Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013 10 01 AIS Chapter IV AmendmentsAGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 10/1/2013 Meeting Type: Work Session Staff Contact/Dept.: Mark Metzger/DPW Staff Phone No: 541-726-3775 Estimated Time: 60 Minutes S P R I N G F I E L D PLANNING COMMISSION Council Goals: Mandate ITEM TITLE: AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER IV OF THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN (METRO PLAN) ACTION REQUESTED: No action is required. ISSUE STATEMENT: The planning staffs and legal counsel for Eugene, Springfield and Lane County have prepared amendments to Chapter IV of the Metro Plan for the purpose of implementing ORS 197.304. The proposed amendments clarify which jurisdictions shall participate in future Metro Plan amendments and amendments to related documents. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Proposed Metro Plan Chapter IV Amendments 2. Chart Comparing Current and Proposed Standards for Metro Plan Chapter IV DISCUSSION: ORS 197.304 (HB 3337) established separate Urban Growth Boundaries (UGBs) for Eugene and Springfield and was the impetus for the Springfield 2030 Plan and the Envision Eugene planning initiatives. As these planning efforts are readied for adoption, amendments to Chapter IV are needed to clarify which governing bodies will participate in decision making given the establishment of separate UGBs. The most significant changes to Chapter IV of the Metro Plan are: Three types of Metro Plan amendments are established: Type I which requires the participation of all three jurisdictions; Type II which requires the participation of the home city and Lane County; and Type III amendments which may be enacted by the home city alone. The current policy defines only two types of amendments: Types I and II. Under the amended Chapter IV, adoption of the Springfield 2030 Plan and other Springfield-specific amendments would be a Type II decision approved with the participation of the City and Lane County. The proposed amendments remove references to Metro Plan amendments with “regional impact.” Removal of the regional impact language does not change similar language found in Chapter VI of the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Public Facilities and Services Plan (PFSP) which provides for multi-jurisdictional review of public facility projects which have a significant impact on water, stormwater, wastewater and electrical facilities serving more than one jurisdiction. When governing bodies do not reach consensus on a Metro Plan amendment, the current policy sends the matter to the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC). The proposed amendments would send unresolved decisions to the Chair of the Board of County Commissioners and one or both of the Mayors of Eugene and Springfield for resolution, depending on how many governing bodies are participating in the decision. These amendments were reviewed in work session on March 11. Attachment 1 contains the proposed Chapter IV amendments which have been updated since last March. Attachment 2 is a chart comparing the current and proposed standards for Chapter IV. Chapter IV Metro Plan Review, Amendments, and Refinements The Metro Plan is the long-range public policy document which establishes the broad framework upon which Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County make coordinated land use decisions. While the Metro Plan is the basic guiding land use policy document, it may be amended from time to time require update or amendment in response to changes in the law or circumstances of importance to the community. Likewise, the Metro Plan may be augmented and implemented by more detailed refinement plans and regulatory measures. Goal Ensure that the Metro Plan is responsive to the changing conditions, needs, and attitudes of the community. Findings, Objectives, and Policies Findings 1. If the Metro Plan is to maintain its effectiveness as a policy guide, it must be adaptable to the changing laws and the needs and circumstances of the community. 2. Between Metro Plan updates, changes to the Metro Plan may occur through Periodic Review and amendments initiated by the governing bodies and citizens. 3. Refinements to the Metro Plan are may be necessary in certain geographical portions of the community where there is a great deal of development pressure or for certain special purposes. 4. Refinement plans augment and assist in the implementation of the Metro Plan. 5. Enactment of ORS 197.304 required each city to separately establish its own Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and demonstrate that it has sufficient buildable lands to accommodate its estimated housing needs for twenty years. Objectives 1. Maintain a schedule for monitoring, reviewing, and amending the Metropolitan Area General Plan Metro Plan so it will remain current and valid. 2. Maintain a current land use and parcel information base for monitoring and updating the Metropolitan Area General Plan Metro Plan. 3. Prepare refinement and functional plans that supplement the Metropolitan Area General Plan Metro Plan. Policies 1. A special review, and if appropriate, Metro Plan amendment, shall be initiated if changes in the basic assumptions of the Metro Plan occur. An example would be a change in public demand for certain housing types that in turn may affect the overall inventory of residential land. 2. The regional land information database shall be maintained on a regular basis. Attachment 1, Page 1 of 5 3. All amendments A proposed amendment to the Metro Plan shall be classified as a Type I, or Type II or Type III amendment depending upon the specific changes sought by the initiator of the proposal number of governing bodies required to approve the decision. a. A Type I amendment shall include any change to the urban growth boundary (UGB) or the Metro Plan Plan Boundary (Plan Boundary) of the Metro Plan; any change that requires a goal exception to be taken under Statewide Planning Goal 2 that is not related to the UGB expansion; and any amendment to the Metro Plan text that is non-site specific. b. A Type II amendment shall include any change to the Metro Plan Diagram or Metro Plan text that is site specific and not otherwise a Type I category amendment. c. Adoption or amendment of some refinement plans, functional plans, or special area plans may, in some circumstances, be classified as Type I or Type II amendments. Amendments to the Metro Plan that result from state mandated Periodic Review or Metro Plan updates also shall be classified as Type I or Type II amendments depending upon the specific changes that would result from these actions. 4. A Type I Amendment requires approval by all three governing bodies: a. Type I Diagram Amendments include: i. Amendments of the Common UGB along I-5; and ii. A UGB or Metro Plan Boundary change that crosses I-5. b. Type I Text Amendments include: i. Amendments that change a Fundamental Principle as set forth in Chapter II A. of the Metro Plan; ii. Non site specific amendments that apply to all three jurisdictions; iii. Amendments to a regional transportation system plan, or a regional public facilities plan, when the participation of all three governing bodies is required by the amendment provisions of those plans. 5. A Type II Amendment requires approval by two governing bodies. The governing bodies in a Type II are the home city and Lane County. Eugene is the home city for amendments west of I-5, and Springfield is the home city for amendments east of I-5: a. Type II Diagram Amendments include: i. Amendments to the Metro Plan Diagram for the area between a city limit and the Plan Boundary; ii. A UGB or Metro Plan Boundary amendment east or west of I-5 that is not described as a Type I amendment. b. Type II Text Amendments include: i. Amendments that are non site specific and apply only to Lane County and one of the cities; Attachment 1, Page 2 of 5 ii. Amendments that have a site specific application between a city limit of the home city and the Plan Boundary; iii. Amendments to a jointly adopted regional transportation system plan, or a regional public facilities plan, when only participation by Lane County and one of the cities is required by the amendment provisions of those plans. 6. A Type III amendment requires approval by the home city. a. Type III Diagram Amendments include amendments to the Metro Plan Diagram for land inside the city limits. b. Type III Text Amendments include: i. Amendments that are non site specific and apply only to land inside the city limits of the home city; ii. Site specific amendments that apply only to land inside the city limits of the home city; and iii. Amendments to a regional transportation system plan, or a regional public facilities plan, when only participation by the home city is required by the amendment provisions of those plans. iv. The creation of new Metro Plan designations and the amendment of existing Metro Plan designation descriptions that apply only within the city limits of the home city. 4. 7. Initiation of Metro Plan amendments shall be as follows: a. A Type I amendment may be initiated at the discretion of any one of by the three governing bodies. (Note: this correction reflects adopted ordinance and code.) at any time. b. A Type II amendment may be initiated at the discretion of any one of the three governing bodies or by any citizen who owns property that is subject of the proposed amendment by the home city or county at any time. A property owner whose property is the subject of a proposed amendment may initiate a Type II amendment at any time subject to limitations set out in the development codes of the home city and Lane County. c. A Type III amendment may be initiated by Eugene, Springfield, or a property owner whose property is the subject of the proposed amendment at any time subject to limitations set out in the home city development code. c. d. Only a governing body may initiate a refinement plan, a functional plan, a special area study or Periodic Review or Metro Plan update. e. Metro Plan updates shall be initiated no less frequently than during the state required Periodic Review of the Metro Plan, although the governing bodies may initiate an update of the Metro Plan at any time. 5. The approval process for Metro Plan amendments, including the number of governing bodies who participate and the timeline for final action, will vary depending upon the classification of amendment and whether a determination is made that the proposed amendment will have Regional Impact. a. All three governing bodies must approve non-site-specific text amendments; site specific Metro Plan Diagram amendments that involve a UGB or Plan Boundary change that crosses the Attachment 1, Page 3 of 5 Willamette or McKenzie Rivers or that crosses over a ridge into a new basin; and, amendments that involve a goal exception not related to a UGB expansion. b. A site specific Type I Metro Plan amendment that involves a UGB expansion or Plan Boundary change and a Type II Metro Plan amendment between the city limits and Plan Boundary, must be approved by the home city and Lane County (Springfield is the home city for amendments east of I-5 and Eugene is the home city for amendments west of I-5). The non-home city will be sent a referral of the proposed amendment and, based upon a determination that the proposal will have Regional Impact, may choose to participate in the decision. Unless the non-home city makes affirmative findings of Regional Impact, the non-home city will not participate in the decision. c. An amendment will be considered to have Regional Impact if: (1) It will require an amendment to a jointly adopted functional plan [Eugene- Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan), Eugene- Springfield Public Facilities and Services Plan (Public Facilities and Services Plan), etc.] in order to provide the subject property with an adequate level of urban services and facilities; or (2) It has a demonstrable impact on the water, storm drainage, wastewater, or transportation facilities of the non-home city; or (3) It affects the buildable land inventory by significantly adding to Low Density Residential (LDR), Campus Industrial (CI), Light-Medium Industrial (LMI), or Heavy Industrial (HI) designations or significantly reducing the Medium Density Residential (MDR), High Density Residential (HDR), or Community Commercial (CC) designations. d. A jurisdiction may amend a Metro Plan designation without causing Regional Impact when this action is taken to: compensate for reductions in buildable land caused by protection of newly discovered natural resources within its own jurisdiction; or accommodate the contiguous expansion of an existing business with a site-specific requirement. e. Decisions on all Type II amendments within city limits shall be the sole responsibility of the home city. 6. Public hearings by the governing bodies for Metro Plan amendments requiring participation from one or two jurisdictions shall be held within 120 days of the initiation date. Metro Plan amendments that require a final decision from all three governing bodies shall be concluded within 180 days of the initiation date. When more than one jurisdiction participates in the decision, the Planning Commissions of the participating jurisdictions shall conduct a joint public hearing and forward that record and their recommendations to their respective elected officials. The elected officials also shall conduct a joint public hearing prior to making a final decision. The time frames prescribed in connection with Type II Metro Plan amendment processes can be waived if the applicant agrees to the waiver. 7. If all participating jurisdictions reach a consensus to approve a proposed amendment, substantively identical ordinances affecting the changes shall be adopted. Where there is a consensus to deny a proposed amendment, it may not be re-initiated, except by one of the three governing bodies, for one year. Amendments for which there is no consensus shall be referred to the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) for additional study, conflict resolution, and recommendation back to the governing bodies. 8. Adopted or denied Metro Plan amendments may be appealed to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) or the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) according to applicable state law. Attachment 1, Page 4 of 5 9. The three metropolitan jurisdictions shall jointly develop and adopt Metro Plan amendment application procedures and a fee schedule. 10. Metro Plan updates shall be initiated no less frequently than during the state required Periodic Review of the Metro Plan, although the governing bodies may initiate an update of the Metro Plan at any time. 8. The approval process for Metro Plan amendments shall be as follows: a. When more than one governing body participates in the decision, the Planning Commissions of the bodies shall conduct a joint public hearing and forward that record and their recommendations to their respective elected officials. The elected officials shall also conduct a joint public hearing prior to making a final decision. b. If all participating governing bodies reach a consensus to approve a proposed amendment, substantively identical ordinances effecting the changes shall be adopted. Where there is a consensus to deny a proposed amendment, it may not be re-initiated, except by one of the three governing bodies, for one year. c. A Type I amendment for which there is no consensus shall be referred to the Chair of the Lane County Board of Commissioners and the Mayors of Eugene and Springfield for further examination of the issue(s) in dispute and recommendation back to the governing bodies. d. A Type II amendment for which there is no consensus shall be referred to the Chair of the Lane County Board of Commissioners and the Mayor of the home city for further examination of the issue(s) in dispute and recommendation back to the governing bodies. e. Adopted or denied Metro Plan amendments may be appealed to the Oregon Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA) or the Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) according to applicable state law. f. The three governing bodies shall develop jointly and adopt Metro Plan amendment application procedures. g. A different process, time line, or both, than the processes and timelines specified in 8a. through 8f. above may be established by the governing bodies of Eugene, Springfield and Lane County for any government initiated Metro Plan amendment. 11. 9. In addition to the update of the Metro Plan, refinement studies may be undertaken for individual geographical areas and special purpose or functional elements, as determined appropriate by each governing body. 12. 10. All refinement and functional plans must be consistent with the Metro Plan and should inconsistencies occur, the Metro Plan is the prevailing policy document. 13. 11. Refinement plans developed by one jurisdiction governing body shall be referred to the other two jurisdictions for their review. Either of the two referral jurisdictions governing bodies may determine that an amendment to the Metro Plan is required. 14. 12. Local implementing ordinances shall provide a process for zoning lands in conformance with the Metro Plan. Attachment 1, Page 5 of 5 DRAFT – August 9, 2013 – For Reference Only Metro Plan Chapter IV: Metro Plan Review, Amendments, and Refinements Summary of Proposed Changes Topic Current Metro Plan Proposed Change Rationale Amendment Types: Process Amendments are classified as Type I or Type II (See below under amendment types: decision makers) Decision making process does not follow amendment types (ie. Some Type I amendments require participation of all three governing bodies, some only require participation of two). Expand to three Amendment Types (I, II and III) Align Amendment Types with the number of jurisdictions requires to approve the amendment (ie all Type I amendments require participation of all three governing bodies) Makes Metro Plan consistent with HB 3337. Amendment types are defined by the participants required for decision making. Responds to the establishment of separate UGBs. Defines when jurisdictions may act alone as a home city and when the County and or the non- home city may participate. Amendment Types: Decision Maker Any change to the UGB or Metro Plan boundary; (currently Type I) All three governing bodies must approve a site specific UGB or Metro Plan Boundary adjustments that cross the Willamette or McKenzie Rivers or that crosses over a ridge into a new basin. The home city and Lane County must approve a site specific UGB expansion or Plan boundary adjustment between city limits and plan boundary. Non-home city receives referral and may participate as decision make if determine regional impact (see below). All three governing bodies must approve amendments of the common UGB along I-5 and for UGB or Metro Plan Boundary changes that cross I-5. The home city and Lane County participate in a UGB or plan boundary amendment east or west I-5 that is not described above. Narrows the opportunity of the none-home city to participate in UGB decisions by the home city and the County. Any change that requires a goal exception to be taken under Statewide Planning Goal 2 that is not related to the UGB expansion (Currently Type I) All three governing bodies must approve amendments that involve a goal exception not related to a UGB expansion. This section is removed. Actions requiring an exemption to Statewide Planning Goals that are not related to a UGB expansion are very rare. The goal exception to Statewide Planning Goal 15—Willamette River Greenway to for construction of the new I-5 Bridges and adjoining bike viaduct is the only one requested in recent memory. Virtually all goal exceptions are sought for UGB expansions or for the development of resource lands in rural areas. Any amendment to the Metro Plan text that is not site specific or any change to a Fundamental Principle in Chapter II (Currently Type I) All three governing bodies must approve. Add changes to the Metro Plan’s Fundamental Principles to list of Type I non site specific text amendments requiring the approval of all three jurisdictions. The Fundamental Principles found in Chapter II of the Metro Plan set forth the basic concepts of the Plan. The Principles are not site specific. Changing one or more of them fit the definition of a Type I amendment. Any change to the Metro Plan Diagram or Metro Plan text that is site specific and not otherwise a Type I amendment (Currently Type II) Home City must approve No change Changes to the Metro Plan that are not site specific would affect all jurisdictions. Participation of all jurisdictions is appropriate for such amendments. Amendments to a regional transportation system plan, or a regional public facilities plan, Adoption or amendment of some refinement plans, functional plans, or special area plans may, in some circumstances, be classified as Type I or Type II amendments. Amendments to the Metro Plan that result from state mandated Periodic Review or Metro Plan updates also shall be classified as Type I Either all three governing bodies, the home city and Lane County, or the home city, shall approve changes to the Metro Plan as required by the amendment type (Type I, II, or III). Plans with their own amendment Consistent with the establishment of Type I, II, and III amendments, changes to TransPlan, functional plans or special area plans shall follow the amendment process dictated by the amendment type. Attachment 2, Page 1 of 3 DRAFT – August 9, 2013 – For Reference Only or Type II amendments depending upon the specific changes that would result from these actions. Chapter VI of the Eugene Springfield Metropolitan Area Public Facilities and Services Plan (Public Facilities Plan) contains amendment provisions which are specific to that plan. Those provisions are not changed by these amendments. provisions shall be governed by those provisions. The Public Facilities Plan, for example, contains its own amendment provisions which are not affected by the proposed changes to Chapter IV. Plans which have their own amendment provisions are not affected by these changes. Creation of new Metro Plan designations and amendment of existing designation descriptions that apply only within the city limits of the home city. All three jurisdictions must approve text amendments which are non-site specific. Creation of a new Metro Plan designation is a text amendment which is non-site specific. Home city. The proposed change amendments will allow a home city to independently approve new Metro Plan designations which apply only within its city limits. Regional Impact An amendment will be considered to have Regional Impact if: It will require an amendment to a jointly adopted functional plan [Eugene- Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan), Eugene- Springfield Metropolitan Area Public Facilities and Services Plan (Public Facilities Plan), etc.] in order to provide the subject property with an adequate level of urban services and facilities; or It has a demonstrable impact on the water, storm drainage, wastewater, or transportation facilities of the non-home city; or It affects the buildable land inventory by significantly adding to Low Density Residential (LDR), Campus Industrial (CI), Light-Medium Industrial (LMI), or Heavy Industrial (HI) designations or significantly reducing the Medium Density Residential (MDR), High Density Residential (HDR), or Community Commercial (CC) designations. Language referencing “Regional Impact” is removed from Chapter IV. Removal of the regional impact language does not change Chapter VI of the Public Facilities Plan which provides for multi-jurisdictional review of public facility projects which have a significant impact on water, stormwater, wastewater and electrical facilities serving more than one jurisdiction. A Metro Plan amendment which causes a significant impact on public facilities will be subject to the provisions of Chapter VI. Amendments to other functional plans and refinement plans will be subject to the amended Chapter IV processes unless those documents specify a different amendment process like that found in the Public Facilities Plan. The establishment of separate UGBs has prompted each city to establish their own inventories of residential, commercial and industrial Lands. The proposed change allows cities to act independently to add or subtract land from their inventories so long as these amendments do not significantly impact public facilities outside of their jurisdiction. Conflict Resolution When there is no consensus on an amendment (such as when one jurisdiction approves and the other does not), the amendment is referred to the Metropolitan Policy Committee (MPC) for additional study, conflict resolution and recommendation back to the governing bodies. For a Type I amendment where there is no consensus, the amendment shall be referred to the Chair of the Lane County Board of Commissioners and the Mayors of Eugene and Springfield for examination of the issue(s) in dispute and recommendation back to the governing bodies. For Type II amendments, the amendments shall be referred to the Chair of the Board and the Mayor of the home city. The MPC is comprised of two elected officials each from Eugene, Springfield, and Lane County. When the MPC is considering metropolitan transportation matters, the two members of the Lane Transit District (LTD) Board serve as voting members. The change provides more flexibility for decision makers to determine a conflict resolution method that is tailored to the specific situation. Timelines Public hearings by the governing bodies for Metro Plan amendments requiring participation from one or two jurisdictions shall be held within 120 days of the initiation date. The timelines for processing amendments are dropped from Chapter IV. Current Plan amendments take longer than this 120 day limit because of challenges in scheduling meetings involving multiple jurisdictions and Attachment 2, Page 2 of 3 DRAFT – August 9, 2013 – For Reference Only Metro Plan amendments that require a final decision from all three governing bodies shall be concluded within 180 days of the initiation date. continued hearings or deliberations. Attachment 2, Page 3 of 3