desirable commercial location while improving its visual quality. 6. Encourage a variety of commercial, industrial, and residential uses as an integral part of the Glerwood community. 7. Promote use of rail service as a viable method of transport of industrial materials and goods. 8. Improve bicycle and pedestrian access into, out of, and within Glenwood and along the river. 9. Provide urban services in a timely way, including providing sanitary sewers to those who need them, improving street drainage, ensuring timely public safety response, and maintaining the viability of James Park or other park facilities. 10. Be sensitive to annexation concerns and provide for voluntary annexation wherever feasible. 11. Provide access to the river and promote development opportunities along the river, which take advantage of the river's natural assets and are sensitive to the river environment. 12. Improve the community's quality of life by addressing such issues as litter and noise pollution. -8- - LAND USE ELEMENT . I. ORGANIZATION OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT The Land Use Element has three main sections and a special section taken from the previously adopted Phase I Glenwood Refinement Plan. The first section includes a General Introduction . to Land Use in Glenwood and specific introductions on population characteristics and residential and industriaVcommercialland uses. The second section contains the General Land Use Policies and Implementation Strategies. These are applicable to the entire Glenwood area, including the Phase I area. The third section contains the Plan Diagram, specific subarea discussions, recommendations, implementation strategies, and site development guidelines. At the end of the element is the Phase I Land Use Element from the Glenwood Refinement Plan that was adopted in August 1986. The Phase.1 element has slight changes in it to bring its format into conformity with the Phase II plan. II. GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO LAND USE. The Land Use Element addresses the population, housing, land use, and zoning ~haracteristics of the Glenwood area. It provides direction on the way future growth and development should occur based on existing development patterns and zoning, and based on the goals and policies contained in the Metro Plan and related policy documents. In general, diversity in type and condition characterize the existing land use patterns in . Glenwood (See the Existing Land Use Map on Page 14). While there are distinct residential and . industrial areas, there are also other areas that are mixed commercial and industrial areas. Sites and structures are found in a range of standard and substandard conditions. The Glenwood area's unique combination and pattern of land uses are due in part to its central location between Eugene and Springfield and in part to its location along major transportation corridors. In particular, the transportation corridors of Franklin Boulevard and the McVay Highway cater to automobile-oriented commercial/industrial uses and travel-oriented residential uses,' such as mobile home/recreational vehicle parks. Glenwood's central location has also prompted large regional services to locate here, such as the Lane County Solid Waste Facility and more recently Lane Transit District's (L TD) bus maintenance and operations facility. Much of Glenwood's development has occurred without benefit of City services and a majority of the area is still outside the Springfield city limits. This largely non-urban form of development has also affected Glenwood's land use pattern. Most development has had to occur without sewers, resulting in land-intensive rather than labor-intensive industrial uses. Also, because of sewer unavailability, much of the 618 acres of land in Glenwood remains vacant or . underutilized. In fact, there is more vacant land (27 percent or 167 acres) in GIenwood than in any other single land use category (See Figure 1, Summary of Land Use, on Page 10). -9- . . '" . . . " Rgure 1 180 160 140 A 120 c 100 r 80 e 60 s 40 20 o Summary of Land Use 167 , Single Family Manufactured Residential Dwelling Retail Industrial Vacant 2/87 Source: Lane Council of Governments The zoning in Glenwood reflects an orientation toward industrial uses. Aside from the residential areas and a few other exceptions, Glenwood is zoned for LMI Light-Medium Industrial use (See the Zoning Map on Page 15 and Figure 2, Summary of Tax-Lotted Area by Zoning). Figure 2 Summary of Taxlotted area by zoning 68.15% (336 Acres) 2.43%(12 Acres) 7.71 % (38 Acres) 2.23% (11 Acres) . Residential III Public III Agriculture 1m) Commercial D Industrial 2/87 Source: Lane Council of Governments -10- '- A. Glenwood's Population The community of Glenwood has a population of approximately 1,330 people. Most of the residents are found either in the Central Residential subarea or in the eight mobile home parks located along Franklin Boulevard and the McVay Highway. Glenwood has a small average household size (1.82 persons) and a high percentage of one-person households (43 percent). Glenwood has a significantly higher proportion of elderly persons than Eugene or Springfield. . B. Residential land Use Glenwood serves an important function in the metropolitan area by providing low-cost housing, including manufactured dwellings. Residential development in Glenwood generally consists of single-family houses, manufactured dwellings on individual lots, and manufactured dwellings in parks. The density in the residential area is 6.9 units per acre, within the low-density residential range of 1-10 units per acre. Glenwood has a very high percentage of manufactured dwellings compared with other types of housing. There are 744 dwelling units in Glenwood. Of these, 72 percent are manufactured dwellings (66 percent in parks and 6 percent on individual lots) and 23 percent are single-family residences (See Figure 3 Page 12, Number of Residential Units by Structure Type). There are 46 manufactured dwellings on individual lots in Glenwood. These were established when Glenwood was under Lane County's jurisdiction. The City allows Type I manufactured dwellings . odn v8:cant I~ths: outsidef of mandudfactlul,red dwkelling parks; and Type I and II manufactured . welllngs Wit In manu acture we Ing par s. -11- . , . . . Figure 3 Number of Residential Units by Structure Type (20 Units) 2.69% . Duplex . 11II Manufactured Dwelling in Park III Manufactured Dwelling on Lot ED Multl.Family o Single Family (20 Units) 2.69% 6.18% (46 Units) 65.86% (490 Units) 2/87 Source: Lane Council of Governments There are 167 single-family residences in Glenwood. Of these, 42 percent are owner-occupied. Eugene's windshield survey conducted to determine general housing quality has indicated that a majority (62 percent) of the residential structures in Glenwood are in need of major repair. C. Industrial and Commercial Land Use Over the past 30 years, industrial development has gradually become the, single most predominant form of development (14 percent) in Glenwood, In line with this industrial orientation, a majority of Glenwood's total acreage (59 percent) and of Glenwood's vacant acreage (65 percent) is designated in the Metropolitan Plan for light-medium industrial use. Industrial park sites and freestanding industrial sites are available for development as well. A majority of the land (68 percent) in Glenwood is also zoned for industrial use. On the other hand, there is very little land developed (six percent), designated (eight percent), or zoned (two percent) for retail commercial uses. These commercial uses are located mostly along Franklin Boulevard. About 116 acres of industrially zoned land in Glenwood is vacant. Of this total, a majority of these parcels are five acres or less in size (There are 73 acres in 67 parcels). Conversely, there are 43 acres in five parcels that are six acres or larger (See Figure 4 Page 13, Industrially Zoned Undeveloped Area). These figures indicate that most of the industrialta1'ld in Glenwood is best suited for small to mid-size industrial uses. -12- .. Figure 4 . 60 '".' '50 A 40 c r 30 e 20 s 10 0 Less than 1 Acre Industrially Zoned Undeveloped Area Glenwood:TQtal Acreage by Lot Size 54 1-5 Acres 6-10 Acres More than 10 Acres Almost all (90 percent) of the commercial and industrial structures in Glenwood were considered to meet standard building conditions, according to Eugene's windshield survey conducted in 1987. "/ More detailed information on land use and population characteristics can be found in the Appendix dated April 1989. . -13- . . EXISTING LANDUSE Feb,1989 .. Commercial .. Industrial Residential Mobile Home Park _ Park D Vacant N A .0 I 500 1000 Feet , . G L E N w o o D -14 - .. III. GENERAL LAND USE POLICIES AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES Policies are in bold. Indented below each policy are any associated implementation strategies. . These general policies apply to the entire Glenwood Refinement Plan area including the Phase I area. There are specific policies and implementation strategies in each subarea discussion. 1. Use the Plan Diagram and the accompanying subarea discussions along with other policies in the Glenwood Refinement Plan in evaluating private development proposals and in reaching other public decisions affecting the area. 2. Develop programs that will strengthen designated residential and mixed-use areas, ...~ including the Central Residential subarea. 2.1 Pursue programs to provide low-interest loans and other services designed to help improve housing stock in Glenwood. 2.2 Explore the feasibility of creating a tax increment district. Consider using the revenues from the district for such uses as constructing essential infrastructure improvements, increasing housing resources for low and moderate-income households for subareas 1, 8, and 9, and reducing the financial burden of infrastructure improvements on low and moderate-income households. 2.3 Explore innovative housing options for designated residential areas in Glenwood, including provision for manufactured dwellings on individual lots. . .' 2.4 Consider development of a low-interest loan program to upgrade manufactured dwelling parks through use of Community Development Block Grant funds. I - 2.5 The City shall consider adopting a Manufactured Dwelling Park Closure ordinance for Glenwood in order to provide protection to manufactured dwelling dwellers in manufactured dwelling parks that convert to other uses. 3. Minimize the impact of industrial development on adjacent residential development and provide for an orderly transition from residential to industrial land use for the existing residential areas that are designated for future industrial use with particular attention to the Phase I residential area and the South 17th Avenue subarea. 3.1 Use the Industrial Site Development Guidelines as criteria in reviewing industrial development proposals through the site plan review process. -16- . . . . 4. The City shall allow for a gradual transition from existing residential to future industrial use for those areas that are currently zoned residential but are industrially designated. 4.1 Retain existing low-density residential zoning until individual property owners request a change to light-medium industrial zoning. . 4.2 Protect existing low-density residential zoning by allowing the continuation of pre- existing non-conforming use status. Consider amending Article 5 (regulations pertaining to pre-existing non-conforming use status) of the Springfield Development Code. Discussion: This policy and implementation strategy is intended for the Phase I and South 17th Avenue transitional areas. This is to allow an orderly transition with maximum individual flexibility for property owners in these two transitional areas as they change from residential to iridustrialland use over time. It is also intended that individual property owners may retain their residential zoning even after annexation to the City, if they wish. 5. Avoid linear expansion of strip commercial development along Franklin Boulevard/McVay Highway and Glenwood Boulevard. Additional commercial development in those areas shall be encouraged to take place through in-filling or redevelopment of the existing commercial strip. 5.1 Discourage future commercial zone changes for parcels that would expand the fringes of strip commercial along Franklin Boulevard/ McVay Highway. 5.2 Discourage future commercial zone changes for parcels on Glenwood Boulevard, except as specified under the Glenwood Boulevard/17th Avenue Industrial subarea. 5.3 Encourage commercial development that establishes commercial nodes or clusters of commercial uses within existing or designated commercial areas. 6. Recognize Glenwood's strategic location in the metropolitan area for industrial development, in particular for distribution-related industrial uses. 6.1 Seek industrial incentives such as enterprise zones in order to strengthen the area for industrial development. 7. The City shall use the Willamette River, Franklin Boulevard, McVay Highway, and Industrial Site Development Guidelines along with adopted policies when reviewing development proposals. -17- Discussion: Section E of the Land Use Element on Page 36 contains specific site . development guidelines for development within the Willamette Greenway, along Franklin Boulevard and the McVay Highway, and in industrial areas adjacent to residential development and zoning. The subarea recommendations indicate areas within the subarea that are appropriate for the various site development guidelines. These. guidelines will be used in conjunction with a Willamette Greenway Discretionary Use Permit in the case of the Willamette River Site Development Guidelines and the site plan revie~ process. 8. Recognize Franklin BoulevardlMcVay Highway and Glenwood Boulevard as important entrance corridors for both Eugene and Springfield. 8.1 Apply applicable Springfield Downtown Refinement Plan Design Element policies to the Franklin Boulevard/McVay Highway and Glenwood Boulevard entrances until such time as specific Glenwood beautification policies are adopted. . '," , -. . ~.., . :..' '. .J,":1~Y ~'::i(~,'~, .:<":..:;~~~ -18- . . v. PLAN DIAGRAM A. WHAT IS THE PLAN DIAGRAM? The Plan Diagram represents the general future land use patterns that are desired for the Glenwood area. It is a refinement of the Metropolitan Area General Plan diagram. It is a graphic . expression of the policies found elsewhere in the plan and is based on a number of factors, including: 1. Unique physical and social/economic characteristics in the area; 2. The type of existing development; 3. Land use and zoning regulations; 4. Ownership patterns; 5. The condition of existing structures; and 6. Goals, policies, and land use designations previously adopted by the Eugene City Council and adopted by the Springfield City Council that have a bearing on the Glenwood area and, in particular, the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan. . . B. HOW TO USE THE PLAN DIAGRAM The Plan Diagram and the accompanying' policies and implementation strategies are meant to be used along with policies in the Glenwood Refinement Plan Phases I and II and applicable City goals, policies, and plans to evaluate individual land use proposals. It is intended to be a guide for both public and private actions affecting the growth and development of the area. The Plan Diagram is not a zoning map. In many cases, more than one zoning district would be consistent with tne recommended land use pattern. The Plan Diagram is intended to indicate the type of future development that is desired for the area, while allowing flexibility for previously approved development. C. THE GLENWOOD REFINEMENT PLAN DIAGRAM In order to consider and suggest future land use for the Glenwood area, the-ptan area is broken into ten subareas. The subareas provide a more detailed discussion of current land use, zoning history, policies, and implementation strategies for future action. . -19- D. PLAN DIAGRAM SUBAREA DISCUSSIONS . SUBAREA 1. CENTRAL RESIDENTIAL AREA (Refer to the Plan diagram on Page 20) The Central Residential Area has historically been in residential use and it contains the heart of the residential community in Glenwood. The subarea was zoned RA Suburban Residential by Lane County in 1955. The area is currently developed with a mixture of single-family homes and manufactured dwellings. Some parcels are developed with more than one house or manufactured dwelling. There are scattered home businesses such as repair garages in the residential area as well as a granola-making business located on the southwest corner of Concord and 15th Avenue. The area includes Midway Manor Manufactured Dwelling Park that has 87 manufactured dwellings on about 12 acres on the east side of Henderson Avenue. According to Eugene's windshield survey of housing stock in Glehwood, a high proportion of the area's housing stock is in need of major repair. City low-interest loan programs and other Community Development Block Grant programs can be provided to the area when it is annexed to the City. The City should make every effort possible to help encourage rehabilitation of the existing housing stock in Glenwood through provision of these programs. Many residents in the area keep farm animals ranging from chickens to horses. The Low Density Residential (LOR) zoning district allows farm animals as long as the property meets certain standards, such as lot size and fencing for LOR properties within Springfield's city limits as specified in Sections 5.400-5.5.476 of the Springfield Municipal Code, 1997. For LOR properties within the transition area, agriculture and agricultural uses and structures permitted under Section 9.384 of the Eugene Code prior to the adoption of the Glenwood Refinement Plan by the City, may continue until the land is annexed to the City. Upon annexation, . Springfield animal regulations will apply. . -21- . . . . POLICIES 1. This subarea shall be considered appropriate for low-density residential use. 2. The City shall act to maintain the viability of existing residential development, including single-family homes and manufactured dwellings. 2.1 Adopt methods to allow for the replacement of existing manufactured dwellings or placement of new manufactured dwellings on vacant lots. 2.2 Adopt methods to allow small-scale manufactured dwelling parks (3-10 manufactured dwellings) to remain. 3. Where appropriate, the City shall allow continuation of existing nonconforming uses established under earlier Lane County zoning. 3.1 Recognize the granola-making business on the southwest corner Concord and 15th Avenue as a non-conforming use. 3.2 Consider amending Article 5, the Springfield Development Code regulations pertaining to pre-existing non-conforming use status and Articles 18 and 20, Commercial and Industrial zoning districts. 4. The City shall support residential zoning that allows farm animals for non-commercial purposes. . 4.1 Retain LOR zoning upon annexation to the City. SUBAREA 2. SOUTH 17TH AVENUE TRANSITIONAL AREA (Refer tathe Plan diagram on Page 20) . The South 17th Avenue Transitional area is a small residentially developed area consisting of 19 tax lots in nine acres. The area is developed with 17 houses, two manufactured dwellings, and a logging supply business. Lane County originally zoned this area for, industrial use in 1955. In 1982, Lane County changed the zoning to RA Suburban Residential to conform to the existing residential land use in the area. The Metropolitan Plan designates this area for light-medium industrial use. The area is currently bordered by industrial zoning on the south, west, and north sides and partially on the east side. Most of the industrially zoned land is vacant, at this time. -22- POLICIES . I . This subarea shall be considered appropriate for eventual light-medium industrial use. 2. . The City shall allow for a gradual transition from residential to future industrial use. .. 2.1 Retain existing low-density residential zoning until individual property owner's request a change to light-medium industrial zoning. 3. The City shall protect nearby residential development from the impact of industrial expansion. . 3.1 All industrially zoned parcels abutting or across theustreet from residentially zoned and developed property shall use the Industrial Site Development Guidelines as criteria in reviewing development proposals during the site plan review process. '~~i"L . SUBAREA 3. GLENWOOD BOULEVARD/17TH AVENUE INDUSTRIAL AREA (Refer to the Plan diagram on Page 20) This subarea encompasses the four quadrants around the intersection of Glenwood Boulevard and 17th Avenue. The northeastern quadrant is developed with Lane Transit District's bus maintenance and. administrative facilities. The southeastern quadrant consists of a vacant parcel containing approximately three acres. The northwestern and southwestern quadrants each contain a vacant parcel of about seven acres in size. -23- . .. . . . Glenwood Boulevard is classified as an arterial street. It extends from Franklin Boulevard to 1-5 with access to and from the freeway. A drainage slough forms the southern boundary of this subarea. The slough is identified as a potentially regulated wetland area in a metropolitan-level review of wetlands. The primary land use pattern for this area should remain industrial in the future to accommodate light manufacturing and/or distribution activities. The central location of this subarea in the metropolitan area and the access to Franklin Boulevard and 1-5 via Glenwood Boulevard make this location particularly well suited for distribution facilities. While the primary designation for this area should be industrial, there are certain characteristics peculiar to the area that indicate other options could also be appropriate. Development of L TO's facilities may ultimately generate some local demand for supporting commercial development. The subarea's central location and access factors may also make the area attractive for an independent retailer, such as a discount store. The intent herewould be to accommodate a single user or single development site that requires a relatively large land area, and to avoid the creation of additional strip commercial through development of a multiplicity of small, .independent uses. The subarea is designated in the Metropolitan Plan for light-medium industrial use. POLICIES 1. This subarea shall be considered appropriate for: mixed-use for the northwest, southwest, and southeast corners of Glenwood Boulevard and 17th Avenue. light-medium industrial for the rest of the subarea. 2. The City shall allow for the possibility of a locally oriented c'ommercial site to serve the developing needs of the area. 2.1 Permit rezoning of the approximately three acres in the southeastern quadrant of the intersection to a Neighborhood Commercial district or other commercial district that would provide for locally oriented uses. 3. The City shall allow for the possibility of a large single commercial use or development site, such as a discount store. 3.1 Permit rezoning of a development site at the southwestern or northwestern corner of the intersection to the Community Commercial district, provided the entire ownership as it exists on the date of the refinement plan's adoption is included. Any tract rezoned to a commercial district under this provision shoulchTOt be approved for further land division. -24- .. SUBAREA 4. GLENWOOD INDUSTRIAL AREA (Refer to the Plan diagram on Page 20) . . The Glenwood Industrial Area encompasses a large portion of Glenwood. It includes all portions of Glenwood not within a specific subarea. The major portion of this subarea is in the interior of Glenwood. Much of this area is vacant or underdeveloped and the rest of the area is developed with a variety of industrial uses. The area includes such major industrial uses as P. W. Pipe Company, United Parcel Service, and the Lane County Central Receiving Station for solid waste. The majority of the area was zoned M-2 Light Industrial by Lane County in 1955 with scattered parcels zoned M-1 Limited Industrial at the same time. The area is still zoned for light-medium industrial use. The most westerly portion of this area is already within the City. In 1976 Lane County constructed a solid-waste facility in Glenwood. The Central Receiving Station is a transfer site for solid waste from the metropolitan. area. Solid waste is received and deposited in the facility's pit where it is compacted and then trucked to the Short Mountain landfill. The site also has a recycling station and a composting project for yard waste. Because of the nature of the activity, the facility does affect surrounding areas in Glenwood. These impacts range from litter generated by uncovered loads traveling through Glenwood to odors from the pit itself. The Metropolitan Plan designates this Subarea for light-medium industrial use. POLICIES 1. This subarea shall be considered appropriate for light-medium industrial use. . 2. The City shall protect nearby residential development from the impact of industrial expansion. . 2.1 Use the Industrial Site Development Guidelines as criteria in reviewing development proposals through the site plan review process. 3. .. The City shall consult with Lane County to reduce litter and odors from the solid __.__"__ -----.-Waste facility. . -25- . ~. . . . SUBAREA 5. GLENWOOD OPEN SPACE (Refer to the Plan diagram on Page 20) This Subarea includes two separate geographic areas: 1) the Laurel Hili Cemetery on Judkins Road; and 2) the area between 1-5 and the railroad tracks in southeast Glenwood. Both areas are presently designated for parks and open space in the Metropolitan Plan. The southeast Glenwood area is currently undeveloped and has steep terrain. It is an area that has poor transportation access and would be difficult to serve with. urban services such as water and sanitary sewer. POLICY 1. This subarea shall be considered appropriate for open space. -26- :J Franklin BoulevardIWillamette River Corridor . This area is made up of all parcels with frontage along the Willamette River and all parcels with frontage on both sides of Franklin Boulevard/McVay Highway. This subarea is a corridor, a portion of which serves as the link between Eugene and Springfield. This area was zoned M-2 Light Industrial District by Lane County in 1955. Aside from a couple of commercial zone changes approved on the south side of Franklin Boulevard, the area between 1-5 and the Springfield Bridge has remained industrially zoned. As part of a metropolitan-wide rezoning in 1982, Lane County rezoned the area south of the Springfield Bridge and between the McVay Highway and the river to RA Suburban Residential in recognition of the manufactured dwelling park development in this area. Although most of the remaining area within the corridor is zoned for industrial use, the corridor is actually developed with,.a mixture of uses, including industrial, commercial, and residential land uses. A strip of land along the river approximately 150 feet wide is within the Willamette River Greenway. Development within this area must conform to greenway development criteria including access to and along the river, preservation of riparian vegetation, and provision of landscape buffering between the use and the river. Development within the Greenway is reviewed through the Discretionary Use process. Site development guidelines for development within the Greenway are provided in Section E of this element. The Willamette River is ' discussed more thoroughly in the Environmental Design Element. .;;J'" Development in the Franklin Boulevard/Willamette River Corridor may have impacts on adjacent areas including the Franklin commercial strip, the Willamette River, and adjacent residential areas. The following goals address these issues: . GOALS .1. . To improve the visual quality of the Franklin Boulevard and McVay Highway corridors as . . gateways to Eugene and Springfield. 2. To create opportunities for publiC and private use and enjoyment of the Willamette River through developing visual and physical linkages, preserving and enhancing the natural qualities of the riverscape, and encouraging compatible development. 3. To allow a diversity of land uses compatible with one another, complementary in style and scale, and in harmony with the riverscape. POLICIES 1. The City shall ensure that new development and redevelopment will aesthetically and functionally enhance the Franklin Boulevard and McVay Highway corridors. -27- . . . . . 1.1 On a strip 100 feet deep and parallel to Franklin Boulevard and the McVay Highway use the Franklin Boulevard or McVay Highway Site Development Guidelines (whichever is appropriate) through the site plan review process. Discussion: The Franklin Boulevard/McVay Highway corridor has many characteristics of strip commercial development, including a multiplicity of access points, garish and competing signs, little or no landscaping, and unbuffered parking fronting on the street. WhEm viewed in its entirety, the corridor creates a vision of discordance and chaos. The Metropolitan Plan supports elimination or redevelopment of strip commercial areas in the metropolitan area, stating that they "should be limited to existing locations and transformed into more desirable commercial patterns, if possible" (Page II-E-6). The site' development guidelines for Franklin Boulevard and McVay Highway are intended to help eliminate some of the undesirable aspects of strip commercial development. Because Franklin Boulevard and the McVay Highway have somewhat different development characteristics, there is a set of development guidelines for each corridor. 2. The City shall ensure that new-development and redevelopment in the Willamette River Greenway is sensitive to Greenway concerns. 2.1 Use the Willamette River Site Development Guidelines beginning on Page 37 in reviewing development proposals within the Willamette River Greenway until such time when Springfield establishes a Greenway Setback Line for all Glenwood properties. . Discussion: Statewide Goal 15--the Willamette River Greenway and the Metropolitan Plan recognize the importance of preserving and enhancing the qualities of the Willamette River frontage. SDC Article 25, Willamette Greenway Overlay District provides specific management regulations to take into account when reviewing development proposals within the Greenway. Springfield has established a Greenway Setback Line along the Willamette River, both within the city limits and the City's urban transition area. The City will establish a Glenwood Greenway Setback Line within one year of the adoption of this plan. The Willamette River Site Development Guidelines beginning on Page 37 shall continue to apply until the Glenwood Greenway Setback Line is established. Because of the breadth and diversity of land uses and character of the cqrridor, this subarea is broken into five smaller subareas: River Industrial, Franklin Commercial-Industrial Strip, River Opportunity Area, McVay Mixed-Use Area, and South McVay Industrial. These subareas are discussed below and have policies and implementation strategies specific to them. SUBAREA 6. RIVER INDUSTRIAL (Refer to the Plan diagram on Page 20) The River Industrial area includes all parcels between Franklin Boulevard and the Willamette River from the 1-5 bridge to the Jay Oldham storage yard. It also includes the-first seven parcels on the south side of Franklin Boulevard ending just west of Brooks Auto Parts. The parcels on the north side of Franklin Boulevard have historically been used for major industrial uses and the area is still predominantly industrial with such large well-established uses as Myrmo's and Willamette Graystone. There are.also smaller, more commercially oriented uses on parcels fronting Franklin Boulevard such as car dealerships and pawn shops. -28- The.majority of the parcels on the south side of Franklin Boulevard are vacant and under one . ownership. One parcel has two houses. All of these parcels back up to the Lane County Solid Waste Facility on the south. . ) Because these parcels are vacant and have frontage on Franklin Boulevard, the site may also be desirable for commercial use. The intent here would be to accommodate a single large user rather than a proliferation of smaller commercial uses so that strip commercial would not be extended on Franklin Boulevard. y;. The River Industrial area is designated for light-medium industrial use in the Metropolitan Plan. POLICIES 1. This subarea shall be considered appropriate for: mixed use for the parcels on the south side of Franklin Boulevard; light-medium industrial for the restofthe subarea. 2. The City shall recognize existing commercial development. 2.1 Allow for continued commercial use of smaller parcels with frontage on the north side of Franklin Boulevard and a shallow lot depth by allowing Community Commercial zone changes. 3. The City shall recognize the possibility of commercial development on the south . ' side of Franklin Boulevard. 3.1 Allow rezoning of parcels on the south side of Franklin Boulevard to the Community Commercial district, provided the entire ownership as it exists on the date of the refinement plan's adoption is included. Any tract rezoned to a commercial district under this provision should not be approved for further land division. 3.2 Any development on the south side of Franklin Boulevard should consolidate access points and consider providing a frontage street. Refer to the Franklin Boulevard/Willamette River Corridor policies on Page 27 for additional policy direction. . " -29- c. . . . SUBAREA 7. FRANKLIN BOULEVARD COMMERCIAL-INDUSTRIAL STRIP (Refer to the Plan diagram on Page 20) The Franklin Boulevard Commercial-Industrial Strip is located along the south side of Franklin Boulevard and it extends east from Brooks Auto Parts to the railroad overpass. Although most of the strip has industrial zoning, many of the uses are commercial in nature (such as the Glenwood Market) or commercially oriented industrial uses (such as Case Equipment). The area also. includes scattered residential uses. In some cases this area extends more than a block south of Franklin Boulevard in recognition of existing industrial development patterns. This is particularly true on the east side of Brooklyn Street, which is currently developed with a mixture of industrial and residential uses, including houses, a church, a warehouse, and a truck repair business. The Franklin Boulevard Commercial-Industrial Strip, exceptfor the east side of Brooklyn Street, is designated for commercial use in the Metropolitan Plan. The east side of Brooklyn Street is designated for light-medium industrial use. POLICIES 1. This subarea shall be considered appropriate for mixed commercial-industrial use. 2. The City shall allow a mix of zoning districts in order to reflect the combination of land uses in the subarea.' 2.1 Allow Community Commercial zoning (parcels may retain Light-Medium Industrial zoning). -30- 2.2 Allow residential uses to retain Low Density Residential zoning. . Refer to the Franklin BoulevardIWillamette River Corridor policies on Page 27 for additional policy direction. SUBAREA 8. RIVER OPPORTUNITY AREA (Refer to the Plan diagram on Page 20) The Hiver Opportunity Area encompasses the parcels between the river and Franklin Boulevard, extending from Ponderosa Manufactured Dwelling Park easUo the Springfield Bridge and continuing south just past the railroad crossing. This is an area of mixed uses. It includes commercial uses such as a veterinary clinic; commercial-industrial uses such as tractor sales; industrial uses such as warehousing; and residential uses. The residential uses include approximately 12 houses scattered throughout the area, a small apartment building, and two manufactured dwelling parks with 77 manufactured dwellings on 14 acres. This subarea contains approximately 47 acres, a significant portion of which is vacant or underutilized property, especially along the riverfront. There are six landowners owning most of the land within the River Opportunity Area. Because of the amount of vacant land with river frontage, the consolidation of parcels under a few ownerships, and the location of the area at the entrance to Springfield and Eugene, this is considered an area that could provide an opportunity for new development. The opportunities for new development could include office developments, industrial parks, industrial headquarters and operations, commercial uses that would promote public enjoyment of and access to the river, and space for public riverfront parkland. The subarea may also be appropriate for new residential development. In recognition of the mixed development pattern of the area, the River Opportunity Area is designated for industrial, commercial, and residential uses in the Metropolitan Plan. . -31- . . . . POLICIES I . This subarea shall be considered appropriate for mixed use. 2. The City shall allow for a mixture of zoning districts in order to facilitate development of a mixed-use area. . 2.1 Retain existing Light Medium Industrial zoning, but consider zone changes that would allow for park development, office and medium-density residential development and commercial uses that would provide public enjoyment of and access to the river, such as restaurants, outdoor recreation, and plant nurseries. 3. The City shall encourage development that consolidates parcels into cohesive development sites, including office and industrial parks. 4. The City shall defer to Willamalane to investigate the potential for acquiring/developing riverfront parkland in this area. 5. The City shall allow for continued commercial use of smaller parcels with highway frontage. 5.1 Consider zone changes to Community Commercial for smaller commercially developed parcels with highway frontage. Refer to the Franklin Boulevard/Willamette River Corridor policies on Page 27 for additional policy direction. -32- SUBAREA 9. MCVAY MIXED-USE AREA (Refer to the Plan diagram on Page 20) . The McVay Mixed-Use area is located on both sides of the McVay Highway. It includes three manufactured dwelling parks with a total of 135 manufactured dwellings and 98 RV spaces on 18 acres on the river side (east) of the McVay Highway and two manufactured dwelling parks with a total of 80 manufactured dwellings and 49 RV spaces on 15 acres on the west side of the McVay Highway. It also includes some commercial and industrial uses oriented to the McVay Highway near 20th Avenue and houses scattered throughout the area, especially along 20th Avenue. This area also includes a large vacant parcel which fronts on the river and James Park, a neighborhood park located oft 19th Avenue owned and operated by the Willamalane Park and Recreation District. The Parks and Recreation section of the Public Facilities and Services Element discusses James Park and explores the possibility of creating a park on the river side of McVay Highway. All of the mobile home parks in Glenwood allow overnight RV usage. The Springfield Development Code currently allows RV parks only within the Community Commercial district. Overnight RV usage within parks is only allowed under certain conditions in certain parts of the City. The manufactured dwelling parks on the west side of McVay are generally older than the ones on the east side and will probably be redeveloped within the next 15 years. While the manufactured 'dwelling parks on the west side of McVay are currently designated for low-density residential use,in the long term this area will probably he redeveloped for industrial use. This change would require a plan amendment. Most of the parcels on the river side of the McVay Highway are within the Willamette River flood . hazard area, either within the floodway itself or in the 1 DO-year floodplain. New development . within the floodway is extremely restricted. Replacement of existing manufactured dwellings within the flood hazard area is currently allowed. The Metropolitan Plan designates part of the area along the McVay Highway for commercial use, while designating the area of the existing manufactured dwelling parks on both sides of McVay for low-density residential use and the rest of the area for light-medium industrial use. POLICIES 1. This subarea shall be considered appropriate for: mixed use for parks, office and industrial parks and medium-density residential use on the east side of the McVay Highway; low-density residential use for the two manufactured dwelling parks on the west side of McVay Highway; commercial use in the vicinity of 20th Avenue; park use for James Park and the old Glenwood school site; and light-medium industrial for the remainder of the subarea. -33- . . . . .... 2. The City shall allow for appropriate zoning reflecting the land use designations within this subarea. 2.1 Allow for a mixture of zoning districts that would allow parks, office and industrial parks, and medium-density residential use. 2.2 Allow manufactured dwelling parks to have Low Density Residential zoning. 2.3 Allow Neighborhood Commercial or Community Commercial zoning within the commercially designated area. 3. The City shall consider this area as appropriate for RV use. 3.1 Continue to allow RVs to replace RVs 'and manufactured dwellings in existing manufactured dwelling parks that contain RVs. 4. The City shall defer to Willamalane to consider the potential for future park development within the area adjacent to the Willamette River. Refer to the Franklin Boulevard/Willamette River Corridor policies on Page 27 for additional policy direction. .<.,,;-:::-:::::,-;~;;c:::.c:'::;;;;;':'::-._'-~""'-;;::.. ----- -34- SUBAREA 10. SOUTH MCVAY INDUSTRIAL (Refer to the Plan diagram on Page 20) . This area is located on both sides of the southern portion of the McVay Highway as it exits the Glenwood area. While existing uses are mostly industrial in nature, the opportunity exists for office or industrial park development that takes advantage of the riverfront location. The South McVay Industrial area: is designated for light-medium industrial use in the Metropolitan Plan. POLICIES 1. This subarea shall be considered appropriate for light-medium industrial use. 2. . The City shall recognize the east side of McVay Highway's potential for office park development. 2.1 Allow office park development on the parcels fronting the river with GO General Office zoning. Referto the Franklin Boulevard/Willamette River Corridor policies on Page 27 for additional policy direction. . -35- . . . . E SITE DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES 1. INTRODUCTION Frequent references are made in the text of the Land Use Element of the Glenwood Refinement Plan to site development guidelines. These guidelines are intended to be 'used in conjunction with one of two City review processes: . a. For areas adjacent to Franklin Boulevard, McVay Highway, and where industrial zoning abuts residential zoning and development, the guidelines are to be used in conjunction with the site plan review process. The site plan review process involves review of development plans by City staff prior to issuance of a building permit. The applicable development guidelines set forth in the Glenwood Refinement Plan will be incorporated when the site plan review process is required for a particular parcel. b. Review through the Discretionary Use process is required for all development occurring within the boundaries of the Willamette River Greenway. In the Glenwood area, all land within 150 feet of the ordinary low-water line is within the Willamette Greenway. The Discretionary Use process is a more formal review process than the site plan review process, involving a public hearing before the Springfield Hearings Official or Planning Commission. The Willamette River Site Development Guidelines, below are intended to address the use management considerations of Statewide Goal #15 and the standards of SDC 25, Willamette Greenway Overlay District. -36- 2. WILLAMETTE RIVER SITE DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES . The Glenwood area is unique because it has more continuous property in private ownership fronting the Willamette River than any other part of the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. Existing development along the Willamette River is diverse, including industrial, residential, and commercial development. There are also several large vacant areas where future development can be oriented to the river. Existing development along the Willamette River varies substantially in the manner in which it has treated the river. In some instances, industrial and residential development has treated the river frontage sensitively. In other instances, the value of the river frontage has been ignored. Under present requirements of Statewide Goal #15, the Willamette River Greenway, and SDC Article 25, Willamette Greenway Overlay District, any development, intensification, or change of use occurring within the Greenway must follow certain criteria related to provision of landscaping, public areas, and other Greenway concerns. In addition to the criteria discussed above, the following guidelines shall apply to development within the Greenway in the Glenwood area until the City establishes a Glenwood Greenway Setback Line: a. All new structures, expansion of existing structures, drives, parking, and other new or expansion of existing open storage areas shall be set back between 20 and 35 feet from the top of the riverbank, unless the location of the floodway boundary requires a greater separation. . -37- . . . . This setback will be known as the Glenwood Greenway setback. The flexibility provided between 20 and 35 .feet will depend upon the amount of riparian area from the top of the river bank to the ordinary low water line. The intent of the Glenwood Greenway setback is to allow adequate space and separation from the river for uses that are not water-related or water-dependent and to allow enough space for construction of a riverfront bike path in the future. There are four exceptions to the Glenwood Greenway setback established here: (1) Structures designed solely for recreational use (e.g., a deck or steps leading to the river), driveways for boat landings, and water-related and water-dependent uses are permitted within the Glenwood Greenway setback. (2) Structures designed primarily for human occupancy, such as residences, offices, restaurants, and similar functions (as opposed to an industrial storage building) may be set back a minimum of 25 feet from 'the top of the bank, if that lesser, setback provides sufficient area for any necessary pedestrian or bicycle access. (3) New fences or screening for security .that protect public and private property and do not disturb the natural vegetative fringe along the river may be permitted, taking into consideration future bike paths. Maintenance of existing fences is permitted. (4) Maintenance and repair of structures within the Glenwood Greenway setback are permitted. As long as the uses as protected by Goal 15 have not changed, rebuilding of structures existing on the date of the adoption of this plan and within the Glenwood Greenway will be permitted at their exact location subject to the provisions of the Willamette Greenway permit process. This provision recognizes that propertY owners may also choose to rebuild with a greater setback. b. The natural vegetative fringe along the river shall be protected and enhanced to the maximum extent possible. c. Continuous building facades and opaque fences or walls exceeding 75 feet in length shall be discouraged adjacent to the river. d. People-oriented activities or uses shall be encouraged along the river. Examples of such activities or us.es include areas for employee recreation, office development, and residential or recreational vehicle park development. -38- e. Except for small identity and directional signs, business signs shall be oriented away from the river. . f. Fill material shall not be deposited over the top of the riverbank. ',",-, " :':1 g. If the Department of Fish and Wildlife determines that one or more sites in the Glenwood area provide(s) significant fish or wildlife habitat, the identified site(s) shall be reviewed through the Economic, Social, Environmental, and Energy (ESEE) Analysis as provided for in Statewide Land Use Goal 5. The development guidelines for the Greenway area set forth above recognize that certain use management considerations listed in Statewide Goal #15 are not applicable to the Glenwood area. There are no agricultural lands in Glenwood adjacent to the river. There are no identified scenic qualities or viewpoints within the Glenwood portion ofthe -Greenway. No significant fish or wildlife habitat areas have been identified to date. 'Areas .of riparian vegetation have been identified along the river in the Metropolitan Plan's Natural Assets and Constraints working paper. Protection of riparian vegetation is addressed underBin the Willamette River Site Development Guidelines. The same Metropolitan Plan working paper also identifies the entire length of the river as anadromous fish habitat. Finally, aggregate extraction is not anticipated in the area subject to the Glenwood Refinement Plan. Upon establishment of the Glenwood Greenway Setback Line by the City, the Willamette River Site Development Guidelines shall cease to exist. ,~ e 3. INDUSTRIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES Residential development frequently occurs adjacent to or across the street from industrial development. The following guidelines are intended to increase compatibility between these two types of land uses, while recognizing the appropriateness of industrial development in areas designated for that type of use: . a. Compatibility with the surroundings, particularly when residential in character. Every effort shall be made to buffer surrounding residences from the visual and noise impact of the industrial development; including creation of a ten-foot buffer zone with minimum improvements of: (1) A six-foot wooden fence or masonry wall which shall be constructed to provide a uniform site-obscuring screen; or (2) An earth berm combined with evergreen plantings or fence which shall form a sight and noise buffer at least six feet in height within two years of completion, or (3) A planting screen of year-round site-obscuring vegetation planted a minimum of six feet in depth and which shall form a sight and noise buffer at least six feet in height within two years of completion. -39- . . . . b. Signs and illumination in scale and harmony with the site and area. Illumination shall be designed so as to reflect the light away from neighboring residential properties. c. Adequate provision for flood control and storm drainage. d. Safe and efficient ingress, egress, and on-site traffic circulation, including emergency vehicle access, with particular attention to the impact of industrial traffic on surrounding residences, minimizing industrial traffic in front of residential development as much as possible. e. Heating, cooling, and other mechanical equipment should be designed and located to minimize noise impacts to adjacent residences. It should be noted that the Springfield Development Code currently requires a.ten-foot setback between industrial and residential property. The ten-foot buffer zone required above should not be construed as an absolute requirement. If this standard cannot be met because of physical limitations on the property, such as a grade differential, the requirements may be modified. However, the modification must satisfy the intent of this standard. 4. FRANKLIN BOULEVARD SITE DEVELOPMENT- GUIDELINES Because of its connection to 1-5 via Glenwood Boulevard and McVay Highway, Franklin Boulevard serves as an important entrance to both Eugene and Springfield. It is also a major connection between the two cities. The appearance of the Franklin Boulevard corridor can be improved over time. The development guidelines provided here recognize that improvement will occur gradually as properties are developed or redeveloped. These guidelines will be used in conjunction with the site plan review process for any development occurring within 100 feet of Franklin Boulevard. a. Use of the site plan review process along Franklin Boulevard will be subject to the following special consideration: (1 ) Site plan review will be required for development as specified in Section 31.020 of the Springfield Development Code. Minimum Development Standards review will be required for certain minor improvements as specified in Sections 3.070(1 )(f) and 31.010 of the Springfield Development Code. The intent of this provision is to exempt minor improvements from the site plan review process. -40- '~or,. (2) The development guidelines reference to curb cuts to: minimize the number of new curb cuts, consolidate existing ones where feasible, and eliminate hazardous curb cuts. Curb cut issues are reviewed during the site plan review process and the Minimum Development review process. The State Highway Division also has authority over location of curb cuts along Franklin Boulevard because it is a State highway. They have indicated a willingness to cooperate with the City in reviewing curb-cut siting. . (3) Site plan review guidelines shall take into consideration the fact that the continuation of businesses within the greenway are to be permitted to continue and the site review process shall not make it impossible or difficult for businesses protected by the greenway goal to continue. (4) Special consideration may be given to parcels that have an extremely narrow depth so that the existing uses may continue. This may include exemption for the fencing requirements in "c" below. b. The following development guidelines shall be used when site plan review is required along Franklin Boulevard. (1) Landscaping, including street trees, shall be provided where possible along Franklin Boulevard: (2) Placement of parking areas in side yards and rear yards shall be encouraged. (3) Placement of chain-link fencing within 20 feet of the right-of-way shall be discouraged. If fencing is needed within this 20-foot setback area, ornamental iron fencing or its equivalent shall be provided. . (4) Signs shall be set back ten feet from the right-of-way. (5) Where development abuts a public street that intersects with Franklin Boulevard, the site design shall reinforce recognition of the street (as opposed to just another driveway). (6) Where commercial or industrial development is adjacent to residential development, illumination shall be oriented away from the residential development. (7) Safe and efficient ingress and egress. c. Apply applicable Springfield Downtown Refinement Plan Design-Bement policies to Franklin Boulevard entrances until such time as specific Glenwood beautification policies are adopted -41- . . . . , : ,! . " '\ " ~.,':..,.l 5. MCVAY HIGHWAY SITE DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES McVay Highway is similar to Franklin Boulevard insofar as it serves as an important entrance to Eugene and Springfield because of its linkage to 1-5. However, McVay Highway also differs from Franklin Boulevard in several important respects. The right-of-way of McVay Highway is wider than its improved surface, resulting in a greater setback from the street and a less cluttered appearance. McVay Highway also retains a more rural character than the Franklin Boulevard corridor. The development guidelines for McVay Highway will be used in conjunction with the site plan review process for development occurring within 100 feet of that highway. The intent of the guidelines is to reinforce the positive features already found along McVay Highway. a. Like the Franklin Boulevard corridor, use of the site plan review process along McVay Highway will be subject to the following special considerations: (1) Site plan review will be required for development as specified in Section 31.020 of the Springfield Development Code. Minimum Development Standards review will be required for certain minor improvements as specified in Sections 3.070(1 )(f) and 31.010 of the Springfield Development Code. The intent of this provision is to exempt minor improvements from the site plan review process. (2) The development guidelines make reference to curb cuts along Franklin Boulevard to minimize the number of new curb cuts, consolidate existing ones where feasible, and eliminate hazardous curb cuts. Curb cut issues are reviewed during the site plan review process and the Minimum Development review process. The State Highway Division also has authority over location of curb cuts along Franklin Boulevard because it is a State highway. They have indicated a willingness to cooperate with the City in reviewing curb-cut siting. b. The following development guidelines shall be used when site review is required along McVay Highway: (1) Landscaping, including street trees that reinforces existing landscaping along McVay Highway shall be provided along the frontage of parcels. (2) Consideration shall be given to preservation of significant vegetation, whenever possible. -42- (3) Where commercial or industrial development abuts residential development, . signs and illumination shall be oriented away from the residential development. (4) Placement of chain-link fencing within 20 feet of the right-of-way shall be discouraged. If fencing is needed within this 20-foot setback area, ornamental iron fencing or its equivalent shall be provided. (5) Safe and efficient ingress and egress. v. PHASE I LAND USE ELEMENT (Refer to the Plan diagram on Page 20) A. BACKGROUND Land use and zoning within Phase I reflects an historical mix of uses in the area (See Table 1), with the majority of the development in either residential (5.7 acres) or industrial (30.5 acres) use. Another 21.7 acres are vacant, including an estimated 14 acres in two larger parcels that are vacant and available for development. TABLE I GENERALIZED LAND USE--GlENWOOD PHASE 1 # Acres % Total . Residential 5.7 8.7 Industrial* 30.5 46.7 Vacant 21.7 33.2 Streets 7.0 10.7 Religious & .4 .7 Charitable Total 65.3 100.0% *includes partially developed industrial land Since 1958, almost half of the area (28 acres) was annexed to Eugene at the request of various property owners, in line with their desire to obtain an urban level of services for more intense development (See the Ownership Map, Page 44). These properties and any properties annexed to Eugene after adoption of this refinement plan by Eugene in July 1990 are now under the jurisdiction of Springfield. With the exception of the church located within the Low Density Residential zoning district, all of the Phase 1 area annexed to the City is zoned and developed industrially. These uses range from Pape Brothers' industrial vehicle sales and maintenance yards to Farwest Steel's manufacturing facility, including some lands that are used for spillover parking from these uses. -43- . GLENWOOD REFINEMENT PLAN -- PHASE 1 . OWNERSHIP I'!,;; ,';t$\1 Fischer - 18.2 Acres <, Nielsen -7.3 Acres Pape - 12.3 Acres Miller - 0.4 Acres Gordon Vik N A Owner Occupied Renter Occupied CJ Study Area Boundary o , 500 1000 Feet , . G L E N w o o D -44 - F' A mixture of residential and industrial land use and zoning characterizes those portions of the area that remain within lane County. Residentially zoned land includes an estimated 25 housing units on 5.7 acres, while the remaining residentially zoned land is vacant. Due to the proximity of industrial and residential development east of Henderson (See the Existing land Use Map, Page 14), the site plan review for all development as specified in Section 31.020 of the Springfield Development Code. The site review procedure ensures that developments will include the use of landscaping, fencing, and other improvements to buffer the effects of industrial development and its traffic on the housing in the area. . 'ir ~~~-- NOTE: Additional information on the history of zoning and annexations in the area can be found in the Appendix dated April 1989. B. LAND USE GOAL. To provide for an orderly transition from the existing mix of residential. and industrial land uses to industrial land uses. y". Discussion: The Phase I area of southwest Glenwood has been designated for future industrial . use both through the 1990 Plan and its update, the Metropolitan Area General Plan. A mixture of residential, industrial, and vacant land currently characterizes the area. The land use goal for this,;area recognizes that it will eventually be entirely industrial, but in recognizing that, the goal also recognizes the community's desire to minimize impacts on remaining residential properties. POLICIES These policies help guide decisions in providing for an orderly transition to industrial land use in . the Phase I area. 1. Under direction established in the Metropolitan Plan, the City shall consider voluntary annexations in this area as a high priority. Discussion: This policy follows the direction of adopted policies within the Metropolitan Plan that set a high priority on annexing industrially designated property. This policy adds southwest Glenwood as a high priority for annexation. 2. Both contiguous and non-contiguous annexations shall be considered if they are consistent with City annexation criteria. Discussion: This policy addresses the timeliness and orderliness of the industrial transition by allowing for both contiguous and non-contiguous annexations if they meet the City's annexation criteria. Availability of sanitary sewers and provision of adequate street improvements are the key urban services needed to ensure an orderly industrial transition and are services that need to be available before an annexation can be considered. -45- . . . . 3. Application of industrial zoning shall only occur in conjunction with annexation to the City. Discussion: This policy follows the guidance of Growth Management Policy No. 7 in the Metropolitan Plan which states that land within the.urban growth boundary should not be, converted to urban uses until the property is annexed and provided with a full range of urban services. Application of this metropolitan policy to the Glenwood Phase I Area would result in annexation to Springfield as a condition of approval for any zone change actions involving intensification of use (Le., changes from residential to industrial). This ensures that intensive urban levels of development .will have the necessary services. 4. The site plan review criteria shall follow the Industrial Site Development Guidelines. Discussion: This policy ensures that future industrial development will be compatible with existing residential development. Site plan review will include the Industrial Site Development Guidelines. These are minimum requirements. If the Springfield Development Code establishes more stringent standards, those standards will prevail. Site plan review involves an administrative review of proposed development by the Development Services Department and does not require a public hearing. However, the site plan review process is considered a limited land use decision that requires notice to adjacent property owners and occupants prior to the issuance of an administrative decision. Site plan review occurs prior to application for a building permit. -46- TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT . I. INTRODUCTION Glenwood is exceptionally well-located in terms of its access to regional transportation systems like Franklin Boulevard and, Interstate 5 and its central location between the communities of Eugene and Springfield. As noted in the Land Use Element beginning on Page 9, much of Glenwood's development has been associated with its location in relation to the State highway system, the interstate system, and the two main railroad lines. For example, the area has historically been a location for manufactured dwelling parks because of its easy access from Franklin Boulevard and the McVay Highway (Franklin Boulevard is known as the McVay Highway south of the Springfield Bridge). Subsequent construction of Interstate 5 on the south and west in the 1950s and construction of Glenwood Boulevard's intersection with Interstate 5 in 1980 maintained the area's easy access for manufactured dwellings and recreational vehicles and for truck traffic to and from Glenwood's industrial areas. Lane Transit District's selection of the Glenwood area as the site for its operations and maintenance facility is due primarily to the area's central location in the metropolitan community and to its access from the regional transportation network. The location of two main branches of the Union Pacific Railroad within Glenwood, the Union Pacific Main line and the Siskiyou line, add to the range of transportation options for shipment of goods, increasing the area's attraction for industrial development. At the same time, these rail lines affect the street system with streets that bridge the tracks, dead-end, or have at-grade crossings. A railway trestle crossing McVay Highway and the Willamette River also reflects the variety of rail crossings in Glenwood (See the Major Transportation Network Map, pa'ge 48). . Most of the Glenwood.area has been developed without an urban level of street improvements. This means that many of the streets are not well-defined by curbs and gutters, making it difficult to tell where the street stops and private property begins. This also means that there are few sidewalks. Most of the sidewalks are along Franklin Boulevard. They are both narrow and noncontinuous and are curbside sidewalks, immediately next to that heavily used highway. In addition to the lack of improved streets and sidewalks, except for the bike path connector to the Knickerbocker Bridge, Glenwood does not have bicycle paths either on or off-street to provide for safe bike connections to and from the Glenwoodareaor for safe bicycle travel within the Glenwood area. Bicycle facilities currently exist immediately west of Interstate 5, within Eugene, and north of the Willamette River, within Springfield, but safe connections to and from the Glenwood area and bike facilities within Glenwood are nonexistent. The Glenwood Water District will continue to provide streetlights to the area of Glenwood outside the city limits. They will contract with SUB for streetlight maintenance and repair during the transition period. The City, under contract with SUB, is responsible for streetlight maintenance and repair within the city limits and will take responsibility for additional streetlights as the area annexes. -47- . . . MAJOR TRANSPORTATION NETWORK July, 1999 - Major Arterial - .. I Minor Arterial -- Collector >++++++ Railroad N A o 500 1000 Feet I I . G L E N o w o -48- D Additional transportation related data, such as traffic counts and accident records are in the Appendix dated April 1989. . POLICIES 1. Improve the major transportation network within and through Glenwoodto urban standards, with emphasis on improvements to Franklin Boulevardl McVay Highway, Glenwood Boulevard, Henderson Avenue, 19th Avenue, 17th Avenue west of Henderson, and 22nd Avenue between Glenwood Boulevard and Henderson Avenue. 1.1 The City should consult with other metropolitan agencies to update TransPlan, addressing the need for improvements to Franklin Boulevard, including policies concerning mass transit and Nodal Development. 1.2 The City should consult with the Oregon Department of Transportation to identify needed improvements and a means of financing them. Items to consider when improving Franklin Boulevard/McVay Highway are the following: a. Sidewalks along both sides of the highway with a priority on developing sidewalks on the south side of Franklin Boulevard when Franklin Boulevard is improved (Note: Consideration should be given to extending sidewalks on the north side of Franklin from the Springfield Bridge to the intersection with Glenwood Boulevard. However, the most westerly extent of sidewalks on the north side of Franklin Boulevard will be decided upon at the time Franklin improvements are designed. The design should consider the need for . pedestrians to travel on the north side of Franklin Boulevard westward from Glenwood Boulevard as well as the physical and topographical restraints for placing a sidewalk north of the highway at this location); b. Bike lanes connecting to Eugene, Springfield, and Lane Community College; c. Intersection improvements to allow better differentiation of the local intersecting streets, such as providing curbs and gutters and better signage to make it safer to turn off Franklin Boulevard onto local streets; d. Improvements to traffic flow, especially during commuting hours, through changes in signal timing and other appropriate means. Request that the Oregon Department of Transportation analyze signal timing at Brooklyn Street and Henderson Avenue; e. The possibility of reducing the speed of traffic entering Glenwood from Eugene and the McVay Highway; and 1. Improvements to storm drainage, including maintenance as well as reconstruction where needed. -49- . . . . 1.3 The City $hould consult with Lane County about urban transition agreements, TransPlan, and abutting property owners to identify needed improvements and a means of financing them for collector and arterial streets in Glenwood. However, certain streets were transferred to the City that included Lane County payments through urban transition agreements to defray the cost bringing them up to standard. Lane County considers its obligation for those .streets completed. Items to consider when improving streets are: a. Street improvements appropriate to the street's classification, including sidewalks, bike lanes if appropriate, improvements to storm drainage, and adequate street paving width; and b. The possibility of controlling traffic traveling along Glenwood Boulevard to and from 1-5, including deceleration lanes for the Lane County Solid-Waste Facility and LTD. 1.4 The City and State Highway Division should consider combining access points along Franklin Boulevard/McVay Highway and Glenwood Boulevard when reviewing new development proposals. 2. Adopt a classification system for the streets in Glenwood that reflects the way streets currently function in the area. 2.1 The City and Lane County should consider collector designation for 22nd Avenue between Glenwood Boulevard and Henderson Avenue, for 17th west of Henderson, and for 19th Avenue (Tile only street lane County has jurisdiction over is 19th Avenue). Discussion: Streets included in the major transportation network serving the Glenwood area are illustrated on the Major Transportation Network Map on Page 48 and currently fall under: State jurisdiction (Franklin Boulevard/McVay Highway), under Lane County jurisdiction (Henderson, 17th west of Henderson, and 19th), and under City jurisdiction (Glenwood Boulevard and 22nd Avenue between Glenwood Boulevard and Henderson Avenue). Improvements to these major streets in Glenwood are a priority to make the transportation system safer and more convenient. The major streets listed in this policy serve to move traffic within and through Glenwood and thus their improvement is a higher priority than other streets in Glenwood which carry only local traffic. A street is improved to urban standards when it has curbs, gutters, sidewalks, bike lanes (if needed), lighting, and an adequate paving width. Streets are classified according to their function in carrying traffic and this classification dictates right-of-way and improvement width. Franklin Boulevard/McVay Highway are major arterials which provide for through traffic between major centers of activity. GlenwooctBoulevard is a minor arterial, a street that provides for traffic within a neighborhood and serves as a direct connection from neighborhoods to major arterials. Henderson is a collector that collects traffic from local residential streets and channels it to major or minor arterials. tih, 19th, and 22nd (between Glenwood Blvd. And Henderson) avenues are currently classified as local streets, but should be reclassified as collectors in recognition of their function of collecting traffic from local streets and channeling it onto arterials. -50- Arterials by their very nature carry heavy amounts of traffic that does not have a local destination. Combining the driveway access points along arterials can help reduce the dangerous conflicts that arise between vehicles entering and exiting property fronting the a~erial and vehicles and pedestrians passing through the area. Franklin Boulevard is a State highway and is the major link between the downtowlJ areas of Eugene and Springfield. It is the only major arterial in GI.enwood and it carries traffic that often does not have origins or destinations within Glenwood. Franklin Boulevard is known as the McVay Highway where it turns south at the Springfield Bridge. . Most other streets in Glenwood are either Lane County streets, which meal1S they are maintained by lane County, or public streets, which are dedicated to the public but are not maintained by Lane County. There are 3.16 miles of Lane County streets and 3.84 miles of dedicated public streets in Glenwood. Many of these streets are improved only to:rural standards, have substandard rights-of way, or exist only on paper and are not developed at all. The existing improvements lack definition and have inadequate drainage due to their many types of construction. When Glenwood is annexed into the City, the arterials and collectors found to be most important to the transportation system will be improved to urban standards when necessary for safety reasons through the Capital Improvement Project process. Improvements to residential streets can be initiated by the City Council, normally by petition of at least 50 percent of the benefiting property owners. There are no transportation projects for Glenwood proposed in the Oregon Department of Transportation's current Statewide Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). However, the Eugene-Springfield transportation plan, TransPlan (current draft update), lists two major projects. These projects are: 1) widening of McVay Highway from the Springfield Bridge to 30th to three lanes, bike lanes, and intersection improvements at Franklin Boulevard; and 2) Glenwood/l-5 interchange improvements. TransPlan lists the State of Oregon as the funding agency for the McVay and 1-5 projects. However, currently there are no funds allocated for these projects. . In addition, the surface condition of Franklin Boulevard is deteriorating and the Oregon Department of Transportation has indicated that its storm drainage from Mississippi Avenue to 1-5 is old, undersized, and needs to be replaced. j -51- . . . . 3. The City shall consider the feasibility of constructing a full freeway Interchange at the intersection of Franklin Boulevard and 1-5. Discussion: The creation of a new freeway interchange at Franklin Boulevard vyould have a major impact on western Glenwood and considerable transportation implications for both the cities of Eugene and Springfield. The feasibility of such an interchange should be studied. If construction of the interchange seems likely, the Glenwood Refinement Plan should be amended to reflectthese changes in western Glenwood. 4. Promote safe and convenient access for pedestrians, bicyclists, and disabled individuals with particular attention to access to Eugene and Springfield from the Glenwood area. 4.1 Pedestrian priorities should be established as follows: a. The City shduld consult with the Oregon Department of Transportation to provide sidewalks along Franklin Boulevard, in conjunction with other improvements to this State highway. b. The City should support Lane Transit District's proposal to install a sidewalk along the east side of Glenwood Boulevard from Franklin Boulevard to 17th Avenue. 4.2 The City should establish a local bicycle route through Glenwood that parallels Franklin Boulevard. Its alignment would follow 17th Avenue from Glenwood Boulevard to Henderson, Henderson to 15th Avenue, 15th Avenue to Concord, and along a private alley owned by the Texaco Station Oust south of their buildings) to Brooklyn. Both Glenwood Boulevard and Brooklyn Avenue have signals at Franklin to facilitate north and south movements. If it is not possible or feasible to use the alley between Concord and Brooklyn, an alternate route would be Concord to Franklin (See the Proposed Bicycle Routes Map, Page 53). 4.3 The City should establish a local bicycle route southbound through Glenwood: its alignment would follow the local route proposed under 4.2 above to 17th and Henderson avenues, then follow Henderson Avenue south to 19th Avenue, 19th Avenue to Nugget Way, and Nugget Way to the McVay Highway. This would be a temporary route until the McVay Highway is improved with bicycle lanes and would only be undertaken if further study indicates a low enough industrial traffic volume to avoid conflicts with bicyclists. 4.4 Establish improvement priorities for bicycle routes into Eugene and Springfield as follows: a. Extend the "Glenwood Connector" east along the sanitary sewer line. alignment from 1-5 along the north property line of Lane County's Solid-Waste Facility site, and then out to Glenwood Boulevard. -52- ,;;- ~=-. ... - I I v I LID Site ~I . m 01 8 r;~~ ~.: ~~L "L , , ~- ~ ....' '~- o O~~ N... CTOV Solid .~aste Site \; ~, ''''...- ~~ . I- - \ \ .- ~ o o ;:;""\, I'-- ......... N _h N' -p 'c r~ ~ ~ r II It:: ~I ~ ~ I. '1 F ~ ~ ~ w I- _ ffi J IH ~ ~~~~c- /~~ 111h= r .-!~~ r--- , Wl L ~f',:, ~ ;;;:~?l- ~e- r-;-, ,: \- ',;\ I).~ '1= ~ de ;:L ~ ~~~; ~; ~)__~.~~:. t ,I ~ : ~ ~! I q91 ~ ! II ~ Of ~~i. IW of ( I~ 97 \ I 0/ ~ I .. V' :\d', \ .-::. 10" \ 1 0 \ ~ 0' \ '1' \ ,i J I 1'/10/ ./' I "I I I ( I / - '-~ ~J, / \q: ".. I ]~ . ~ I ,..... ~ .., If ~ li ~ .hN. . "-;",, '-". . 5 PROPOSED BICYCLE ROUTES I i - Existing Off-Street Path o 0 oProposed Off-Street Path - - I Proposed On-Street Path """"""'" Proposed Wide Sidewalk NOTE: The Riverfront Bike Path may not be located exactly where shown depending on the location of structures at the time of construction G L E N A . o . [ 500 1000 Feet , o o w D , ( ( ,~ ~ - 53- . . . . ~..' -" >, b. Provide better access on the Springfield Bridge. 4.5 Acquire through purchase or voluntary donation easements for pedestrian and bicycle access to and along the Willamette River through the Glenwood area as part of the development review process to provide for the planned South Bank Trail subject, however, to the provisions of the Greenway Goal protecting uses established as of the date of the adoption of this plan. Provide adequate security measures when the bicycle path is designed and constructed to ensure the public's. safety and protection of private property. Discussion: Currently, there are no streets in Glenwood that provide safe and continuous sidewalks for pedestrian movement. Although centrally located between Eugene and Springfield, there is not a safe. continuous way to bicycle or walk to either city from Glenwood. Currently, there are three signalized intersections along Franklin-Boulevard with pedestrian crossing facilities. They are at Glenwood Boulevard, Henderson Avenue, and Brooklyn Avenue. In addition, there are pedestrian crossing facilities at the Springfield Bridge. Within Glenwood there are currently no developed easements or rights-of-way providing pedestrian access to and along the Willamette River. There is an undeveloped ten-foot piece of right-of-way extending from the end of North Concord to the Willamette River. While providing public access along the river frontage in the form of a bicycle path is desirable, the community has serious concerns over security, especially in the most isolated areas along the river. In particular, Glenwood has transients th-at camp and travel along the river and the railroad tracks. Security measures should be designed into the bicycle path to protect public safety and private property . Facilities to serve the east/west movements of bicyclists and pedestrians are a high priority on the streets listed in the preceding discussion. As arterials and collectors in other parts of Glenwood are improved, consideration will be given to bicycle needs as well. The TransPlan Bicycle Element provides proJects to improve access for bicyclists to Eugene and Springfield along Franklin Boulevard and along the Willamette River. In addition, when streets are improved to urban standards, sidewalks will be installed as part of the project. The bike path proposed along the river is a continuation of the South Bank Trail and it is shown on the TransPlan Bicycle System Map as projects 410 a. and b. The proposal for a bike path along the river is a conceptual alignment and it is understood that this path may not be constructed for many years. In the meantime, the City will acquire easements when possible. When construction of the bike path begins, the location of the bike path may meander away from the river in those locations where there are structures in the way of the riverside alignment. In areas where there is very little land between the river and Franklin Boulevard (such as the extreme westerly portion of the greenway), the path may have to follow Franklin Boulevard. -54- 5. As the City assumes responsibility for street lighting in Glenwood, elimination of . safety hazards caused by inadequate lighting of intersections shall be a priority. . 5.1 The City should consult with the State Highway Division to improve street lighting at the intersection of Glenwood Boulevard and 22nd Avenue and the 1-5 on and off ramps. . 5.2 The City should consult with the Glenwood Water District to review other street lighting needs in Glenwood. 5.3 As Glenwood is annexed to Springfield, other appropriate intersections should be added to the City's streetlight list. Discussion: Adequate street lighting is an important safety feature of intersections. Two intersections in Glenwood have been noted as having inadequate lighting: the intersection of Glenwood Boulevard and 22nd Avenue and the 1-5 on and off ramps. Elimination of these . hazards will require coordination with the State Highway Division. 6. Encourage Lane Transit District to continue to provide convenient transit service to Glenwood. Discussion: L TD currently provides transit service along two routes in Glenwood. Location of the new L TD facility in Glenwood will provide the community with an opportunity to work with L TD on increased service. 7. Recognize and promote the availability of rail service to industrial properties as an asset in Glenwood. . Discussion: Glenwood has particularly good rail access because two major rail lines run through the area. This should be promoted as an asset for the future development of industrial property in the Glenwood area. . Glenwood has as many'as 20 to 30 trains per day passing through the area in a 24-hour period. The Union Pacific Main Line carries rail traffic through the area from Los Angeles to Seattle, while the Siskiyou Line carries traffic between the metropolitan area and cities in southern Oregon. The Major Transportation Map on Page 48 illustrates the Glenwood area's location along these main transportation corridors. II. PHASE I TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT A. BACKGROUND Transportation facilities serving the Phase 1 area provide access to both residential and industrial properties. Access and circulation are complicated by the fact that 1-5 forms the area's southern boundary, while Union Pacific Railroad's Ashland line forms its northern boundary. As a result, access to and from the area has been limited to minimize intersections with 1-5 and across the Union Pacific tracks. -55- . . . . . Historically, primary access to the area was provided from Franklin Boulevard via Henderson Avenue. In 1979-80, Glenwood Boulevard was constructed between Franklin Boulevard on the north and 1-5 on the south. As part of that same project, 22nd Avenue was constructed west of Henderson as a connector to Glenwood Boulevard. It Was built to serve as a collector street for the largely developed industrial area west of Henderson. Finally, in 1980, the railroad crossing at Henderson Avenue was closed, ending Henderson's function as a major access way into the . area, and leaving the 22nd Avenue collector and Glenwood Boulevard as the only access to the Phase I area. At the presenttime, there are no fully improved streets (streets with curbs, gutters, and . sidewalks) within the Phase I area of Glenwood. The 22nd Avenue collector west of Henderson is improved with two 11-foot travel lanes on asphalt mat and four-foot paved shoulders. Henderson Avenue is a Lane County-maintained street with less than a 40-foot right-of-way and an asphalt surface in fair to poor condition. Other streets like 21 st and 22nd Avenues east of Henderson remain gravel streets with less than a 40-foot right-of-way. At the present time, the gravel portion of 22nd Avenue provides the only access to 14 acres of vacant land east of Henderson. Still other streets, like Harrison (also known as Seneca), exist on paper as dedicated rights-of-way and have never been developed for access (See the Street Conditions Map, Page 57). Access remains a critical issue at the present time, particularly in areas east of Henderson Avenue, where the gravel portion of 22nd Avenue provides access to a number of houses and also provides the only dedicated access to vacant, industrially-designated property. While bisecting part of the Farwest Steel development site, 21 st Avenue also provides access to nine residences and a church. As mentioned above, the only access point into the Phase I area is from 22nd Avenue. This limits the ability of emergency vehicles, such as fire trucks and ambulances, to get into the area if 22nd Avenue were to be blocked. There are currently no developed pedestrian or bicycle ways within the Phase I area or connecting the Phase I area to the rest of Glenwood. Although 22nd Avenue, west of Henderson, has four-foot shoulders on either side, these are inadequate for pedestrian and bicycle travel given the nature of industrial traffic on 22nd Avenue and the steeply sloping sides of the fill immediately next to the street shoulders. B. TRANSPORTATION GOALS It is understood that not all of the transportation goals stated below can be met fully or at the same time. The goals can be prioritized and balanced against each other in order to achieve the transportation needs for the Phase I area. These goals are not listed in order of priority. 1. As the area makes a transition to a fully developed industrial area, to design access to industrial development that minimizes impacts on existing residential property. -56- I GLENWOOD REFINEMENT PLAN -- PHASE 1 ROAD CONDITIONS December. 1985 - Paved with Gutters - - I Paved ....... Gravel . -7-- Mapped but not existing CJ study Area Boundary N A o 500 1000 Feet I 1 G L E N w o o D - 57- . . . . 2. To.provide development standards and processes that will improve access to industrial property. 3. To provide safe and efficient access into the area for emergency vehicles. 4. To provide safe and efficient access into the area for pedestrian-bicycle traffic. POLICIES These policies help guide decisions in providing for adequate transportation access and circulation in the Phase I area. 1. Recognize residential and industrial land use patterns and implement a short-range transportation strategy that responds to those patterns. 2. Recognize ultimate development of the area for industrial uses and implement a long-range transportation strategy as residential uses.phase out of the area. 3. Provide short-range access and improvements to the area atminimal cost and in the most efficient manner possible. 4. Provide for an efficient and workable transition between short and long-range transportation strategies recognizing the short-term transportation needs of existing residential and industrial development and the long-term transportation needs of future industrial development. Discussion: Transportation strategies for the Phase I area need to address existing residential and industrial land use patterns as well as future plans for industrial development. These policies provide direction for more specific street improvement projects to address residential and industrial land use patterns in the short term and ultimate industrial development in the long term. The Short and Long-Range Transportation Strategies identify how to implement the transportation goals and policies through specific street improvement projects. The Short-Range Transportation Strategy allows vacant industrial land to develop while minimizing, as much as possible, the physical and financial impacts of street improvements on existing residential development. This strategy also minimizes costs of interim street improvements to developers of industrial property. The proposed Long-Range Transportation Strategy reflects anticipated transportation needs of future industrial development and would only take full effect when residential development has phased out of the area. To provide a transition between the short and long-range strategies, street improvement projects will need to be carried out in a manner that provides access to developable land while continuing to protect adjacent residential properties from industrial impacts. -58- 5. The City shall require developers of vacant industrial property to provide a minimum level of street improvement before development can occur. . . Discussion: The minimum level of improvement needed for industrial development is described in the Short-Range Transportation Strategy. This minimum level of improvement is needed to provide reasonably safe and efficient access as part of the Short-Range Transportation Strategy for the area. The City will not assess adjacent property owners for less than a City standard street improvement. The responsibility for providing those street improvements will fall upon those property owners who initiate the improvements. 6. The City shall not initiate street improvements on streets providing frontage to residentially developed properties. Discussion: Residential property owners have expressed concern about being assessed for street improvements needed for industrial development. Thus; industrial development on streets providing access to adjacent residential properties that requires street improvements must improve a 2/3 street. A 2/3 street includes at least one travel lane in each direction and curb, gutter and sidewalk on the industrial side of the street. Street improvements can still be initiated on petition of a majority of property owners benefited or on the motion of the Council, as provided in the Springfield Charter, Section 77. 7. .rii The Long-Range Transportation Strategy for the area shall provide a basis for considering vacation of existing street rights-of-way to facilitate consolidation of parcels for industrial development. i'" Discussion: The long-Range Transportation Strategy will not be fully implemented until residential development has phased out of the area. This provides assurances for residents and residential property owners that existing street patterns will be retained where they provide access to residential property. It also provides assurances to owners of industrial property that the City will not require full improvement of existing streets not needed for future industrial development and that eventually parcels under their development control could be consolidated. This policy also allows for development of fully improved streets in portions of the area while residential development continues to exist in other parts of the Phase I area. . 8. The City shall consult with approptiateagencies and..affected property owners to establish a secondary emergency vehicle access into the Phase I area. Discussion: Emergency service providers from both cities have raised concerns about their ability to respond to emergencies in the area if the 22nd Avenue collector becomes blocked. The need for a secondary emergency access increases as the area develops more intensively. Finding viable alternate access routes is difficult because of the limited access into the area in general. The following access points have been identified as possible alternate access routes (See the Secondary Emergency Access Map, Page 61). a. From Henderson, across the Union Pacific railroad tracks. This route is considered by the emergency service providers as the most desirable secondary emergency access into the area. This alternative would require gates and/or boUards on both sides of the tracks. The surface over the tracks would need to be improved enough to support the weight of a fire truck (80,000 pounds). This alternative would require the successful . negotiation of a limited use crossing between the City and Union Pacific. -59- . . . . If this section of Henderson were vacated, a 20-foot fire lane easement would have to be retained (Note: Following adoption of the Phase I plan, the Eugene City Council approved the vacation of this portion of Henderson, making this implementation strategy unlikely to occur). b. From 22nd, through thePape development to the south end of Henderson Avenue. This route would require an access point off of 22nd Avenue into the property and the establishment ofa fire lane easement through the Pape development to the unvacated portion of Henderson Avenue. c. From Glenwood Boulevard, through the Pape development to the south end of Henderson Avenue. This route is, similar to B., except that the access point would be off of:Glenwood Boulevard rather than 22nd Avenue. Before this could be a viable access, the fill on the Pape property would have to be extended to Glenwood Boulevard. This alternative would also require a fire lane easement through 'the Pape development. d. From Interstate 5, through the Vik property to the east end of 22nd Avenue. This route would require an emergency access point off of the northbound lane on Interstate 5 where 1-5 is level with the Vik property. This route would require a fire lane easement through the Vik property to the east end of 22"d Avenue. Development of this route would require both State highway and Federal approval. Alternative a. should be considered the top priority for secondary emergency access since it is the most preferred by the emergency access providers and seems to be logistically the easiest and least expensive to provide. If development of emergency access in that location is riot possible, implementation of another alternative should be pursued. If 22nd Avenue is ever extended east to Newman or the McVay Highway, secondary emergency access will no longer be needed. 9. In conjunction with TransPlan and adjacent landowners, the CityshaU pursue development of 22nd Avenue west of Henderson as -a fully improved street, including pedestrianlbicycle facilities. . Discussion: That portion of 22nd Avenue west of Henderson was built in 1980 by Lane County and was not constructed to Eugene street standards. As more industrial development occurs, this street will need to be upgraded. Future improvements to this street should also address the lack of adequate pedestrian and bicycle access into the Phase I area. Regardless of future land use patterns in the area, access for pedestrian and-bicycle traffic needs to be improved. Because of topography and industrial traffic, the pedestrian-bicycle facilities Will need to be separated from vehicular traffic on 22nd Avenue by curbs or other barriers. -60- GLENWOOD REFINEMENT PLAN -- PHASE 1 ~ffHB , , , , , , , SECONDARY EMERGENCY ACCESS December, 1985 AI. TERNATlVES 1 a . . . 2 ........... 3 00000000000 4 - - ~,- - - . N A - 22ND Ave Extension CJ Study Area Boundary o 500 1000 Feet I I GLENWO o D - 61 - . . . 10. The appropriate governmental agencies shall seek to improve pedestrian-bicycle access into the neighborhood, with particular attention to use of the Hend~rson rail crossing. ' . Discussion: Pedestrian-bicycle access into the Phase I area is currently inadequate. Adequate pedestrian-bicycle access is important to current residents as well as employees of future industrial development. Pedestrian-bicycle access should be considered a priority. This policy does not imply any future reopening of Henderson Avenue, but does call for investigation into the use of the existing right-of-way for a pedestrian-bicycle crossing or research into the feasibility of a ~eparated grade pedestrian-bicycle cross.ing. c. TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES The gradual transition of residential to industrial uses and traffic in the Phase I area necessitate two transportation strategies to reflect that transition. The Short-Range Transportation Strategy addresses interim improvements allowed for industrial development using existing . rights-of-way. The Long-Range Strategy addresses the ultimate street development in the area, including street vacations and new street development. 1. The City shall use the Short and Long-Range Transportation Strategies as a guide for evaluating specific development proposals in the area. . a. Short-Range Transportation Strategy: The Short-Range Transportation Strategy identifies the conditions and issues to be addressed by short-range transportation improvements (See the Short-Range Transportation Strategy Map, Page 64). (1) Intersection at 22nd and Henderson Avenues Currently, the alignment of the intersection of 22nd and Henderson avenues is offset. 22nd Avenue west of Henderson intersects Henderson at a point approximately 100 feet north of the portion of 22nd Avenue east of Henderson Avenue. Depending on whether the intersection realignment at Henderson and 22nd avenues occurs on the east or west side of Henderson, the realignment could impact the house on the northeast corner and possibly the house next to it. (2) 22nd Avenue East of Henderson Avenue 22nd Avenue east of Henderson has been identified as the street best able to provide access to vacant industrial sites. This street will need to be improved to provide access for industrial traffic. Development of vacant industrial property on the south side of 22nd Avenue east of Harrison Street will require street improvements for the south side of 22nd Avenue where it abuts the vacant industrial site, as discussed in #6 on Page 59. -62- 22nd Avenue would terminate in a cul-de-sac on the Vik property. The cul-de-sac would be built . when the Vik property is developed, although interim turnaround measures may be required prior to that time. (3) 21 st Avenue 21st Avenue east of Harrison would retain its existing level of improvement. Because of existing hazardous conditions, a minimum level of intersection improvements at the intersection of 21 st and Henderson avenues would be required. The section of 21st Avenue between Henderson and Harrison would also be paved. 21st Avenue may eventually be vacated as part of the Long-Range Transportation Strategy. There will also need to be an emergency turnaround at the east end of 21st Avenue. This turnaround would be constructed as part of the development on the Vik property. b. Long-Range Transportation Strategy: The Long-Range Transportation Strategy will develop as residential uses phase out of the area. It needs to address the following issues and conditions: (1) City standards for industrial areas require fully improved streets including curbs, gutters, sidewalks and paving. (2) Ultimate street patterns included as part of the long-Range Transportation Strategy will depend upon property ownership and the nature of industrial development. . The Long-Range Transportation Strategy will provide for a fully improved street on 22nd Avenue. Some flexibility for future improvements to 21 st Avenue east of Harrison Street and for the improvement of Harrison Street between 21 st and 22nd Avenues will be needed. The final street pattern will depend on how parcels are consolidated and developed. For example, under this plan, the streets that now bisect the Fischer property (21st and Henderson Avenues) could be vacated. If 21st Avenue between Henderson and Harrison is vacated to facilitate consolidation of industrial development sites, improvements to Harrison Street between 21 st and 22nd avenues may be considered. Prior to approving any vacation of 21st Avenue between Henderson and Harrison streets, the City Council should consider whether the public interest is met by the vacation proposal. This should include consideration of the concerns of residents and property owners who use 21st Avenue for access. In addition, consideration should be given to the impact on adjacent properties if Harrison Street between 21 st and 22nd avenues is to be developed as an alternative access. -63- . . . . . GLENWOOD REFINEMENT PLAN -- PHASE 1 Secoadmy cmergalCy /' access aaoss niIroad tracka Minimum k:Yel of iDIa:aoclion improwmeut --+ 22ND AVE /' 1ntI:rsccti0ll will have to be ~ for safe access SHORT RANGE TRANSPORTATION STRATEGY December. 1985 ..... Dust Free Road Surface ----. Paved Roadway within existing ROW - Half Industrial Street Improvement CJ Study Area Boundary N A o 500 1000 Feet , G L E N w o o D - 64- ,., Eventually, 22nd Avenue may be extended through the Vik and Nielsen properties to connect with either Newman Street or Franklin Boulevard. This would open up additional landfor development. Because of the steepness of terrain east of the Phase I area, this street extension would be expensive to construct. Currently, neither the City or Lane County has funds available to construct such a street and it may only be constructed in the event of initiation and financing by adjoining property owners. Because this proposal impacts land and transportation circulation in the Phase II area, it should be considered more thoroughly during the development of the Pha~e II part of the plan. Under the Long-Range Transportation Strategy, the Phase I area would eventually be served by fully improved streets. (NOTE: The Appendix dated April 1989 contains a, more complete record of extensive discussions during preparation of the draft plan on the subject of street vacations). . . ~r . .~.: '~ ' , h . -65- . . . . . -66- PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES ELEMENT . I. INTRODUCTION ti A variety of urban facilities and services are currently available in Glenwood, but services will need to be expanded as properties in the area are annexed and developed more intensively. . TheiMetropolitan Plan specifically calls for a minimum level of key urban services such as water, electricity, police and fire protection, and sanitary sewers to be available to accommodate urban development needs. The Metropolitan Plan also establishes that the proper timing for urban development is after annexation to the City. In addition to the minimum level of key urban services listed above, afull range of urban services adds local parks and recreation programs, storm sewers,street lighting, and libraries. This more extensive range of services cannot always be provided immediately upon annexation, but are to be provided eventually to all areas within the City. The Metropolitan Plan recognizes that "a full range of key urban services should be provided to urban areas according to demonstrated need and budgetary priorities. II (Policy 8, Growth Management and the Urban Service Area, Page II-B-4). To establish budgetary priorities, major capital intensive facilities projects need to be incorporated into the City's Capital Improvement Program. The Metropolitan Plan gives additional policy direction and support for this process: In those portions of the urban service area where the full range of key urban services is not available, metropolitan area capital improvement programming (planning, programming, and budgeting for service extension in an orderly and efficient manner) shall be developed and maintained (Policy 4, Public Utilities, Services, and Facilities Element, Page III-G-5). . Glenwood is an area where a full range of key urban services is not available. It will require budgeting and planning for a sanitary sewer system, storm drainage improvements, extensive rebuilding of the water system, enhancement of public safety services, and expansion of parks and recreation opportunities. This element reviews key urban services that are currently being provided or that will be provided to Glenwood as it develops more intensively. It also includes a discussion of annexation in relation to service provision. The following services are discussed in the Policy section of this ele"ment: water and electric services, public safety services, parks and recreation services, storm sewers, and sanitary sewers. The element concludes with a section on urban transition and annexation. Where appropriate, there is discussion and policies specific to the Phase I area. Unless otherwise noted, all policies and discussion pertain to both phases of the Glenwood Refinement Plan. -67- . . . . . '.,_:"'1"'1 II. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES GOAL To provide and maintain a full range of public facilities and services in an orderly and efficient manner as the area develops more intensively. POLICY 1. f The City shall provide public facilities and services to Glenwood in a timely fashion and in response to requests for service. ' 1.1 A variety of sources for funding public facilities and services should be identified and explored as to their feasibility, including but not limited to tax increment financing, local improvement districts, block grants, and public/private partnerships. Discussion: The City will begin to provide a full range of urban services to properties as they annex. It is important to analyze availability of services for each proposed annexation to ensure that services can be extended to the property in an orderly and cost-efficient manner. Lack of adequate capital funds may be a major impediment to the timely provision of public facilities and services in Glenwood. This is particularly true in regard to City construction of sanitary sewer trunk lines into Glenwood. The City will need to explore as many creative solutions as possible to provide financing for needed public facilities and services. III. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES POLlCI.ES Each service has unique issues and policy directions associated with it, requiring the separate discussion and policy sections presented below. A. WATER AND ELECTRIC SERVICES Since 1941, the Glenwood Water District has contracted with the Eugene Water & Electric Board (EWEB) for the provision of water to the Glenwood area. EWEB has also provided electric service to both the incorporated and unincorporated portions of Glenwood. Glenwood has been in EWEB's electric service area since the late 1950s. Prior to that time, Glenwood was part of Mountain States Power. EWES's plans called for construction of an additional substation southeast of Glenwood as the electric load on the current system increases. During the transition period, EWEB will continue to provide water service directly to the portion of Glenwood inside the city limits, while the Glenwood Water District will continue to contract with EWEB to provide water service to unincorporated Glenwood. Under this arrangement, EWEB wholesales water to the water district, maintains the water transmission and distribution system, and reads meters and bills for all water-related services in Glenwood. The water district must authorize any expenditures for maintenance over $500 (See the Appendix dated April 1989 for the Water, and Streetlight Maps for the Phase I area). -68- .,':l'.:"- ;.'t;;".",. . The Glenwood water distribution system is in poor repair and will need to be improved and . extended in order to serve additional development. Currently, the water system loses an average of one million gallons of water a month through leaks in the system. This leakage is a significant proportion of the four to five million gallons of water a month purchased from EWEB. The Glenwood Water District plays a major role in the Glenwood community. The district provides, through contractual arrangements with other agencies, three important services to the unincorporated portions of Glenwood. The district currently contracts with EWEB for water service and streetlight maintenance and with. Springfield for fire protection services. The water and streetlight services are fee-based, with the users paying for the service. The district acts as a taxing entity to collect funds for fire protection services. Fire protection services are discussed in detail in the Public Safety section of this element. Street lighting is discussed in the Transportation Element. ;~;; ~,~,~~ Although the district serves an important function for the Glenwood community, that role will diminish over time as annexations to the City and concurrent withdrawals from the water district occur. There will cornea point where it is neither logical nor cost-effective for the district to remain in operation, especially in light of the need for major repairs to the water system. The Metropolitan Plan recognizes this problem and provides policy direction supporting the creation of transition plans for the dissolution of existing service districts: :~" As annexations to cities occur over time, existing service districts within the urban growth boundary shall be dissolved. The cities should consider developing intergovernmental agreements, which address transition issues raised by , annexation, with affected special service districts (Policy 17, Growth Management and the Urban Service Area, Page TI-B-6). . Efforts shall be made to reduce the number of unnecessary special service districts and to revise confusing or illogical service boundaries, including those that result ina duplication of effort or overlap of service. When possible, these efforts shall be pursued in cooperation with Springfield and Eugene (Policy 5, Public Utilities, Services, and Facilities Element, Page III-G-6). When a special service district can no longer serve its function, the district is dissolved and its functions are taken over by other agencies. In this case, when the Glenwood Water District dissolves, SUB will provide water service and streetlight maintenance directly to the unincorporated area and unincorporated Glenwood could be annexed into an existing fire district for, fire protection services. The Appendix dated April 1989 has additional information on the Glenwood Water District and the process and options for dissolution. SUB has an extraterritorial water extension policy that governs extension of water service to areas outside the city limits. When the Glenwood Water District is dissolved and Water service is provided directly to unincorporated Glenwood, water-line extensions and new service connections would be governed by this policy. Although the terms of any agreement dissolving the water district would set the specific conditions for, water extensions, -69- . . . . . ; ~~ t./ l~:, SUB policy provides for water-line extensions to properties in a dissolved Idistrict if the property owner signs an annexation agreement with the City. An annexation agreement is an agreement in which the property owner agrees t~ annex to the City at some future time when the City requests it. . In a noncontiguous annexation, water service could be provided through the existing water line or through installation of new water lines. New water lines would require an -extraterritorial water extension" in cases where the water line passes through unincorporated area. In these cases, SUB's policy calls for the customer requesting the extension to pay initial installation costs. POLICIES 1. SUB shall provide water and electricity service to the Glenwood area either directly or by contract. Discussion: In the short-term, EWEB will continue to provide electricity services to all of Glenwood and water services within the city limits (directly) and outside the city limits through the Glenwood Water District. In the long-term, SUB will be the ultimate provider both within and outside the city limits (upon dissolution of theGlenwoodWater District). How and when the service transfer will occur, will be resolved by the two utilities through an Intergovernmental Agreement. 2. The City shall consult with SUB and the Glenwood Water District to determine the appropriate timing for dissolution of the water district and provision of water service directly by SUB. Discussion: It is important to provide for a smooth and efficient transition of water service from the Glenwood Water District to SUB. There are three issues which need to be addressed when providing for this transition: 1) Extension of waterlines and improvements to the water system in the most logical and cost-effective way; 2) Contracting for provision of fire protection service to unincorporated portions of Glenwood; and 3) Maintenance of streetlights: As discussed in the background information, the water system in Glenwood is in poor repair. The system needs to be upgraded to provide better and more cost-efficient water service to Glenwood, especially in cases where new development creates more demands on the system. SUB cannot significantly upgrade the system until it is under their direct control. The timing for SUB to take over direct service should take into consideration the cost savings and efficiency that direct service would provide. Prior to the dissolution of the water district, contracting for fire protection services will need to be transferred to an existing fire district in order to maintain fire protection for the remaining unincorporated portions of Glenwood. Because of the need to upgrade the water system, the water district should be dissolved as soon as negotiations for transfer of contracted fire protection services have been successfully completed. Contracting of fire protection services is discussed in more detail in the Public Safety section of this element. -70- B. PUBLIC SAFETY . Public safety services include fire protection and fire prevention services; police and crime prevention services, and emergency medical services. Each of these services requires safe and efficient access into the area served. This has been identified as an issue of particular concern for the Phase I portion of the Study Area and is addressed in the transportation plan for that area. '. For those portions of the Glenwood area outside Springfield's city limits (which involves most of the area), transition of public safety services from Lane County (sheriff) to the City is the overriding issue to be addressed. 1. Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services Both Eugene and Springfield fire and emergency serVices have served th~ Glenwood area. Springfield will provide fire protection services within the city limits, while fire protection services for the area outside the city limits were and will continue to be provided by the City, under contract with the Glenwood Water District. A full range of fire protection services are provided to those areas of Glenwood within the city limits, including: fire protection, fire investigation, hydrant maintenance inspections, fire inspection programs, the hazardous materials control program, and fire safety education. These services would be available to the Glenwood area upon annexation. Fire protection services provided to those areas of Glenwood in the urban transition areas is limited to fire protection and hydrant maintenance inspections. Fire hydrant flow tests and.maintenance are performed . by SUB. Emergency services include basic and advanced life support and paramedic response to health emergencies. The engine companies (fire trucks) provide advance life support services, with transportation provided by medic units. As a result of an enhanced mutual aid agreement between the two cities, calls for emergency medical or fire services are the shared responsibility of both cities in areas, like Glenwood, which lie between the two cities. This means that the initial response in case of fire or basic life support comes from the City with responsibility for providing service while paramedic response is governed by whichever uhit is closest. Under this agreement, both cities' equipment can be . used if a large fire occurs. POLICIES 1. Fire protection services currently provided by Springfield under contract with the Glenwood Water District shall be transferred to a system of services provided by the City at the time of annexation, according to present practice. 2. Eugene and Springfield shall continue an enhanced joint response program in the Glenwood area, even after complete annexation of the area to Springfield, and shall maintain current levels of fire response time to the Glenwood area. 3. As additional Glenwood properties annex to Springfield, there will be a need to construct a new fire station in the downtown area that can serve all of Glenwood. -71- . . . . Discussion: Fire protection services in the Glenwood area are the responsibility of both Eugene and Springfield, as a result of the mutual aid and enhanced mutual response system that has been adopted for areas where the two cities abut the 1-5 corridor. This system is designed to avoid unnecessary construction of additional fire stations and duplication of ' services and costs by providing for response by the nearest unit to qalls for fire protection services (See Enhanced Mutual Aid with Springfield in the Appendix dated April 1989). Both Springfield and Eugene units may therefore be called upon to respond to fires in the Glenwood area, under the current system. Recent statistics indicate that fire response to the Glenwood area is approximately 5.4 minutes, a response time that is expected to be improved as annexation and development of the Glenwood area occurs and a new fire station is constructed in the downtown area. . For those areas not yet annexed to the City, Springfield provides fire protection services through a contract with the Glenwood Water District. If the GlenwoodWater District were dissolved or if the.district ceases to provide fire protection. services as a district function, it is assumed the territory within the Glenwood Water District would be annexed to an existing rural fire protection district such as the Willakenzie Rural Fire Protection District. In that event, the rural fire protection district would contract with either Eugene or Springfield to provide the service. Because Springfield currently provides that service to the unannexed portions of Glenwood, changes in contracting arrangements would result in some fiscal impact on Springfield. 2. Police Protection Police protection is currently provided to the unincorporated portions of the Glenwood area by the Lane County Sheriff's Department and the Oregon State Police. Springfield's police provide patrol service and police protection to portions of Glenwood already inside the city limits. POLICIES 1. Springfield will assume responsibility for providing an urban level of police services comparable to those provided in other parts of the City, including crime prevention and response to calls, upon annexation of properties to the City. Discussion: As portions of the Glenwood area are annexed to Springfield, they will receive the same level of police services that are provided to other areas within the City. This level of service will depend on the Springfield area's growth, size and development patterns, as well as the community's willingness to finance police services. 2. T~e City will consult with residents and property owners to identify crime prevention needs and to establish crime prevention programs to serve the area upon annexation of properties to the City. Discussion: There is increasing recognition that there are a variety of crime prevention programs possible and that they must play an increasing role in future police services. The Police Department will offer residents of the Glenwood area the support and educational programs that are offered to other areas of the City, upon annexation of properties to the City. These will include personal safety issues, specific crime prevention techniques, and continued liaison work with the social service agencies that can affect many of the problems that are considered police issues for this area. -72- C. PARKS AND RECREATION . Parks and recreation services are currently being provided in the Glenwood area through the Willamalane Park and Recreation District. Willamalane has served the Glenwood area since the park district was formed in 1944. The only public park in Glenwood is James Park. This park was purchased by the district in 1948 and is classified as a neighborhood park. POLICIES 1. The City and Willamalane shall work with property owners along those portions of the Willamette River within the Glenwood area in recognition of the area's role as part of the Willamette Greenway system and the community-wide resource it represents. Discussion: Adopted Statewide Planning Goals, the Metro Plan and Willamalane's comprehensive parks and open space plan continue to identify the valuable recreational and scenic qualities of land along the Willamette River. Within the Glenwood area, the Willamette Greenway is located along the south bank of the Willamette River, extending east from Interstate 5 and continuing south around the bend in the river beneath the Springfield Bridge and along the riverbank east of the McVay Highway. Several locations within this area have been identified as appropriate for possible park and open space development, while other portions are identified as part of Routes 41 Oa and b called for in the Metropolitan Bike Plan. 2. The City will consult with Willamalane and other public agencies and private landowners to coordinate acquisition of property and development of public access and recreational facilities with preservation and enhancement of .significant natural habitats and scenic corridors and with economic use of those lands along the river. . 3. The City will defer to Willamalane to consider the following park acquisition and development priorities in developing park and recreation services for the Glenwood area listed in priority order. See the Possible Park Site Map, Page 76. A. Consider acquisition for passive park/open space along !h~ river in the vicinity of the river's bend, just west of the Springfield bridge. This land is designated as part of an opportunity area in the land Use Elementand could be developed with an industrial or office park or in some form of residential development. The area is directly across the river from Island Park, is located along the bend in the river, has value as an attractive open space area that could complement whatever development goes in there, and is most likely to provide metropolitan-level park/open space services. -73-: . . . . This area has been. identified in parks planning for the metropolitan area as appropriate for a special park node within the regional greenway system. In that system, park and greenway linkages along the river would be sought of 150 feet or'more back from the. river, widening out at this node to a possible depth of 300 feet back from the river. Access and visibility from Franklin Boulevard are issues that will need to be addressed for whatever form of public or private development that takes place on that property. . B. Explore the feasibility of acquisition of one or more parcels within or adjacent to the central resi,dential area for redevelopment as a small neighborhood park. James Park is not easily accessible from the central residential area because it is separated from the residential area by the railroad line and the park has no visibility or access to McVay Highway. C; Consider. future land uses in determining ongoing use and development of James Park for Glenwood residents and investigate acquisition and development of alternative sites east of McVay Highway. Consider the possible purchase of the old G/enwood School site for an expansion of James Park, thereby increasing the parks access and visibility from McVay Highway. James Park is approximately three acres in size and is owned and operated by Willamalane as a neighborhood park. It used to be adjacent to a 4J School District site which provided a means of access and frontage to McVay Highway for the park site, but the former school site has since been sold. -74- - . . -75- . . . , ~ ~ . POSSIBLE PARK SITES July, 1999 . Manufactured Dwelling - Designated Mixed Use Area m~!~ Opportunity Area Site I~~lirm~ Existing James Park Site ~~ James Park Alternative Site 1~lm~ Residential Area N A o , 500 1000 Feet , . G L E N w o o D -76- :~"""." Several manufactyred dwelling parks are located on both sides of McVay. Assuming the parks on the east side of McVay remain in residential use, consideration should be given to swapping the James Park site for a park and open space site east of the McVay Highway and along the river. A park site in this location would further plans to extend the greenway and so~th bank pedestrian/bike trail and could better serve local neighborhood needs, depending on the future of residential uses in the area. Because of its location on the river, a park in this vicinity would serve more than local needs. .:".,,,: D. STORM SEWERS AND DRAINAGE Storm sewer and drainage facilities provide for storm water runoff and drainage on both private prop~rty and on public rights-of-way. Controlling runoff may occur through use of existing natural watercourses and by channeling runoff through pipes located in public rights-of-way or easements. Private drainage improvements may be located on private property as part of private development. For development inside the City, private drainage systems are reviewed to avoid impacts on other properties. The City installs storm drain systems as part of street improvement projects and may become involved when private development activities cause blockage or other changes to the natural drainage system that impact other properties. In those cases, the City will step in to ensure that the outfall from private systems does not cause erosion or other impacts on adjacent properties. :",!-," Glenwood is in a 500-acre drainage basin. This basin includes part of the Laurel Hill Valley that drains under Interstate 5 into Glenwood. Most of the drainage in Glenwood is along natural channels, ditches, or swales. There are some areas that are piped or have piped crossings under streets. Parts of the Central Residential Area, in particular, have very poor storm' drainage that causes "ponding" in streets and yards. Aside from areas directly fronting the river, all drainage in Glenwood is or will eventually be directed either naturally or through pipes to the slough on the north side of the railroad tracks. This slough carries water to the river in a course that parallels the railroad tracks and crosses under the freeway bridge to the river (See the Drainage Map, Page 79). The slough has an estimated capacity for a ten-year storm event. The Appendix dated April 1989 contains additional information on the drainage system in the Phase I area, including the Topography and Drainage Map. ,,,' The natural watercourses in Glenwood serve an important function in carrying storm water through the area to the river. These watercourses are shown on the Drainage Map and should not be filled unless a permit is obtained from the City and other State and Federal agencies that may regulate their alteration. -77- . . . . . . ".,' 1. Storm Drainage and Wetlands Often natural watercourses such as the slough are also wetlands and possess many values common to wetland areas, such as flood conveyance, flood storage, sediment and pollution control, groundwater recharge, fish and wildlife habitat, and recreational and scenic values. Wetlands in Glenwood will be. discussed in more detail in the Environmental Design Element. However, it is appropriate here to explore the link between wetlands and storm drainage. At times, the purpose of these two uses can conflict, but they are usually complementary. A natural watercourse used for storm drainage needs to have a free flow, unobstructed from vegetation, for optimum efficiency in carrying large amounts of water during storms so that it will not flood surrounding areas. On the other hand, it is the vegetation and still backwaters that make a wetland an important wildlife habitat. However, wetlands, and particularly vegetated wetlands, can also detain and/or retain flood waters and thereby reduce peak flows. In some instances, this characteristic must be managed or altered to protect adjacent developed lands. These same wetlands and their vegetation provide the other wetland values mentioned above. These wetland values need to be considered when planning for use of the slough for storm drainage. POLICY 1. The City shall design a storm sewer and drainage plan for Glenwood to accommodate storm runoff from growth and development in the area that is also sensitive to other wetland issues. Discussion: There are many types of drainageways within Glenwood, ranging from natural watercourses to private drainage systems and public facilities. In many areas, existing drainageways are inadequate. As the area develops more intensively, both with industrial uses and paved streets, a drainage plan for the Glenwood area will be needed. Since the major drainageway in Glenwood is a wetland slough, the drainage plan will need to be sensitive to the wetland qualities of the slough in determining its capacity and treatment. This plan shows possible locations for pipes that would, along with use of the existing natural watercourses, make up the backbone of a drainage system for Glenwood. E. SANITARY SEWERS Sanitary sewer collection systems transport sewage from private property to the metropolitan area's wastewater treatment plant. lateral sewer-lines act as collectors of sewage from individual service lines and feed into larger trunk lines which transport sewage to the treatment plant. Sanitary sewers that are part of the Metropolitan Wastewater Management System (See the Existing and Proposed Sewer System Map, Page 82) serve those properties in Glenwood that are already located within the city limits. Properties remaining outside the city limits are served by individual on-site sewage disposal systems (septic tanks). -78- . DRAINAGE - Existing Piped Drainage ~ Natural or Open Drainage ~ Proposed Drainage .. Area.ofSpecial Concern (These areas should not be filled without special review) N A o , 500 1000 Feet G L E N w o o D -79- . . . , ~ <~ .. . In an area like Glenwood, which has old on-site sewage disposal systems, there will be failing and marginal systems in the ground. Over the years, Lane County has monitored the area for its suitability for on-site systems. In 1967, the Lane County Health Department conducted a survey of on-site sewage disposal systems in Glenwood. Of the 252 dwelling units surveyed, 104 dwellings were found to have failing or marginal sewage disposal systems. At that time, there was considerable discussion about this problem and whether Glenwood should be sewered, but this issue was never resolved. In 1977 and 1978, Lane County conducted a survey of the Phase I area and determined that a significant number of the on-site systems were failing or marginal (Additional information on this issue can be found in the Appendix dated April 1989). Current City policy requires annexation of property before providing sanitary sewer service. The existing public sewer line has been sized to accommodate any future industrial development contemplated for the Phase I area and a small portion of the Phase II area. Location of lines connecting individual properties to the main sewer line will depend on a variety of factors, including use and topography. Generally, any extensions of the sewer system will be located within public rights-of-way. All properties within the Phase I area can be served from the existing line, with the exception of the Neilson property located at the southeast corner of the Phase I area. Because of the site's topography, any sanitary or storm sewer services to this portion of the Phase I study area would need to be extended from the Phase II area. A small portion of the Phase II area can be served from the existing sewer line. This area is adjacent to the existing sewer line that passes through the Phase I portion of Glenwood. The potential service boundary of existing sewer is shown on the Existing and Proposed Sewer System Map. The sewer lines described above are limited by the capacity of the pump station and sewer line downstream from Glenwood. The rest of Glenwood can now be served by the trunk line connecting to the East Bank Interceptor across the river in Springfield. Eventually, a portion of the existing line serving Glenwood would also connect with this new trunk line (See the Existing and Proposed Sewer System Map, Page 82, for a generalized design of the proposed trunk system). Construction of sewers for Glenwood will require major capital funding by the City. Timing of the construction of the trunk sewer system depends on when the City will have funds available to construct the system ~nd how much demand there is for sewers. -80- The final phase of sewer construction projects will need to be programmed in the City's Capital . Improvement Program (CIP). This project would complete the trunk system in Glenwood. This trunk line could be routed entirely along Franklin Boulevard (See the Existing and Proposed Sewer System Map, Page 82). The City should consider combining sewer construction with improvements to Franklin Boulevard. After the trunk system is constructed, the timing of the construction of laterals (local lines) depends, in part, upon the pattern of annexation. The lateral serving houses or businesses on a local street will be constructed when there is a reasonably sized area to serve and limited need for extension of the sewer outside the city limits. The City tries to respond to individual needs, such as failing septic systems. Once the lateral is constructed, each property owner is assessed , for his/her share of the cost of the system and has 18 months to connect to it. If the property that"the lateral goes by is outside the city limits, that property cannot connect to the system and is not assessed. The property would be assessed its share oUhecostat the time of annexation. However, this rarely occurs because the City's current funding levels prohibit extra territorial extension of sewers. Service lines will be constructed concurrently with the trunk lines to provide direct service to abutting property, ~ ~,~ Annexation generally occurs when property owners wish to develop their properties more intensively. Provision of sanitary sewers requires that the cost of extension be borne by the property owner upon annexation. Under certain conditions, City Bancroft programs allow property owners to pay for these and other public improvements over a number of years at a fixed interest rate. The amount of interest is determined by the interest rate on bonds sold by the City to finance the improvements. Currently, the City's Bancroft program provides a ten-year period at an interest rate based upon current market conditions for repayment of improvement costs. The Bancroft program is available to all owners in developed areas. To reduce the financial impacts of improvement costs on low-income, elderly property owners, there are deferral and extension programs for Bancroft payments. The City may extend this deferral program to non-elderly low-income property owners for sanitary sewer assessments. . ,'l.t. ;;' ~ -81- . . EXISTING AND PROPOSED SEWER SYSTEM July,1999 - - . Existing Public Pressure Sewer - Existing Sanitary Sewer --- Proposed Sewer _ Areas to be served by Existing Sanitary Sewer o , 500 1000 Feet N A . G L E N w o o D -82- POLICIES . 1. The City shall provide sanitary sewers for Glenwood according to adopted Capital Improvement Program priorities and in response to a demand for urban levels of development. 2. The City shall place a high priority on construction of the trunk sanitary sewer system in Glenwood as funds become available. 2.1 The City should proceed with design work for the Glenwood sanitary sewer system within the next three to five years. The design should be. based on the trunk line being constructed entirely on Franklin Boulevard (Option A on the Existing and Proposed Sewer System Map, Page 82) unless it is not financially feasible or practical. The study should also consider alternate design. measures that would reduce overall system cost, such as possible use of lift stations to reduce the overall depth of the trunk system. ,_.... 2.2 The City should explore alternative means of short-term financing for sewer extensions as a means of providing sewers to those whom request them. One such mechanism would allow property owners who want the sewer extended to pick up the cost for property owners who do not support the extension. When those property owners annex, the City would repay the cost. Discussion: Timing and funding of a project of the magnitude of the Glenwood sewer system needs to be evaluated along with other capital projects planned for the City through the Capital Improvement Program. . ~"I The timing of.sewer construction should also be responsive to development needs. Cost estimates for construction of a trunk sewer system have risen substantially since the original estimates were made in 1984. Because costs are likely to continue to rise, it will be more cost-effective for the City and property owners in Glenwood to begin construction of the system as soon as the City can finance the project. It is important to begin the design work for the sewer system fairly soon in order to determine the actual costs of the system and to explore methods to reduce the costs. In order to minimize disruption in the Central Residential Area, the trunk line should be designed to go down Franklin Boulevard if at all possible. In anticipation of requests for sewers by some property owners, but not all of them, the City should explore alternatives to the present method of sewer line extension. 3. Intensified development shall only be allowed in the Phase I area and the portion of the Phase II area which has sewers available to it after annexation and extension of sanitary sewers. 4. Until such time as sanitary sewers are available in the Phase II area, the City shall allow the use of septic systems for those uses specifically listed in Sections 29.050 and 29.060 of the Springfield Development Code. . -83- . . . . . Discussion: Following the direction set in the Metropolitan Plan, intensive development, such as industrial land uses, requires urban services including sanitary sewers. Sanitary sewer extension is not allowed without annexation to the City. F. URBAN TRANSITION AND ANNEXATION In 1987, the City and Lane County agreed to transfer jurisdiction over certain service responsibilities within the urban growth boundary from Lane County to the City. These responsibilities are for building, zoning, and planning services. This concept of turning over service functions from Lane County to the City is known as urban transition. The purpose of urban transition is to give regulatory responsibility to the jurisdiction that will eventually be responsible for providing urban services to an area. This allows for an easier transition from Lane County semi-urban development to City urban development... . The policy direction for urban transition is established by the Metropolitan Plan and is illustrated by the following policy: . . . any development taking place in an urbanizable area. . . shall be designed to the development standards of the City which would be responsible for eventually providing a minimum level of key urban services to the area. .. (Policy 25 of the Growth Management and the Urban Service Area section, Page II-B-7). The jurisdictional issue between Springfield and Eugene regarding which City would eventually annex Glenwood and provide the area with urban services was resolved in 1998. At that time, the cities of Springfield and Eugene and Lane County adopted the recommendation in the Glenwood Jurisdictional Study that gave ultimate jurisdictional responsibility for Glenwood to Springfield. 1. Relationship of Annexation to Sewer Provision The Sanitary Sewer section of this element explains that the gradual phasing of sewers into Glenwood will need to be served by a large capital-intensive project. As is discussed in the introduction to this element, sewers need to be able to be extended before an area can be annexed. This means that a short-term barrier to annexation in Glenwood is the initial cost and timing of sewer construction. Development in Glenwood will be limited because of this lack the sewers and lack of funds to extend sewers into the area. -84- .. The third phase of the sewer construction project is the one that will serve most of Glenwood. Since assessments are the primary source of funding for the third phase, the City will need to . annex 90-100 percent of the properties that will benefit from trunk line construction before construction can begin. Whether the trunk can be built in stages will depend on who wants the sewer and where they are located. Properties in the northern end of Glenwood will either be served first (phased annexation along the trunk line) or the whole area along the trunk will be served at the same time (full annexation along the trunk line). If other funds become available (grants, etc.), sewers could be constructed more quickly. 2. Annexation Policies in the Metropolitan Plan support annexation of developed and/or industrially designated areas, including Glenwood. Policy 21 of the Economic Element of the Metropolitan Plan directs the City to "pursue an aggressive annexation program and servicing of designated industrial lands in order to have a sufficient supply of 'development ready land" (Page III-B-6). In the short term, the City has no plans to actively solicit annexations in Glenwood. However, the City's role in annexation of the Glenwood area may change if the industrial land in Glenwood becomes more of a development priority due to changes in industrial land availability in other parts of the Metropolitan area. 3. Voluntary Annexation The 1984 Glenwood Jurisdictional Study contained a recommendation from the Glenwood Citizen Advisory Team relating to voluntary annexation. The recommendation requested that the refinement plan "examine the subject of annexations, recognizing the desire of area residents to have annexations remain voluntary". The Springfield City Council ordinance and the Lane County Board of Commissioners order adopting the study both contained the above recommendation. The City will continue to support the voluntary annexation policy. . POLICY 1. The City shal.1 make every reasonable attempt to provide for annexation on a voluntary basis and according to individual property annexation agreements. Discussion: This policy addresses the concern over voluntary annexation that was expressed in the Glenwood Jurisdictional Study. It is also recognized that under certain circumstances (e.g., a small number of non-consenting property owners blocking a requested annexation of a much larger area), annexations may include non-consenting properties in order to provide services in an efficient, timely, and cost-effective way. As discussed above, annexation and sewer provisions are closely linked. There may not necessarily be a critical need for sewers in some of the already developed areas. It is the intent of this policy to provide sewers following annexation for those properties that require sewers and other urban services for new development or expansion of existing development. -85- . . . . View of Franklin Boulevard, looking toward Springfield, January 1948 flood. (Photo courtesy of Steve Hoe) -86- ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN ELEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN ELEMENT . Glenwood has been shaped both physically and culturally by its setting and natural environment. This element explores the link between the natural environment and historic development, highlighting the role of the river, wetlands, and pioneer settlement patterns in the community. It also proposes urban design recommendations to help strengthen the structure of the community. . I. NATURAL FEATURES Much of what has lead Glenwood to evolve into its present form today is a direct result of the natural environment. One of the most significant natural features which has shaped Glenwood is the Willamette River. The Willamette River forms the northern and eastern boundaries of Glenwood and, as such, it has had a tremendous impact on the community, both as a natural asset and as a natural constraint. The river's role as an asset is one that has not until now been fully recognized. The river's role as a constraint has been as the bringer of annual floodwaters that plagued Glenwood until the mid-1950swhen dams were built on the upper Willamette. Although not as extensive as the river frontage, wetlands also play an important role in Glenwood's natural environment by providing such values as storm drainage and fish and wildlife habitat. Because of the importance of the river and wetlands on the national, state, and local level, the plan needs to provide policy direction on how these resources should be managed in the future. A. Natural Environment -,;", Glenwood's natural environment is defined by its location at the beginning of the upper Willamette Valley, just northwest of the confluence of the Coast and Middle Forks of the Willamette River, which defines Glenwood's northern boundary. The annual flooding pattern of the Willamette River (until the mid-1950s) is perhaps the most significant factor in Glenwood's development. Glenwood is also defined by a system of enclosing buttes and hills: Mt. Pisgah, Quarry Butte, and Willamette Heights on the east; Kelly Butte across the Willamette River on the north; Moon Mountain on the south; and Laurel Hill and Judkins Point to the west (See Figure 5, Glenwood Natural Features, Page 88). . As the Willamette River flows north past Willamette.Heights, the gradient of the river decreases significantly as it widens and turns west past Kelly Butte. This change in direction and flow on Glenwood's northern boundary creates a rich deposit of sand and gravel, while the annual flood waters create fertile deposits of silty loam ideal for agricultural use. Following this basic natural structure in Glenwood are two secondary naturalfeatures: riparian vegetation along the banks of the Willamette River and the slough that runs along the base of Moon Mountain. Glenwood.also has some identified wildlife habitats, scenic areas, and water resources. The Metropolitan Plan working paper on Natural Assets and Constraints identifies a water fowl flyway that crosses Glenwood, marine fossil beds near Farwest Steel, and areas of prominent. and plentiful vegetation on Glenwood's south hills, in laurel Hill cemetery, and along the slough. The working paper also notes that most of Glenwood is an aquifer recharge area. -87- . . . . . .' : Figure 5 MIPDL. e FPP-Y- l.O^~" fC'P-1'- MWN MOUI"tT"''''IN ~ '. '':: ~-.' < 10t\~) ,)-~_: ,N ~..j;..... HJ-TUF-.AI.- ff.,,ATup..e ~. Po fulZ(2. B. THE RIVER AS A NATURAL ASSET Because of the dams upstream, flooding in Glenwood is largely a matter of the past. Yet the river again can play an important role in the community as a major amenity and valuable natural asset. In many ways the river is a hidden asset that many current land uses turn their backs on. Property along the river in Glenwood is in a variety of uses, some of Which recognize the river and others that do not. Residential uses along the river, such as the various manufactured dwelling parks, provide residents with access to the river area. Pietro's Pizza, a commercial use, allows customers visual enjoyment of the river, and some industrial uses along the river recognize the river through provision of employee access and use of the river frontage. Other uses, many of them industrial, provide little access or enjoyment of the river, and indeed some of these use the river frontage as their backyard dumping ground. Both on the local level, through the Metropolitan Plan, and on the State level, through Goal 15-The Willamette River Greenway, the river is recognized as a valuable natural resource that needs enhancement and protection. Both the Metropolitan Plan and Statewide Goal 15 have goals that recognize the need to protect, conserve, and enhance the natural, scenic, and economic qualities of the lands along the river. Statewide Goal 15 does this by mandating the creation of the Willamette River Greenway that is a specially protected corridor along the river. In Glenwood, the Willamette River Greenway is a 150-foot strip of land parallel to the river. Any new development within this strip needs to be approved through a special greenway compatibility review in accordance with SDC Article 25, Willamette Greenway Overlay District regulations, to ensure that the development will not conflict with greenway concerns. -88- 1. The City shall review development proposals within the Willamette River Greenway . to ensure that all greenway criteria are met and, in particular, to ensure that there is provision of adequate public access to and along the river;. protection and enhancement of the natural vegetative fringe along the river; and assurances that the development has adequate buffering, setbacks, and is compatible with greenway concerns. Disc'ussion: Although there are several greenway management requirements outlined in Goal 15, three of the most important are provision of adequate public access, protection of the natural vegetative fringe, and directing development away from the river. The Willamette River Site Development Guidelines on Page 37, outlined in the Land Use Element will provide specific guidelines for new development within the greenway to address these and other concerns, until such time that the City establishes the Glenwood Greenway Setback Line. The following discussions highlight why these three elements are so important. 1. Access Because the river is a limited and valuable natural resource, adequate public access to the river should be provided. In some cases, this may mean provision for actual public access to or along the river through easements or purchase. In other cases, it may mean preservation of views to the river through appropriate site design. 2. Vegetative Fringe Thriving and healthy vegetation along the river provides many benefits. From a distance, the . sight of river-oriented trees telegraphs to the viewer that the river is there even if it cannot be seen. The vegetative fringe buffers the view of unsightly development from the river. Riverside vegetation improves water quality by trapping sediments and controlling riverbank erosion. The vegetative fringe also provides significant fish and wildlife habitat and provides a corridor for wildlife to travel through the urban area. The Willamette River Site Development Guidelines ensure protection and enhancement of the natural vegetative fringe as one of the guidelines for review of development within the greenway. . , 3. Development within the Greenway , Both the Willamette River Greenway Goal and the Metropolitan Plan call out the importance of directing development away from the river and limiting it to uses that are compatible with the natural qualities of the river. The goal does, however, permit urban uses already on the land to continue and to be maintained. In particular, Policy 6 in the Willamette River Greenway Element of the Metropolitan Plan states that "new industrial development that locates along the Willamette and McKenzie rivers shall enhance natural, scenic, and environmental qualities" (Page III-D-4). The Willamette River Site Development Guidelines provide for compatible development through a number of specific guidelines, such as providing a building setback from the river and through discouraging inappropriate uses along the river. -89- . . . . C. THE RIVER AS A NATURAL CONSTRAINT Although dams have prevented the annual flooding that used to inundate Glenwood, much of Glenwood is still in a flood hazard area and has the potential of flooding during a major flood. A major flood is considered a 100-year flood that has a one-percent chance of occurring within any given year. Development within flood hazard areas is regulated by requirements from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) that is then adopted into local ordinances, specifically SDC Article 27,. Floodplain Overlay District. . The purpose of regulating development within the flood hazard area is twofold: 1) to minimize the potential danger to life and property in the floodprone area; and 2) to ensure that development in the floodway does not result in an increased flood level on properties upstream. By restricting development in the flood hazard area, losses and insurance rates can be minimized. A good portion of Glenwood's river frontage, especially south of the Springfield Bridge, is within the flood hazard area (See the Flood Hazards and Wetlands Map, Page 91). Of that area, some property is also within the floodway. The floodway includes the actual channel of the river and the part of the adjacent floodplain that must be reserved for the flow of floodwaters. New construction is severely limited in this area. Development can occur in the flood hazard area outside the floodway if the floor elevation is constructed one foot above the base flood elevation. As previously mentioned, FEMA.sets the standards that control the type of development allowed in flood hazard areas. Under recently mandated changes to local flood ordinances, manufactured dwellings can be replaced in the flood-hazard area, but they will need to be elevated and anchored. These regulations will have some impact on the manufactured dwelling parks on the east side of the McVay Highway. The policy basis supporting regulations within the flood-hazard area is set by the Metropolitan Plan and it follows the requirements of FEMA. In particular, there are two policies in the Metropolitan Plan that address this issue. Policy 2 in the Environmental Resources Element prohibits development in floodways except where allowed according to FEMA regulations. Policy 3 controls development within the flood hazard area "in order to minimize the potential danger to life and propertyll (Page III-C-7).The Glenwood area is no different from other parts of the metropolitan area that are affected by potential flooding and needs no specific policies in regard to this issue. D. WETLANDS Wetlands serve many important environmental functions such as fish and wildlife habitat, flood control, sediment and erosion control, water-quality control, and groundwater pollution control. They also provide recreational opportunities and educational and scientific research benefits. A wetland must have the presence of water at least part of the year, contain soils that are characterized by water saturation, and have vegetation adapted to saturated soils. -90- . . '''FLOOD HAZARD AND WETLANDS ~ 100 Year Flood Plain ~ Floodway :^:^:^ Potentially Regulated Wetlands N A o I 500 1000 Feet G L E N w o o D . -91- ~:. " ':'. . '. . Wetlands are increasingly recognized on the Federal, State, and local level as important natural resources that need to be protected. Most fill activity in a wetland requires permit approval from both the Army Corps of Engineers and the Division of State lands. On the local level, the Metropolitan Plan supports wetland protection through Policy 18 of the Environmental Resources Element which directs local governments to develop programs to restrict development in wetlands "in order to protect scenic quality, surface and groundwater quality,vegetation, and wildlife qualities of wetlands" (Page III-C-9). In Glenwood, an inventory of potentially regulated wetlands indicates thafthe major wetland areas are in and around the slough north of the railroad tracks on both sides of Glenwood Boulevard and along thedrainageway between the solid waste facility and Franklin Boulevard (See the Flood Hazards and Wetlands Map, Page 91, for the approximate locations of wetlands in Glenwood). Both of these areas act as natural drainageways in Glenwood. Their function in relation to storm drainage is discussed in the Storm Sewers and Drainage section of the Public Facilities and Services Element. POLICY 1. Significant wetland areas in Glenwood shall be protected from encroachment and degradation in order to retain their important functions and values related to fish and wildlife habitat, flood control, sediment and erosion control, water quality control, and groundwater pollution control. . Discussion: The biggest threat to wetland areas is their loss through fill and drainage. In order to preserve remaining wetlands, it is important to protect them from further alteration. This policy is intended to supplement wetland regulations authorized under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act and Oregon's Removal-Fill Law. View of the Pacific Highway (McVay Highway) from the railroad trestle, look- ing north, circa 1928 flood. (Photo courtesy of Steve Mae) . -92- II. HISTORIC QUALITIES . Glenwood's contribution to the cultural history of the metropolitan area is briefly outlined in this . section, but the full extent of the areals historical significance will not be known until the area is inventoried for historic resources. The policy direction for historic preservation in this section supports the importance of studying Glenwood's potential historic significance. A. HISTORIC DEVELOPMENT With the basic natural structure of Glenwood defined by the river and surrounding hills,. the next layer of definition is created by the early IIbuiltll environment. The growth of all cities, both great and small is based on the development of its transportation systems. In Glenwood this took the form of the east-west Lane County street from Eugene to Springfield, later the Pacific Highway, and now Franklin Boulevard-McVay Highway. Henderson Avenue ran due south from Franklin Boulevard up to Moon Mountain. The Springfield Wagon Road, now 19th Avenue, ran east from Henderson just north of the slough and crossed the Willamette River just south of where the railroad bridge is today. This street system is still the backbone of Glenwood's transportation network. Built in the 1870s, the Oregon-California Railway line, now Union Pacific, followed the base of Moon Mountain and 19th Avenue. The Willamette River might have played a more significant role in Glenwood's transportation system and development if it were navigable above the rapids just upstream from the Ferry Street Bridge. B. PIONEER SETTLEMENT The earliest settlement of Glenwood occurred in 1851 when Charles B. Sweet filed for a Donation Land Claim (DLC) in the area surrounding Henderson Avenue. In 1852, Zara Sweet . filed for his DLC in the area west of C. B. Sweet, and in 1852, Daniel McVay filed for his DLC to . the east, adjacent to the Willamette River. In 1857, Zara Sweet sold his DLC to Thomas Judkins, and C. B. Sweet sold his DLC to James Henderson. Daniel McVay sold his DLC to Mr. Judkins in 1863. The first development in Glenwood occurred around 1892 along the McVay Highway between Franklin Boulevard and 19th Avenue, with most of the land to the west used for orchard crops. lane County deed records indicate that. . .IIA plat for a subdivision to be called Glenwood Park was filed on August 13,1888. An amended plat for Glenwood Park was filed on July 21,1890, by Silus M. Titus and J. A. Straight.1I This amended plat is located just south of the SP Railroad tracks, and east of Henderson Avenue in the old Henderson DlC. Preliminary research has found an advertisement in a California paper that promoted house lots for sale in Glenwood Park, Lane County, Oregon. Although these house lots were above the flood waters, access to the site was not. Because of this, development of Glenwood Park never grew beyond a handful of houses (See the Early Settlement Patterns Map, Page 94). -93- . ," . Land Claims 1870's . ,"-", . 1900c Settlement Patterns " '^ ." G L E w o o D . -94- The Laurel Hill Cemetery is located in the old Thomas Judkins Donation Land Claim along Judkins Road. The Judkins family upon Mr. Judkins' death created it in 1878. From that time on, . the site has served as the "pioneer cemetery" for the Glenwood and Springfield comm'unities. The cemetery has also historically served as the final resting place for the area's indigent population. During the Great Depression the cemetery was used for burying the babies and infants who did not survive the harsh realities of the period. The area of the cemetery reserved for these IIdepression babies" is located on the western slope of the site and is overgrown with blackberries and brambles. Up until the 1970s, the cemetery was used as hallowed grounds for Memorial and Veterans Day ceremonies. The residential development of Glenwood never reached any substantial growth in population or commitment in terms of the quality of housing stock, largely due to the annual flooding of the WiII9mette River. The factors that influenced Glenwood's growth center on the transportation system within and through the area. Glenwood functioned as a crossroads for the upper Willamette Valley, servicing east-west traffic through Highway 126, and north-south commerce along the Pacific Highway, old Highway 99, (See the Early Settlement Patterns Map, Page 94). This street pattern was paralleled by the Union Pacific Railroad, all of which continues to function today. The vital link between Eugene and Springfield was first made sometime in the 1870s with a covered bridge that spanned the Willamette River just north of the existing railroad trestle. Around the turn of the century, a steel-frame bridge was constructed just south of the railroad trestle where 19th Avenue would cross the river. In 1910, an electric trolley car service ran between J;:ugene and Springfield along what is now 15th Avenue on a high wooden trestle. In 1928, a two-lane concrete and steel bridge was built (still in use today) to replace the old steel bridge at 19th Avenue over the Willamette River (See the Early Settlement Patterns Map, Page 94). With the increase in traffic through Glenwood, a number of businesses catering to the traveler sprang up along Franklin Boulevard and the McVay Highway. The gas stations, grocery stores, and car camping courts that developed through Glenwood were the beginning of what we see today in the form of trailer courts, manufactured dwelling parks, and related services. The general growth in the region's population in the mid-1930s and the popularity of auto travelled to the development of more, and better, paved streets in the metropolitan area. This pattern brought a greater demand for sand and gravel resources as materials for street construction and Glenwood had the resources to fill this demand. The need for sand and gravel materials and related support services soon outgrew the demand for land dedicated to agriculture, leading to the graduai disappearance of orchards in Glenwood. In 1943, the opportunity for further growth developed in Glenwood with water service being provided by the Eugene Water and Electric Board (EWEB) to the Glenwood Water District. In the mid-1950s, the Army Corps of Engineers constructed a dam at Lookout Point near Dexter on the Middle Fork of the Willamette River, putting an end to the annual flooding problems of Glenwood. In the early 1960s, the old Pacific Highway was replaced with Interstate 5 that now skirts along Glenwood's southern and western boundary. With the completion of 1-5, business along the Franklin Boulevard and McVay Highway declined in use by traveling motorists. This pattern of commercial decline was prevalent throughout America, once the Interstate Highway System worked its way across the United States. Currently, commercial, light industrial, and manufacturing have replaced much of the old tourist trade through Glenwood leaving only a few isolated remnants of Glen wood's past. -95- . . , . . . . . C. HISTORIC PRESERVATION This brief historical sketch offers a glimpse into Glenwood's past and should assist in our comprehension of how this area developed. At first glance, it may not appear that there is much remaining of "historical" Glenwood; however, it is only through an understanding of history that significant details will begin to reveal themselves. In Glenwood, these details will not be revealed in the more popular image of high-style Victorian architecture. The types of historical images that Glenwood has to offer lay more in its rural vernacular architecture with emphasis on general development patterns, landscape features, and possible archeological sites. The importance placed on the understanding of history in the development of Oregon, including Glenwood, is recognized on both State and local levels. Statewide Goal 5-0pen Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas and Natural Resources addresses the need to ensure that programs shall be provided that will protect scenic and historic areas and natural resourcesforfuture generations. Goal 5 also calls for an inventory of historic areas which are defined as lands with sites, structures, and objects that have local, regional, statewide, or national historical significance. On the metropolitan level, the Metropolitan Plan deals with this issue in the Historic Preservation Element of the plan: "The metropolitan area has experienced, and it appears will continue to experience, growth and change: On the other hand, public interest and commitment to historic preservation has been increasing, at least partly due to recognition that historic structures, sites, and areas that provide a tangible physical connection with the past are a nonrenewable resource. This link with previous times provides a sense of permanence, continuity, and perspective to our lives, as well as a context within which change occurs. Historic structures can enrich our lives by offering architectural diversity to the visual environment and provide tangible links to the future" (Page 111-1-1). Within the City, the need to recognize the importance of historic resources is addressed in Article 30 of the Springfield Development Code. As property in Glenwood is annexed to the City, the historic preservation regulations will take effect. . POLICY 1. The City shall recognize potentially historic resources that exist in Glenwood and support historic preservation efforts. Discussion: All cities and counties are required by State law to inventory the location, quantity, and quality of historic areas, sites, structures, and objects. Once Glenwood becomes a part of the City, the City will Inventory the area. . -96- III. URBAN DESIGN .,: ~'~ ;,. The purpose of this section on urban design is to identify, strengthen, protect, promote, and integrate social processes and physical or community forms that are significant to the area. This section provides recommendations for saving and improving certain features of Glenwood and proposes an urban design concept that would change and improve other features in.the plan area. In order to achieve thispurpose, this section addresses the natural features that give Glenwood its basic form and context, and the built environment which sets the structure for development. Glenwood's natural features are defined as the surrounding hills and buttes, the landscape, and the Willamette River. The built environment is considered the transportation . system and buildings. This 'urban design discussion serves a number of important functions. One of the more significant of these functions deals with revealing the structure of the community through an understanding of its history. The basic "structure" of Glenwood is defined by its system of ... highways, streets, and railroad lines. The previous narrative dealt with Glenwood's history and how the community developed around its transportation system; the urban design section deals with how Glenwood's structure can serve as a basis for future development. A clear structure allows the community to easily find its way around Glenwood allowing us to feel at home, not just inside our front doors, but inside our community. ",-" ';&il;- The Metropolitan Area General Plan recognizes the significant role that good urban design can play in the livability of our cities. The Environmental Design Element of the Metro Plan (Page 111-E-1) states that it is "concerned with that broad process which molds the various components of the urban area into a distinctive livable form that promotes a high quality of life." While this element goes on to say that there are numerous indicators of "livability," it focuses on the features of the natural and built environment that affect the quality of life. As mentioned above, the Urban Design section will look at the natural and built environment of Glenwood as a basis for future urban design development decisions. A. URBAN DESIGN PRINCIPLES Most of the terms used in this section have a generally accepted use or meaning but it may be useful to discuss some of the urban design concepts and terms as they apply to Glenwood. 1. Repair and Reconstruction is a basic concept that recognizes an existing natural or built feature that serves an important function, but is in need of help to allow for its continued use. An example of needed "repair" work in Glenwood is the need to repair certain portions of the bank of the Willamette River where significant vegetation has been lost to long-term storage of industrial equipment and debris. An example of an area in serious need of "reconstruction" is Franklin Boulevard that needs reconstruction of the street surface and the storm drainage and utility service system. -97- . . . . .. . . . . . '.'. ; . 2. Protection and Enhancement refers to the recognition of existing community features that help define the character 01' Glenwood. This concept identifies those features and makes recommendations for protection and enhancement through better public access, education, signing, or lighting. This, again, includes features in both the built and natural environment. Some of Glenwood's greatest assets in need of enhancement or protection are the Willamette River, the large stands of Douglas Fir and cedar trees in the area,~nd . the area's potential historic properties. This concept also looks at the community's ability to . provide for essential community activities, including something as simple as walking down to the local grocery store for a loaf of bread and encourages us to ask some simple questions: are there sidewalks, lighting, traffic signals, and crosswalks? 3. Activity Centers or Nodes are special places where activity or concentrations of uses occur. They often are strategic points, such as those places where paths cross or people meet for community activities. In Glenwood, some otthese areas are the Glenwood Market, Tom's Tapper Tavern, and Susie1s Market on the McVay Highway. 4. Edges are borders and usually are linear. Edges are defined by highways, streets, waterways, railroads, and landscape features, Edges can be hard, such as a wall or busy street, or can act as a seam that holds two areas together, such as the bridges to Springfield or the freeway overpass into Eugene. 5. Barriers are features that separate or prevent passage. Some of the busy streets in the . area, such as Franklin Boulevard or the Union Pacific Railroad tracks, act as barriers to the ease of pedestrian or bicycle movement. 6. Landmarks are points of reference of simple physical features in the landscape that may vary widely in scale. Since the use of landmarks involves the singling out of one element from a host of possibilities, the key physical characteristic of this image is singularity or some aspect of the feature that is unique or memorable. In Glenwood, some notable landmarks are Judkins Point, Moon Mountain, and Willamette Heights. B. URBAN DESIGN FEATURES The Glenwood area is defined and identified by both its natural and. built environment as previously discussed, and illustrated on the Urban Design Features Map. Significant natural features are: The Willamette River Willamette Heights Kelly Butte Judkins Point Moon Mountain Wetlands laurel Hill Cemetery Landscape vegetation -98- Kelly Butte ,Jf' '" s:l- ... s:l ..lol ... 't:lO ~Il.. ... ~ ::z::::; . n _ ~'l>> OQe ~n '" ... ... n URBAN DESIGN FEATURES July, 1999 ~ Riparian Vegetation N A o 500 1000 Feet I G L E N w o o D . -99- . . The built environment in Glenwood is primarily defined by: Franklin Boulevard McVay Highway Union Pacific Railroad Bridges over Willamette River Residential street system Core residential area Laurel Hill Cemetery Manufactured dwelling and trailer court areas Commercial and industrial developments By interpreting these community features through a historical context, it is possible to begin to make some urban design recommendations forGlenwood. Itis also important to understand how these features can work together to achieve the goal of livability and clarity of the environment. One example of this process is to view new construction or major reconstruction projects as an opportunity to add new landscape materials along arterials or to bury existing aboveground utilities in order to open up scenic vistas. C. DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS The design recommendations provided here reflect the concepts of urban design discussed above. They also reflect policy direction set in the Transportation and Land Use elements of the plan. They represent ideas for how those policies can be implemented to strengthen and clarify Glenwood's structure and image. Some of the ideas may be realized through public actions and others through private actions. These recommendations are intended to provide guidance for public and private actions and not all of the recommendations listed are likely to be implemented in the form presented here. For ease of discussion, the Design Recommendations section is divided into two sections: Repair and Reconstruction and Protection and Enhancement. 1. REPAIR AND RECONSTRUCTION - a. Willamette River: One of Glenwood's greatest natural assets is the Willamette River, but for much of its passage along the banks of Glenwood, the Willamette River has suffered from neglect, abuse, and abandon. While the river is an amenity for the manufactured dwelling parks that border on its banks, the remaining sections adjacent to much of the industrial property have been ignored. Design Recommendation: As uses are changed and subject to other parts of the refinement plan, consider phasing out industrial equipment and storage buildings within the Glenwood Greenway setback. landscape river bank areas. Follow the Willamette River Site Development Guidelines in the Land Use Element. b. Franklin Boulevard: The memory most visitors have of Glenwood is what they see and experience from Franklin Boulevard. However, the condition of this major arterial and right-of-way is in a serious state of disrepair and is a hazard to pedestrians and bicyclists. . -100- Design Recommendation: Make Franklin Boulevard a top priority item for major reconstruction within the next five years. This work should include, but not be limited to, . upgrading the entire right-of-way, including acquisition of additional right-of-way for sidewalks and planting strips as required. Refer to the Franklin Boulevard Site Development Guidelines in the Land Use Element and the Transportation Element for additional information on proposed improvements to Franklin Boulevard. Reconstruction should also address a number of other factors including: . Improved street lighting Curb, gutter, and sidewalk returns at residential street intersections New street identification signs Burial of all existing power and utility lines Landscape planting strips between curbs and sidewalks A comprehensive street and directional sign system Franklin Boulevard, originally a Lane County street, has traditionally been the main east-west route between Eugene and Springfield. With the development of this street into . a Ustrip commercial" arterial, utility poles, power lines, and unregulated business signs now obscure most of the natural view of Glenwood for travelers and residents passing through the area. By reconstructing Franklin Boulevard as prescribed above, motorists will not only have a chance to travel with greater safety, but enjoy the view of the surrounding hills and landscape (See Figure 6, Urban Design Element, Page 102). c. Residential Area Housing: Much of the existing housing stock in Glenwood is in a poor state of repair. Many buildings have a failing foundation or lack any foundation at all. Few . homes are weatherized or have adequate heating systems. Parts of the residential area have a blighted appearance because car bodies, car parts, and other debris are accumulating in residents' yards. Design Recommendation: Target residential structures in Glenwood for low-interest rehabilitation loans for home repair. Request Community Development Block Grant funds from the Department of Housing and Urban Development for use in Glenwood for elimination of slum and blighted conditions. At present, most of these programs are available only inside the City. As properties are annexed to the City, the City should work with property owners, residents, and the community organization in cleaning up blighted conditions in the neighborhood. 2. PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT a. The McVay Highway: This street is part of the old Pacific Highway that ran north and south through Oregon. The McVay Highway retains much of its original character as a rural route, anc,j has never been "improved" south of the railroad trestle with widening or curb and gutter construction. This is important because it is a virtually intact example of Glenwood's transportation-related history. A number of pusinesses along its short length still cater to the traveling public. This can be seen by the number of manufactured dwelling parks and related services on each side of the street. Another significant feature that distinguishes this highway from others in the metropolitan area is the large number of mature Douglas Fir and cedar trees that line the street. -101- . .. ,~\" ~r:~'^! . Figure 6 . ~IDf,IolA~~ ~W~I^L-~"/'WJt~T~" ifJ) 1"MF+It.. f>~"'. WN!:. ,L ~ ., :""1, ,: .. j. ? I"'tT..'''''. . . ~ 'r-,~ &I~ lI'>:rl1 + j.....\. .. &' l.,.., - '-- . , ',r!.. \ ~ I .(\" 'r" , ~O"""..,. J . J~, - ~.-:- ., I' --.,., ,..;. ". . ". , . . \' '1 r'~ ~I~;>' I '. '.1.' ! "! ,:' I · '! ':;:6G1j' i.'1 . , . . '.,!~f. . .... i.. . 01 ':.J'So;:: . . . '. . ............ ."'''''- '~." .... .........,......,........,.......... . . " ..... .. '00 .... .. .., . . .. '. . . t,. _ _ ... o. . .' " ..".... .... ...1. . . ........... tj. . :)' '.; . 'J" . . ." ., , ~""U1 '1'p.u. ~ . . ; ......":..,.;......"...,.")'...::. rfu~ UI'BAN De~IGN ~L~Mf.,NT6 ~ . ~L.A"'ION~HIP Of' .lOT~e:..i.f:.O(:Je:. ~L.e.I"1~I'J"~ 102- .. . Design Recommendation: Support efforts to enhance this route as a scenic corridor by additional landscape plantings. Follow the McVay Highway Site Development Guidelines .. in the Land Use Element. While Franklin Boulevard functions as more of a barrier to cross traffic, the McVay Highway works more like an edge or seam that holds its residential sides together. There is a considerable amount of crossover pedestrian movement along its route, particularly , along the activity nodes between Susie's Market and the K & 0 Hamburger Hangout. Care should be taken that improvements to this route serve the pedestrian needs of local residents. b. The Opportunity Area: This is one of the more unique features of Glenwood.since it is -; the only open public access point to the Willamette River. This area offers a great deal of . potential for neighborhood residents' recreational and open space needs. Refer to the - Parks section of the Public Facilities and Services Element for additional information on the possible development of a park for this area. Design Recommendation: Protect and enhance the opportunities for public access to the river's edge portion of this site through implementation of the Willamette River Site development guidelines. Consider development of a portion of this area for a park. c. Historic Preservation: The Environmental Design Element is the first attempt at drawing a broad-based view of Glenwood's historical development. Its basic function was to acknowledge the factors that lead Glenwood to its present physical condition and to set the framework for hoW development might proceed in the future. The next level of .': information that needs to be achieved is a more comprehensive inventory of the historic , structures and sites in Glenwood. This would provide the base data for making future decisions about what structures and sites have historical value to the community and need protection from demolition or inappropriate alterations. This study would also serve as a basis for revealing what properties may qualify for future landmark designation. . Design Recommendation: Initiate a grant request from the State Historic Preservation Office for a Cultural Resource Survey and Inventory of the Glenwood area for those " properties of historic significance within the city limits. d. Laurel Hill Cemetery: This significant historic feature and prime open space area is located southwest of Judkins Road and Glenwood Boulevard. The cemetery is located within the old Judkins Donation land Claim property. laurel Hill Cemetery was started when Thomas Judkins buried his son on this hilltop after he drowned in the Willamette River just below this site. There are a number of other important people buried here including the first mayor of Springfield. This hilltop site is also one of Glenwood's prime open space areas because of its view of the valley below and the Cascade Mountains to the east. From the central Glenwood area below, the cemetery is identified by a large stand of conifers along Judkins Road in front of the cemetery. -1 03- Ie .. . .. . . . .. , ~ ,1 e. Design Recommendation: Pursue educational programs and community events that utilize the cemetery as a community resource. These activities could include grade school field trips to the site to educate students about Glenwood's history and a re-institution of Veterans and Memorial Day ceremonies at the cemetery that recognize and honor the people who have contributed to the area's heritage. Install street signs that identify and direct residents and visitors to the cemetery. Pursue Historic Landmark Designation for the laurel Hill Cemetery and grants that would aid its rehabilitation. Hills and Buttes: The hills and buttes that surround Glenwood play an important role in defining the context of the area and serve as orientation points for residents and visitors. .. Design Recommendation: Remove or relocate utility pOles; service lines, and billboards along Franklin Boulevard and McVay Highway that obstruct the view of the surrounding hills and buttes. Encourage new construction not toobstructtheviewof the surrounding hills and buttes, including the laurel HillCemeteryin order to maintain scenic corridors and vistas. -1 04- . PLAN IMPLEMENTATION I. OVERVIEW . In order for the Glenwood Refinement Plan to be a useful document and have a positive impact on the community, the policy direction, implementation strategies, and design recommendations within the plan need to be followed. Some implementation actions are short term and can be carried out relatively quickly. Others, of a more complex nature, will take longer to implement. The City, the Glenwood community, and the private sector all have roles in implementing the plan. The City's role includes evaluating development proposals for compatibility with the plan, . initiating public programs and projects to implement specific aspects of the plan, and determining financial mechanisms and timing for capital projects called for in the plan. The community organization's role includes initiating and/or advocating for projects that will help implement the plan, advising the City on matters of importance to the community, and commenting to the City on development proposals to ensure thatthey are compatible with the plan. The private sector can use the refinement plan to help guide development projects. A. PRIORITIES FOR IMPLEMENTATION "-"~-I Since there are many policies and implementation strategies in the refinement plan, it is important to set priorities for the plan implementation actions which best reflect the area of greatest community concern and need. The following implementation strategies and policies are considered by the community and City Council to be the highest priority for implementation of the plan. It is recognized that not all of these priorities can be carried out immediately, depending upon their cost and complexity, but all of them are important and should be implemented over time. . The items listed here are not in priority order. 1. LAND USE ELEMENT a. General Policies and Strategies (See Page 16) 1. Explore the feasibility of creating a tax increment district. Consider using the revenues from the district for such uses as constructing essential infrastructure improvements, increasing housing resources for low and moderate-income households for subareas 1, 8, and 9, and reducing the financial burden of infrastructure improvements on low and moderate-income households (Implementation Strategy 2.2, Page 16). 2. Explore innovative housing options for designated residential areas in Glenwood, including provision for manufactured dwellings on individual lots (Implementation Strategy 2.3, Page 16). 3. Use the Industrial Site Development Guidelines as criteria in reviewing industrial development proposals through the site plan review process (Implementation Strategy 3.1, Page 16). -1 05- . .. . " . . . . a . . 4. Apply applicable Springfield Downtown Refinement Plan Design Element policies to Franklin BoulevardlMcVay Highway and Glenwood Boulevard (Implementation Strategy 8.1, Page 18). b. Franklin BoulevardIWlllamette River Corridor (See Page 28) 5. On a strip 100 feet deep and parallel to Franklin Boulevard and the McVay Highway and use the Franklin Boulevard or McVay Highway Site Development Guidelines (whichever is appropriate) through the site plan review process (Implementation Strategy 1.1, Page 28). 2. . TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT a. Street Improvements (See Page 47) 6. The City should consult with other metropolitan agencies to update TransPlan, addressing the need for Improvements to Franklin Boulevard, Including policies concerning mass transit and Nodal Development (Implementation Strategy 1.1, Page 49). 7. The City should consult with the Oregon Department of Transportation to Identify needed improvements and a means of financing them. Items to consider when improving Franklin BoulevardlMcVay Highway are the following: (a) Sidewalks along both sides of the highway with a priority on developing sidewalks on the south side of Franklin Boulevard when Franklin Boulevard is improved (Note: Consideration should be given to extending sidewalks on the north side of Franklin from the Springfield Bridge to the intersection with Glenwood Boulevard. However, the most westerly extent of sidewalks on the north side of Franklin Boulevard will be decided upon at the time Franklin improvements are designed. The design should consider the need for pedestrians to travel on the north side of Franklin Boulevard westward from Glenwood Boulevard as well as the physical and topographical restraints for placing a sidewalk north of the highway at this location). (b) Bike lanes connecting to Eugene, Springfield, and Lane Community College. (c) Intersection improvements to allow better differentiation of the local intersecting streets, such as providing curb cuts and better signage to make it safer to turn off Franklin Boulevard onto local streets. -1 06- . (d) Improvements to traffic flow, especially during commuting hours, through change in signal timing and other appropriate means. Request that Oregon Department of Transportation analyze signal timing at Brooklyn Street. (e) The possibility of reducing the speed of traffic entering Glenwood from', Eugene and the McVay Highway... . . (f) Improvements to storm drainage, including maintenance as well as . . reconstruction where needed (Implementation Strategy 1.2, Page 49). b. Pedestrian/Bicycle Access 8. The City;should establish a local bicycle route through Glenwood that parallels Franklin..Boulevard. Its alignment would follow 17th Avenue'from Glenwood Boulevard to Henderson Avenue, Henderson Avenue to 15th Avenue, 15th Avenue to Concord Street, and along a private alley owned by the Texaco Station (just south of their buildings) to Brooklyn Avenue. BothGlenwood Boulevard and Brooklyn Avenue have signals at Franklin Boulevard to facilitate north-south movements. If it is not possible or feasible to use the alley between Concord and Brooklyn, an alternate route would be Concord to Franklin (Implementation Strategy 4.2, Page 52). ".9 .. . Extend the IIGlenwood Connectorll east along the sanitary alignment from 1-5 along the north property line of Lane County's solid-waste site, and then out to Glenwood Boulevard (a. of Implementation Strategy 4.4, Page 52). ~ c. Street lighting . 10. The City should consult with the State Highway Division to improve street lighting at the intersection of Glenwood Boulevard and 22nd Avenue and the 1-5 on- and off-ramps (Implementation Strategy 5.1, Page 55). 3. PHASE I TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT 11. The City shall consult with appropriate agencies and affected property owners to establish a secondary emergency access into the Phase I area (Policy 8, Page 59). 12. In conjunction with Lane County and adjacent landowners, the City shall aggressively pursue development of 22nd Avenue west of Henderson as a full street, including pedestrian-bicycle facilities (Policy 9, Page 60). -1 07- . . , . ~, . .. . . .. : i: , \ . .,EUGENE ~ CItY CTR. - MALL ~. ,~ ~$,-:.;':;-t;,'~ -1 09- f; . . . ATTACHMENT A STAFF REPORT AND FINDINGS APPLICANT CITY OF SPRINGFIELD (Jo. No. 1999-08-0198) REQUEST ADOPTION OF THE AMENDED GLENWOOD REFINEMENT PLAN AND RELATED AMENDMENTS TO THE SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE BACKGROUND Glenwood is an approximately 618-acre area that is located between the Willamette River on the north and east and 1-5 on the west and south. Eugene and Lane County adopted the Glenwood Refinement Plan (GRP) on July 14, 1990 to provide policy direction for public and private decisions affecting growth and development in Glenwood. However, in 1995, 450 GJenwood residents submitted a petition to Springfield stating that they preferred to be affiliated with Springfield rather than Eugene. The 1998 Glenwood Jurisdictional Study was prepared to guide the process to transfer Glenwood from Eugene to Springfield. The Metro Plan amendment is now complete and all of Glenwood is under Springfield's authority. The portion of Glenwood that was part of the City of Eugene is now part of the City of Springfield. All of Eugene's zoning terminology has been changed to Springfield's zoning terminology in those portions of Glenwood within both Springfield's city limits. and the transition areas. Adoption of the GRP and related amendments to the Springfield Development Code (SDC) are the final legislative actions of the jurisdictional change from Eugene to Springfield. The GRP consists of an introductory section, a section on Community Vision and Direction; four sections or elements on specific issues: Land Use, Transportation, Public Facilities and Services, and Environmental Design; a section on Plan Implementation; and a plan diagram. There are no changes proposed to the existing GRP format or the current land use designations. In fact, the intent of Springfield's review of the GRP has been to make no substantive changes to the document and allow the citizens of Glenwood to continue under the policies adopted by the City of Eugene. The GRP went through an extensive public comment and review prior to adoption by Eugene and Lane County in 1990. The Springfield review of the GRP has included the re-establishment of the Glenwood Planning Advisory Committee, two Planning Commission work sessions and one City Council work session, as well as the current public hearing phase. Adoption of the GRP also includes amendments of the SDC to Articles 5 and 16 to allow exemptions to non-conforming uses in industrial districts and designations consistent with the Eugene Code. The following amendments have been made to the GRP and the SDC: The standard name changes -- "Eugene" to "Springfield", where applicable; "EWES" to "SUS" (including the statement that SUS will be the ultimate electric and water provider for Glenwood); and "Southern Pacific" to "Union Pacific"; Resolution of inconsistencies caused by changes to ORS since the adoption of the GRP -- the change from "mobile homes" to "manufactured dwellings"; Resolution of inconsistencies between Eugene and Springfield Municipal Code regulations concerning street improvement projects, storm drainage improvements and.Sancrofting methods. . . . A-1 '4 · Resolution of inconsistencies between Eugene and Springfield land use regulations -- Eugene's Site Review Overlay District vs. Springfield's Site Plan Review process, Conditional vs. Discretionary Use approval, types of streets - "principal" vs. "arterial", and Eugene's Historic Preservation Ordinancevs. . SDC Article 30; · Establishment of the Greenway Setback Line along the Willamette River within one year of the adoption of the GRP; . · Deletion of portions of the GRP that no longer apply -- outdated land use data, language pertaining to allowing "mobile homes" on individual lots, reference to the small "mobile home" park at the southwest corner of Nugget Way and the McVay Highway, reference to the "remnant" parcel owned by Lane Transit District along Henderson Avenue that is no longer available as a future park site, reference to the stand of mature fir trees on the west side of McVay Highway that have been cut down, and infrastructure projects that have been completed since the adoption of the GRP - extension of the sanitary sewer line across the Willamette River, the bikeway connector to the Knickerbocker bike bridge, and park policies requiring coordination between Eugene and Willamalane; · Inclusion of TransPlan topics sl:lch as "nodes" and BRT (Bus Rapid Transit); · Revision of the refinement plan diagram - the only change has been to show that the Lane County Transfer Facility is designated Public Land, rather than Light-Medium Industrial, consistent with the most recent adopted Metro Plan diagram; and . Minor modification to numerous maps in the plan. · The Springfield Development Code (Article 5 Non Conforming Uses, specifically adding Subsections (5) and (6) to Section 5.030 and adding Section 5.070; and amending Article 16 Residential Zoning Districts, specifically adding Subsection (15) to Section 16.100. These amendments concern non-conforming uses in Glenwood with the purpose of consistency with Eugene's regulations. The GPAC also considered related amendments to the Springfield Development Code (Articles 5 and 16) concerning non-conforming uses in Gleriwood, consistent with Eugene's regulations. CRITERIA OF APPROVAL . SDC 8.030 specifies criteria that must be met by the Springfield Planning Commission, the Springfield City Council (the Lane County Board of Commissioners must also adopt the GRP and the amendments of the SDC to Articles 5 and 16) in reaching a decision to adopt a refinement plan. Findings must be adopted by the elected officials that demonstrate compliance with the specific criteria of approval In accordance with SDC 8.030; that the amended refinement plan and related SDC amendments are consistent with 1) the Metro Plan, 2) applicable state statutes, and 3) applicable State-wide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules. SDC 8.030(1) THE METRO PLAN GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND THE URBAN SERVICE AREA The Growth management and Urban Service Area of the Metro Plan has several policies which are addressed in theGRP: POLICY 9 "Annexation to a city through normal process shall continue to be the highest priority" (Page II-B-5). POLICY 15 "Ultimately, land within the urban growth boundary shall be annexed to a city and provided with the required minimum level of urban services..... (Page II-B-6). ,. . . . Finding: The GRP contains a discussion on urban transition and annexation that provides for annexation to Springfield on a voluntary basis. It is an underlying basis of the GRP that Glenwood will eventually be annexed to Springfield and provided with urban services. SUB will eventually provide water and electric service. The GRP contains a discussion and a policy directing the City to work with EWEB and the Glenwood Water District on a transition plan for the dissolution of the water district. EUGENE AND SPRINGFIELD JURISDICTIONAL RESPONSIBilITY The May 1998 Glenwood Jurisdictional Study gave Springfield the authorization to proceed to amend the Metro Plan (Springfield ,Ordinance 5900 on November 16,1998; Lane County Ordinance PA 1123 on November 16, 1998; and Eugene Ordinance 20137 on December?, 1998). The Metro Plan now contains a section on Eugene's and Springfield's jurisdictional responsibility for Glenwood that states: "The division of responsibility between the two cities is the Interstate 5 Highway.....{Page II-C-1}. Finding: The Metro Plan amendment gives Glenwood's jurisdictional responsibility to Springfield. RESIDENTIAL ELEMENT POLICIES The following policies in the Residential Element of the Metro Plan support the hotlsing direction taken in the GRP: POLlCY'12 "Promote compatibility between residentially zoned lands and adjacent areas" (Page III-A-5). POLICY 15 "Investigate, and when advisable, implement mixed use zoning, particularly in established neighborhoods where compatible and functional mixes already exist" (Page III-A-6). POLICY 21 "Encourage a mixture of dwelling unit types in appropriate areas" (Page III-A-6). POLICY 27 "Provide for mobile homes as an outright use in at least one oUhe following situations in Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County: mobile home subdivisions, mobile home parks, or on individual lots" {Page III-A-?}. POLICY 30 "Encourage higher-cfensity residential development near industrial and commercial centers throughout the metropolitan area" (Page III-A-7). Findings: 1. Policies and implementation strategies within the GRP land Use Element require that new multi- family, commercial and industrial development be processed under Springfield's Site Plan Review process. 2. The mixed-use areas in the GRP allow for mixed-use zoning to be applied in portions of Glenwood. 3. The GRP provides for the preservation of the existing manufactured dwelling park in the Central Residential Area aswell as support for other manufactured dwelling parks in the rtfixed-use areas. 4. An implementation strategy within the Central Residential Area allows for the placement of new manufactured dwellings on individual lots. 5. Glenwood is a primarily industrial center that will increase job opportunities in the future. The medium- density residential uses allowed in the mixed-use areas will help provide additional housing opportunities near employment areas. A-3 6. There are existing pre-existing non-conforming uses carried over from Eugene's jurisdiction of Glenwood. The amendments to SOC Articles 5 and 16 allows for the continuance of these non- conforming uses. ' ECONOMIC ELEMENT POLICIES . The following policies in the Economic Element of the Metro Plan are supported in the GRP: POLICY 5 "Provide existing industrial activities sufficient land for future expansion" (Page III-B- 5). POLICY 7 "Encourage industrial park development, including areas for warehousing and distributive industries and research and development activities" (Page III-B-5). POLICY 8 "Encourage the improvement of the appearance of existing industrial areas, as well as their ability to serve the needs of existing and potential light industrial development" (Page III-B-5). POLICY 13 "Encourage compatibility between industrially zoned lands and adjacent areas in local planning programs" (Page 111-B-5). POLICY 14 "Utilize processes and local controls which encourage retention of large parcels or consolidation of small parcels of commercially or industrially zoned land to facilitate their use or reuse in a comprehensive rather than piecemeal manner"(Page III-B-5}. Findings: 1. The GRP provides an ample amount of light-medium industrially designated land that would allow for the expansion of existing industries. Both mixed-use areas along the river encourage the creation of . industrial and business parks. 2. Springfield's Site Plan Review procedures that are specified in the GRP will encourage the improvement of the appearance of existing industrial areas, especially along Franklin Blvd. These procedures will also encourage compatibility between industrially zoned land and adjacent residential areas. Implementation strategies within the text for the Glenwood Blvd.l17th Avenue Industrial Area protect these sites from being divided into smaller parcels. WILLAMETTE RIVER GREENWAY POLICIES The Willamette River Greenway Element of the Metro Plan has several policies pertinent to the portions of Glenwood along the river: POLICY 6 "New industrial development that locates along the Willamette and McKenzie Rivers shall enhance natural, scenic, and environmental qualities" (Page 11I-0-4). POLICY 8 "Within the framework of mandatory statewide planning goals, local Willamette River Greenway plans shall allow a variety of means for public enjoyment of the river, including public acquisition areas, and commercial areas" (Page 11I-0-5). POLICY 10 "Local and State governments shall continue to provide adequate public access to the Willamette River Greenway" (Page 11I-0-5). A-4 . . . . Findings: 1. The GRP provides the Willamette River Site Development Guidelines to ensure that new industrial development will be compatible with the river. 2. The mixed-use areas in the GRP allow for a variety of ways to enjoy the river, including possible park sites, medium density residential development; and limited commercial uses. 3. The GRP provides for a bike/pedestrian corridor along the river's edge. 4. There are existing pre~existing non-conforming uses carried over from Eugene's jurisdiction of Glenwood. The amendments to SDC Articles 5 and 16 allows for the continuance of these non- conforming uses. ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN POLICIES The Environmental Design Greenway Element of the Metro Plan also provides policies that the GRP addresses: POLICY 1 "In order to promote the greatest possible degree of diversity, a broad variety of commercial, residential, and recreational land uses shall be consistent with other planning policies" {Page III-E-3}. POLICY 2 "Natural vegetation, natural water features, and drainageways shall be protected and retained to the maximum extent practicable, considering the economic, social, environmental, and energy consequences in the design and construction of urban developments and landscaping shall be utilized to enhance those natural features" (Page III-E-3). POLICY 9 "Refinement plans shall be developed to address compatibility of land uses, safety, crime prevention, and visual impact along arterial and collector streets, within mixed use areas..... {Page III-E-4}. Findings: 1. The GRP promotes a diversity of land uses within the mixed-use areas. Policies and guidelines within the GRP help protect the natural vegetation along the Willamette River and the wetland sloughs in Glenwood. 2. The Franklin Blvd. Commercial-Industrial strip area encompasses the type of'mixed-use described in Policy 9 and the GRP calls for using the Site Plan Review process to address issues of compatibility, safety, and visual impacts of mixed-use development. CONCLUSION The following sections of the Metro Plan have been cited above: Growth Management And The Urban Service Area; Eugene And Springfield Jurisdictional Responsibility; Residential Element Policies; Economic Element Policies; Willamette River Greenway Policies; and Environmental Design Policies. The preceding analysis confirms the consistency of the GRP with the Metro Plan. . - A-5 SDC 8.030(2) APPLICABLE STATE STATUTES The intent of Springfield's adoption of the Glenwood Refinement Plan has been to make no substantive . changes to the plan. However, the term "mobile home" has been revised to read "manufactured dwelling" to comply with ORS 446.003(26}(a). With this revision, the Glenwood Refinement Plan is now consistent with. applicable State statutes. Since no substantial changes have been made, no other State statutes apply. Finding: The GRP is now in compliance with ORS 446.003(26}(a} because the term "manufactured" dwelling is used throughout the document. CONCLUSION .,' ORS446.003(26}(a) has been cited. The preceding analysis confirms the consistency of the GRP with applicable State statutes. SDC 8.030(3) DEMONSTRATED COMPLIANCE WITH STATEWIDE PLANNING GOALS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RULES GOAL 1 CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT: "To develop a citizen involvement program that insures the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process." Goal 1 is intended to ensure that citizens are involved in all stages of the planning process. Citizens have been involved in all stages of the development of the GRP. The following summarizes the major citizen involvement opportunities in the development and amendment of the GRP: 1. Significant public input has occurred with respect to the GRP from October 1986 through adoption in J(GUlpYA1C99} Oh' Dlduring this ti~e period'fEugene f~rmdedltl he I GI~nwood Plannti~g AdViSotryedComl, mt ittfee . , e a community Issues orum, notice a panning team mee Ings, crea a IS 0 interested parties, and noticed all public hearing reviews by the Planning Commissions and elected officials. 2. In 1993 a petition signed by 450 Glenwood residents requested a change in jurisdiction from Eugene to Springfield. The 1998 Glenwood Jurisdictional Study called for the re-establishment of the GPAC, the citizen review group involved in Eugene's adoption of the GRP. The Springfield Committee for Citizen Involvement authorized Development Services Department staff to re-establish the GPAC in November 1998. The 10 member GPAC, including four persons who were on the original GPAC, met 8 times from January through April 1999. . 3. The Springfield Planning Commission reviewed the proposed GRP and SDC amendments at two work sessions on May 4 and July 7, 1999. 4. The Springfield City Council reviewed the proposed GRP and SDC amendments at a work session on August 2, 1999. 5. The Springfield Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed GRP and SDC amendments on September 21, 1999. . - 6. The Springfield City Council and the Lane County Board of Commissioners will hold a joint public hearing on the proposed GRP and SDC amendments on November 8, 1999. A-6 . . . . " Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP is consistent with and follows the procedures outlined in the Springfield and Lane County Codes pertaining to citizen involvement, thus conforming to established citizen involvement procedures consistent with Goal 1. 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 assure an adequate factual base for such decisions and actions," Eugene and Lane County adopted the GRP in July 1990. In order to implement the GRP, all three jurisdictions adopted specific Metro Plan diagram and text amendments, also in July 1990. The Metro Plan is an acknowledged comprehensive plan, pursuant to provisions specified by the Land Conservation and Development Commission. The May 1998 GJS states: "No changes should occur to the substance of any of the Refinement Plan policies without reconvening the Planning Advisory Committee and initiation of a citizen involvement program." Springfield reconvened the committee. However, after reviewing the GRP, the proposed amendments make no changes to the current designations and no substantive changes to the policies adopted by Eugene in 1990. Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP is consistent with and follows the procedures outlined in the Springfield and Lane County Codes, thus conforming to established land use planning regulations consistent with Goal 2~ GOAL 3 AGRICULTURAL LAND: "To preserve and maintain agricultural lands." There are no lands designated for agricultural use in Glenwood. According to the 1990 GRP, there were about38 acres zoned for agriculture in the southern end of Glenwood along Interstate 5. This zoning was interim and has been changed to Public Land and Open Space, consistent with the Metro Plan and GRP designations of Parks and Open Space. Finding: Goal 3, Agricultural Land, does not apply because there are no lands designated for agricultural use in Glenwood. GOAL 4 FOREST LAND: "To conserve forest lands by maintaining the forest land base and to protect the state's forest economy by making possible economically efficient forest practices that assure the continuous growing and harvesting of forest tree species as the leading use on forest land consistent with sound management of soil, air, water and fish and wildlife resources and to provide for recreational opportunities and agriculture." There are no lands designated for forest use in Glenwood. Finding: Goal 4, Forest Land; does not apply because there are no lands designated for forest use in Glenwood. A-7 GOAL 5 OPEN SPACES, SCENIC AND HISTORIC AREAS, AND NATURAL RESOURCES: "To conserve open space and protect natural and scenic resources." .;. Two areas in Glenwood are designated Parks and Open Space on both the GRP and Metro Plan diagrams: the Laurel Hill cemetery on Judkins Road and the area between 1-5 and the railroad track in south eastGlenwood, discussed above in the discussion of compliance with Goal 3. In addition, according to the 1990 GRP, an inventory of potentially regulated wetlands in Glenwood indicate that the major wetland areas are in and around the slough north of the railroad tracks on both sides of Glen wood Blvd. Both of these areas act as natural drainageways. Also, the 1992 Draft Metropolitan Natural Resources Functional Plan identified two natural resource sites in Glenwood: a riparian area about 22 acres in size and the riparian area along the Willamette River (the inventory is in the process of.being updated; and related or new study recommendations will be proposed as part of periodic review). Guidelines within the 1990 GRP provide for the conservation of resources such as riparian vegetation and river views. Discussion within the GRP addresses considerations that need to be taken into account when development occurs in these areas. Finally, there are no inventories historic areas within the GRP area. .~v ,~ Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP does not change Goal 5 inventoried resources in Glenwood and thus does not affect compliance with Goal 5. GOAL 6 AIR, WATER AND LAND RESOURCES QUALITY: "To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water and land resources of the state." . , . Springfield's adoption of the GRP does not concern waste and process discharges that would impact the quality of air, water and land resources. However, the GRP addresses Goal 6 by providing for a sanitary sewer system in areas that are currently using on-site sewage disposal systems. In addition, through Springfield's Site plan Review process and the additional Site Development Guidelines in the document, the GRP also establishes provisions to buffer industrial land uses from existing residential land uses. . Finally, any and all future development in Glenwood will comply with all federal, state and additional local standards and guidelines consistent with both the Metro Plan and GRP diagrams that are not being changed as part of the GRP adoption. Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP does not Substantively change air, water and land quality in Glenwood and thus does not affect compliance with Goal 6, GOAL 7 AREAS SUBJECT TO NATURAL DISASTERS AND HAZARDS: "to protect life and property from natural disasters and hazards." According to the GRP, a significant portion of Glenwood's river frontage, especially south of the Springfield Bridge, is within the 1 OO-year flood zone; some of this property is also within the floodway. In Springfield, new construction may occur in the flood hazard area outside of the floodway if the floor elevation is constructed one foot above the base flood elevation. As part of a development request, any future construction would have to comply with Springfield Development Code regulations concerning construction within the floodplain. In addition, the GRP addresses the impacts of flood hazards on proposed and existing development in these areas. Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP does not change Goal 7 inventoried areas subject to natural disasters and hazards in Glenwood and thus does not affect compliance with Goal 7. A-a . . . . '~ . GOAL 8 RECREATIONAL NEEDS: "To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state visitors, and where appropriate, provide for siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts." The GRP proposes possible recreational facilities for Glenwood to take advantage of the Willamette River frontage, to provide pedestrian and bicycle access along the river, and to provide for local residential recreational needs. Willamalane Park and Recreation District has continued to make its facilities and services available to residents in Glenwood without requiring out-of-district fees. The GRP has been amended to state that Willamalane will provide parks services to all.of Glenwood. Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP does not substantively change the need for recreational needs in Glenwood and thus does not affect compliance with Goal 8. GOAL 9 ECONOMY OF THE STATE: "To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. .. Much of Glenwood is designated for light-medium industrial use that will help to promote this area for industrial expansion. The mixed-use areas will allow maximum flexibility for businesses to locate to or remain in Glenwood. Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP does not substantively economic development policies and thus does not affect compliance with Goal 9. GOAL 10 HOUSING: "To provide for the housing needs of the citizens of the state." The GRP protects an existing well established manufactured dwelling park in Glenwood by redesignating it Low Density Residential and also allows most of the other manufactured dwelling parks to retain their existing residential zoning as well as to provide for medium density residential development in the future. However, the proposed amendments to the Springfield Development Code, concurrent with the adoption of the GRP, are intended to provide additional protection to existing residential uses within the Light- Medium Industrial zone and/or designation in Glenwood. Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP does not substantively change the need to provide housing in Glenwood and thus does not affect compliance with Goal 1 O. 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. " Springfield provides Glenwood properties in its city limits with sanitary sewers, storm sewers, streets, police, fire and emergency medical. EWEB will continue to provide water and electric negotiations on transition are completed with SUB and an Intergovernmental Agreement is signed. There is a mutual aid agreement for fire by which Eugene will respond to Glenwood properties inside Springfield. Solid waste collection is provided by individuals or by haulers with regional transfer and disposal managed by Lane County. For those portions of Glenwood outside of Springfield's city limits, the Public Facilities and Services Element of the GRP provides for the minimum level of key urban facilities and services to be provided in an orderly and efficient manner following annexation. The GRP also has language Springfield's proposed changes to the GRP do not impact Goal 11. A-9 Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP does not substantively change the Public Facilities and Services Element of the GRP and thus does not affect compliance with Goal 11. . GOAL 12 TRANSPORTATION: "To provide and encourage a safe, convenient, and economic transportation system." Springfield is now the service provider in the incorporated area of Glenwood. Springfield will provide service to newly annexing areas. All of the street projects in Glenwood in TransPlan are on the state system. TheGRP itself considers all modes of transportation. The location of commercial and industrial uses and medium density residential housing in the mixed-use areas on a transit line promotes transit usage. The GRP's Transportation Element provides for improved bicycle and pedestrian access through Glenwood. Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP does not substantively affect a transportation facility or the Transportation Element of the GRP and thus does not affect compliance with Goal 12. GOAL 13 ENERGY CONSERVATION: "To conserve energy." Goal 13 encourages land use patterns that allow people to live, work, shop, and recreate in the same geographic area. The GRP mixed-use designations accommodate industrial, commercial, and medium density residential uses in the same area. These mixed-use areas along transit lines promote energy conservation through the use of transit services. Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP does not substantively affect the conservation of energy and thus does . not affect compliance with Goal 13. GOAL 14 URBANIZATION: "To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use." The GRP area is entirely within the existing urban growth boundary and either has been or can be provided all necessary urban services. The GRP provides for this transition through a servicing and annexation plan for parts of Glenwood outside of Springfield's city limits. The GRP discusses the timing for that transition. Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP does not substantively affect the transition from rural to urban land and thus does not affect compliance 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 Greenway." Glenwood has extensive frontage along the Willamette River. The GRP provides guidelines for development within the Willamette River Greenway. The GRP also provides for bicycle and pedestrian access along the river. However, there is new language within the GRP that states that Springfield will establish a Willamette Greenway Setback Line within one year of Springfield's adoption of the GRP. A-10 . . . . ., . Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP does not substantively affect the Willamette River Greenway and thus does not affect compliance with Goal 15. GOAL 16 ESTUARINE RESOURCES: "To recognize and protect the unique and environmental, economic, and social values, diversity and benefits of Oregon's estuaries." There are no lands designated for estuarine resources in Glenwood. Finding: Goal 16, Estuarine Resources, does not apply because there are no lands designated for estuarine resources .in Glenwood. . GOAL 17 COASTALSHORELANDS: "To conserve, protect, where appropriate, develop and where appropriate restore the resources and benefits of all coastal shorelands, recognizing their value for protection and maintenance of water quality, fish and wildlife habitat, water-dependent uses, economic resources and recreation and aesthetics. The management of these shoreland areas shall be compatible with the characteristics of the adjacent coastal waters; and To reduce the hazard to human life and property, and the adverse effects upon water quality and fish and wildlife habitat, resulting from the use and enjoyment of Oregon's coastal shorelands." There are no lands designated for coastal shorelands in Glenwood. Finding: Goal 17, Coastal Shorelands, does not apply because there are no lands designated for coastal shorelands in Glenwood. GOAL 18 BEACHES AND DUNES: "To conserve, protect, where appropriate develop, and where appropriate restore the resources and benefits of coastal beach and dun areas; and To reduce the hazard to human life and property from natural or man-induced actions associated with these areas." . There are no lands designated for beaches and dunes in Glenwood. Finding: Goal 18, Beaches and Dunes, does not apply because there are no lands designated for beaches and dunes in Glenwood. GOAL 19 OCEAN RESOURCES: "All local, state, and federal plans, policies, projects, and activities which.affect the territorial sea shall be developed, managed and conducted to maintain, and where appropriate, enhance and restore, the long-term benefits derived from the nearshore oceanic resources of Oregon. Since renewable ocean resources and uses, such as food production, water quality, navigation, recreation, and aesthetic enjoyment, will provide greater long-term benefits than will nonrenewable resources, such plans and activities shall give clear priority to the proper management and production of renewable resources." There are no lands designated for ocean resources in Glenwood. A-11 . I . Finding: Goal 19, Ocean Resources. does not apply because there are no lands designated for ocean resources in Glenwood. . APPLICABLE ADMINISTRATIVE RULES The GRP has a Transportation Element that was specifi~ally addressed under Goal 12. Springfield has added non-specific'language to the GRP using terminology from the current "draft" TransPlan ("nodal development" and "BRT"). This was done to demonstrate compliance with OAR 660-12~045, since the "draft" TransPlan has not been adopted as of this date. Finding: Springfield's adoption of the GRP does not substantively affect a transportation facility or the Transportation Element of the GRP but does comply with OAR 660-12-045. CONCLUSION The following applicable Statewide Goals have been cited: 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15. OAR 660-12-045 has been cited. The preceding analysis confirms the consistency of the GRP with the Statewide Goals and Administrative Rules. RECOMMENDATIONIREQUESTED ACTION The Land Conservation and Development Commission acknowledged the GRP as an amendment to the Metro Plan in 1990 as complying with the Statewide Goals and Guidelines and Oregon Administrative Rules. The intent of Springfield's adoption of the GRP has been to make no substantive changes to the document. The amended GRP and related amendments to the SDC have been found to be in compliance with SDC 8.030 criteria: 1} the Metro Plan, 2} applicable state statutes, and 3) applicable . Statewide Planning Goals and Administrative Rules. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the attached Order and forward the amended Glenwood Refinement Plan to the City Council and the Lane County Board of Commissioners with a recommendation for adoption. A-12 . . . . -, . ATTACHMENT D AMENDMENTS TO THE SPRINGFIELD DEVELOPMENT CODE ARTICLE 5 NON-CONFORMING USE 5.030 CONTINUANCE Add the following Subsections: Add the following Section: ~i!OiitO:I,~r;l0lil(i~NS'! ~(crell1fas;s~$I~~.~~~~~~'ti~tI~l ARTICLE 16 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS 16.100 SPECIAL USE STANDARDS Add the following Subsection: ~~j).IR~llas::"a::':'lRe~IQenti~I':lmr~1 D-1 .\\, . . . . . ORDINANCE ATTACHMENT ADDENDUM There are four minor amendments to the Glenwood Refinement Plan (GRP) document, Attachment C in the Springfield packet and Exhibit A in the Lane County packet since the jOint Planning Commission recommendation on October 19. The language proposed to be deleted is in italics, within brackets. Steve Pardo, Glenwood Planning Advisory Committee member, requested that the following statements be deleted because the manufactured dwelling park was designated low density residential when the GRP amended the Metro Plan in 1990. Therefore, these statements are moot. 1. Page 21 . The following statements are proposed to be deleted: [The Metropolitan Plan designates this area, except for the manufactured dwelling park, for low-density residential use. The manufactured dwelling park is designated for light-medium industrial use.] Tom Stinchfield, Lane County Transportation Planning Engineer, requested that the reference to Lane County be deleted in the instances specified below regarding improvements of roads not under Lane County jurisdiction. Mr. Stinchfield stated that the Lane County Board of Commissioners may consider funding for these projects in the future, but staff does not support language in the plan that implies a Lane County responsibility to do so. 2. Page 52, Implementation Action 4.1 (a) 4.1 Pedestrian priorities should be established as follows: a. The City [and Land County] should consult with the Oregon Department of Transportation to provide sidewalks along Franklin Boulevard, in conjunction with other improvements to the state highway; 3. Page 60, Policy 9 1. In conjunction with Transplan, [Lane County (about urban transition agreements)] and adjacent landowners, the City shall pursue development of 22"d Avenue west of Henderson as a fully improved street, including pedestrian/bicycle facilities. 4. Page 107, Plan Implementation, A. Priorities for Implementation, 3. "PHASE I TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT": 12. In conjunction with Transplan, [Lane County (about urban transition agreements)] and adjacent landowners, the City shall pursue development of 22"d Avenue west of Henderson as a fully improved street, including pedestrian/bicycle facilities (Policy 9, Page 60). .", P II . . . Glenwood Refinement Plan text changes approved at the joint elected official's public haring on November 8, 1999 because the draft TransPlan containing the term "BRT" has not been adopted by the joint elected officials as of this date: Page 49 POLICIES 1. Improve the major transportation network within and through Glenwood to urban standards, with emphasis on improvements to Franklin Boulevardl McVay Highway, Glenwood Boulevard, Henderson Avenue, 19th Avenue, 17th Avenue west of Henderson, and 22nd Avenue between Glenwood Boulevard and Henderson Avenue. 1.1 The City should consult with other metropolitan agencies to update TransPlan, addressing the need for improvements to Franklin Boulevard, including policies concerning [Bus Rapid] mass [T]1ransit and Nodal Development. Page 55 6. Encourage Lane Transit District to continue to provide convenient transit ,service to Glenwood. Discussion: L TD currently provides transit service along two routes in Glenwood. Location of the new L TD facility in Glenwood will provide the community with an opportunity to work with l TD on increased service. [Convenient transit service includes the BRT Pilot Project currently under consideration by Eugene, Springfield, Lane County and ODOT. When these agencies agree on the BRT route through Glen wood, the City will initiate an amendment of the Major Transportation Network Map on Page 48.] Page 106 2. TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT a. Street Improvements (See Page 47) 6. The City should consult with other metropolitan agencies to update TransPlan, addressing the need for improvements to Franklin Boulevard, including policies concerning [Bus Rapid] mass [T]!ransit and Nodal Development (Implementation Strategy 1: 1, Page 49).