HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 01 Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan (SRP) Urbanization Element AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 3/18/2013
Meeting Type: Work Session
Staff Contact/Dept.: Linda Pauly/DPW
Staff Phone No: (541)726-4608
Estimated Time: 45 minutes
S P R I N G F I E L D
C I T Y C O U N C I L
Council Goals: Provide Financially
Responsible and
Innovative Government
Services
ITEM TITLE: SPRINGFIELD 2030 REFINEMENT PLAN (SRP) URBANIZATION ELEMENT:
COMPARING POTENTIAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY SITES TO
ADDRESS 20-YEAR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL LAND NEEDS
(METRO PLAN AMENDMENT FILE NO. LRP 2009-00014)
ACTION
REQUESTED:
The Council is asked to review planning level cost of infrastructure estimates that
compare the cost and difficulty of extending City services to five Urban Growth
Boundary (UGB) study areas (ATT 2).
ISSUE
STATEMENT:
Adoption of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan (SRP) Urbanization Element will
allow the City to identify areas where the UGB will be expanded to establish future
growth areas for economic development and infrastructure planning purposes in
accordance with Statewide Planning Goal 9, Economic Development, Goal 14
Urbanization, other applicable land use goals, rules and statutes and local community
development, livability and environmental quality goals. Springfield’s UGB expansion
proposal will also include a public land, parks, and open space component.
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Council Briefing Memorandum
2. Estimated Cost & Difficulty of Extending Urban Services
3. Prime Industrial Land Characteristics Comparison (Business Oregon)
4. Suitable Land Area Summary Chart (with flood plain constrained acres and
flood map)
5. Springfield’s Employment Land Need
6. UGB Study Areas Map
DISCUSSION/
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
Adding suitable large-site industrial land to the City’s land base is one important
component in growing and diversifying Springfield’s economy to increase city and
regional prosperity. Expanding Springfield’s UGB would increase the region’s supply
of employment land and will require development of public infrastructure (i.e.,
transportation, wastewater and stormwater facilities) to support land development
activity and the infrastructure required to serve specific sites. The cost to plan and
build infrastructure to serve new sites added to Springfield’s UGB will be substantial.
Without availability of adequate public infrastructure and services, the industries
Springfield aspires to attract will have little incentive to locate here (ATT 4).
In order to justify bringing new employment land into the UGB, Statewide Planning
Goal 14 requires the City to compare the relative costs, advantages and disadvantages
of alternative UGB expansion areas with respect to the provision of public facilities
and services. As one necessary step towards completing this requirement, Springfield
engineering and transportation staff prepared rough “planning level” cost of
infrastructure estimates to compare the cost and difficulty of extending the three City
services to each study area (ATT 2). These estimates are in 2009 dollars and likely to
be exceeded at the actual time of development. The cost estimates to extend services to
each area are high so it is likely that most types of development in any new area will
require a mix of public and private investment to build the necessary infrastructure. A
key policy issue for Springfield will be how to reach a balanced mix of public and
private investment to provide infrastructure to one or more new opportunity sites, and
which sites are most likely to present opportunities to create the highest value of
development and return on investment.
M E M O R A N D U M City of Springfield
Date: 3/18/2013
COUNCIL
BRIEFING
MEMORANDUM
To: Gino Grimaldi
From: Len Goodwin, DPW Director
Linda Pauly, DPW Principal Planner
Subject: SPRINGFIELD 2030 REFINEMENT PLAN
(SRP) URBANIZATION ELEMENT:
COMPARING POTENTIAL EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITY SITES TO ADDRESS 20-
YEAR COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
LAND NEEDS (METRO PLAN AMENDMENT
FILE NO. LRP 2009-00014)
ISSUE:
Adoption of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan (SRP) Urbanization Element will allow the City to
identify areas where the UGB will be expanded to establish future growth areas for economic
development and infrastructure planning purposes in accordance with Statewide Planning Goal 9,
Economic Development, Goal 14 Urbanization, other applicable land use goals, rules and statutes and
local community development, livability and environmental quality goals. Springfield’s UGB expansion
proposal will also include a public land, parks, and open space component.
COUNCIL GOALS/
MANDATE:
Financially Responsible and Stable Government Services
A key policy issue for Springfield will be to determine when, where and how infrastructure and urban
services could be provided to new Employment Opportunity sites and public facilities within an expanded
Urban Growth Boundary.
DISCUSSION AND BACKGROUND:
Springfield is preparing amendments to the Eugene/Springfield Metro Area General Plan that will guide
the city’s growth and development over the next 20 years. As part of Springfield’s economic
development strategy to grow the economy and add higher-wage jobs, the City aspires to diversify and
expand its existing employment land base to include Employment Opportunity sites suitable for
redevelopment and new development. Springfield’s Commercial and Industrial Buildable Lands
Inventory and Economic Opportunities Analysis (completed in 2009) identifies the types, sizes and
characteristics of sites that will be needed to expand Springfield’s capacity to support the creation of
13,000+ new jobs over the planning period. A portion of the site need is for large sites (20 acres and
larger) to attract and grow large businesses, which are often traded-sector businesses. The City has only
one buildable site 20 acres or larger1
, and will need 17 sites with about 640 acres of industrial and other
employment land on sites five acres and larger that cannot be accommodated within the UGB.2
A
summary of Springfield’s land needs and needed sites is provided on the next page.
Having a diverse mix of planned and zoned employment, commercial and mixed-use districts in suitable
and economically viable locations will support Springfield’s potential to grow and prosper. At the
November 26th, 2012 and January 22nd, 2013 Work Sessions, the Council reviewed draft Springfield 2030
Economic Element policies that will guide and support commercial and employment growth. Council is
1 Springfield Commercial and Industrial Buildable Lands Inventory and Analysis, ECONorthwest Sept. 2009,
page 65.
2 Ibid, page iv.
Attachment 1-1
3/13/2013 Page 2
now focusing attention on the Urbanization Element of the plan to answer the following questions:
Where will Springfield propose to expand the Urban Growth Boundary?
How much land will be added?
How and when will land eventually be provided with urban levels of service and how will new
infrastructure be funded?
Which 2030 Plan Urbanization policies are needed to plan and guide growth to balance economic
land needs with Springfield’s other land needs, livability, and environmental quality concerns?
How will land be planned and zoned as “Urban Holding Areas” prior to annexation to preserve
large sites for employers that require large sites?
How will land be planned and zoned for development after annexation to ensure efficient
extension of services?
To determine how and where the UGB might be expanded to designate suitable large employment sites,
staff conducted a UGB Alternatives Analysis, applying the required step-by-step method of the applicable
statewide planning goals, administrative rules and statutes to all lands surrounding Springfield’s UGB.
This process refined preliminary growth concepts that were the subject of public review in 2009-2010 and
identified other sites that meet the applicable statutory criteria equally well.
At the February 25th, 2013 Work Session, staff presented the results of the Employment Land Suitability
Analysis and the Council reviewed maps of five potential employment growth areas surrounding
Springfield’s UGB that contain the most suitable employment land. The suitable lands are grouped into
five study areas:
• North Gateway
• North Springfield Highway 126/N. 52nd St.
• South of Mill Race /S. 28th Street
• Mahogany Lane/S. of Jasper Road
• Seavey Loop
COST OF INFRASTRUCTURE ESTIMATES
How much would the new infrastructure extensions cost and which UGB study areas will be
easier/more difficult and/or costly to serve?
In order to justify bringing new employment land into the UGB, Statewide Planning Goal 14 requires the
City to consider — as part of our Urban Growth Boundary Location Alternatives Analysis — how public
facilities and services can be provided to serve the lands to be added. For this purpose, public facilities
and services are defined as water, sanitary sewer, storm water management, and transportation facilities
[OAR 660-024-0060 (7)]3
. Springfield must evaluate and compare “the relative costs, advantages and
disadvantages of alternative UGB expansion areas with respect to the provision of public facilities and
services needed to urbanize alternative boundary locations” [OAR 660-024-0060 (8)]. This evaluation
and comparison must be conducted in coordination with service providers, including the Oregon
Department of Transportation with regard to impacts on the state transportation system. "Coordination"
includes timely notice to service providers and the consideration of evaluation methodologies
recommended by service providers. The evaluation and comparison must include:
(a) The impacts to existing water, sanitary sewer, storm water and transportation facilities that
serve nearby areas already inside the UGB;
(b) The capacity of existing public facilities and services to serve areas already inside the UGB as
3 Staff is conducting a series of meetings with providers of other important service needs, such as police and fire
services, electricity, water, telecommunications and other utility services, and schools and will review
provisions for those services with Council.
Attachment 1-2
3/13/2013 Page 3
well as areas proposed for addition to the UGB; and
(c) The need for new transportation facilities, such as highways and other roadways, interchanges,
arterials and collectors, additional travel lanes, other major improvements on existing roadways
and the provision of public transit service.
As one necessary step towards completing this requirement, Springfield engineering and transportation
staff prepared rough “planning level” cost of infrastructure estimates to compare the cost and difficulty of
extending the three City services to each study area (Attachment 2). OAR 660-009-0025 (4)(a) requires
the city or county in consultation with the service provider, if applicable, to make decisions about
whether a site is serviceable. Multiple public agencies and service providers are involved. Staff will
continue to meet with service providers to review and update service feasibility and cost comparisons as
the UGB proposal is refined further.
The five study areas could be served, but the cost and degree of difficulty for extending each service will
vary from site to site and it is difficult to predict what these costs will be over a 20-year planning period.
Another factor is uncertainty about regulations (e.g. additional FEMA flood plain development
restrictions, greenhouse gas reduction legislation, etc.) that will be applicable at the time of development.
Many changes are currently being considered, including significant efforts and mandates to reduce the
total vehicle miles traveled by the population. Developing infrastructure improvements for opportunity
sites will require regional coordination and cooperation to plan for and fund infrastructure upgrades in
new employment areas. The Council will note that the estimated cost of extending the transportation
system to serve new areas adjacent to I-5 is high, due to estimating how other factors — sometimes
beyond the City’s control— may affect the feasibility and cost of infrastructure.
An example of one such factor and how it applies is the relationship between the ODOT Interchange Area
Management Plan (IAMP), the City’s prior agreements with ODOT and Federal Highways for
Gateway/Beltline improvements, and the North Gateway study area located north of the Beltline/I-5
interchange. The North Gateway area would seem to be an obvious choice location to create a long-term
supply of high value employment sites. While it would appear that this area could be served by the
existing I-5/Beltline interchange, preliminary analysis of infrastructure suggests that substantial
improvements and other efforts (e.g., changes in mobility standards) will be required before significant
new development could occur. Depending on the level and type of employment use, this could require
very costly improvements to the nearby local intersections, and potentially even the interchange, and/or
result in levels of traffic congestion that may be unacceptable to members of the community and to
existing economic activity in the Gateway area. It is difficult to predict the improvements that would be
needed, how much they would cost or how they would be funded. The amount and type of improvements
will depend on the specific impact of each future land use action and the standards that are in place at that
time.
INDUSTRIAL LAND SUITABILITY AND SERVICEABILITY FACTORS
Prime, suitable and serviceable: what do these terms mean and why do they matter?
Without suitable and serviceable land planned for economic development, Springfield cannot be
considered by firms seeking large sites. Without availability of adequate public infrastructure and
services, the industries Springfield aspires to attract will have little incentive to locate here.
Expanding Springfield’s UGB would increase the region’s supply of employment land and will require
development of public infrastructure (i.e. transportation, wastewater and stormwater facilities) to support
land development activity and the infrastructure required to serve specific sites. The cost to plan and
build infrastructure to serve new sites added to Springfield’s UGB will be substantial.
As shown in ATT 2, the cost estimates to extend services are high so it is likely that most types of
Attachment 1-3
3/13/2013 Page 4
development will require a mix of public and private investment to build the necessary infrastructure. It is
important to note that even these estimates, which are in 2009 dollars, are likely to be exceeded at time of
development. A key policy issue for Springfield will how to reach a balanced mix of public and private
investment to provide infrastructure to one or more new opportunity sites, and which sites will present
opportunities to create the highest value of development and return on investment.
ATT 4 provides information to help the Council see how the City’s UGB expansion sites may potentially
“stack up” competitively against other available sites elsewhere.
The following definitions from the Oregon Administrative Rules implementing Statewide Planning Goal
9 Economic Development are germane to this discussion and are provided here to explain the use of these
terms.
“Development Constraints” [OAR 660-009-0005 (2)] means factors that temporarily or
permanently limit or prevent the use of land for economic development. Development constraints
include, but are not limited to, wetlands, environmentally sensitive areas such as habitat,
environmental contamination, slope, topography, cultural and archaeological resources,
infrastructure deficiencies, parcel fragmentation, or natural hazard areas” [OAR 660-009-0005
(2)].
“Prime Industrial Land” means land suited for traded-sector industries as well as other
industrial uses providing support for traded-sector industries. Prime industrial lands possess site
characteristics that are difficult or impossible to replicate in the planning area or region. Prime
industrial lands have necessary access to transportation and freight infrastructure, including, but
not limited to, rail, marine ports and airports, multimodal freight or transshipment facilities, and
major transportation routes. Traded-sector has the meaning provided in ORS 285B.280” [OAR
660-009-0005 (8)].
“Suitable” means serviceable land designated for industrial or other employment use that
provides, or can be expected to provide, the appropriate site characteristics for the proposed use
[OAR 660-009-0005 (12)].
“Serviceable” means the city or county has determined that public facilities and transportation
facilities, as defined by OAR chapter 660, division 011 and division 012, currently have adequate
capacity for development planned in the service area where the site is located or can be upgraded
to have adequate capacity within the 20-year planning period [OAR 660-009-0005 (9)].
“Site Characteristics” means the attributes of a site necessary for a particular industrial or
employment use to operate. Site characteristics include, but are not limited to, a minimum
acreage or site configuration including shape and topography, visibility, specific types or levels of
public facilities, services or energy infrastructure, or proximity to a particular transportation or
freight facility such as rail, marine ports and airports, multimodal freight or transshipment
facilities, and major transportation routes” [OAR 660-009-0005 (11)].
PLANNING NEW PUBLIC FACILITIES TO SERVE LANDS ADDED TO THE UGB
Bringing in new land to the UGB will commit the City and County to updating the transportation system
plan and public facilities plans to address how public facilities and transportation facilities, as defined by
OAR chapter 660, division 011 and division 012, would be provided to serve urban levels of development
in the new areas. Springfield proposes to designate the suitable employment lands added to the UGB as
“Urban Holding Area-Employment (UHA-E),” and to include policies in the Springfield 2030
Refinement Plan Urbanization Element that will require infrastructure plans to be updated prior to
approval of plan amendment requests that seek to remove the UHA-E designation and designate and zone
the land for urban levels of development. At that time, the City, the development applicant, or both must
Attachment 1-4
3/13/2013 Page 5
demonstrate that there is adequate infrastructure capacity for development planned in the service area
where the site is located or the infrastructure can be upgraded to have adequate capacity within the 20-
year planning period.
Public facilities plans describe the water, sewer and transportation facilities needed to support the land
uses designated in the acknowledged comprehensive plans within an urban growth boundary. These
plans are supporting documents to the comprehensive plan and certain elements of the public facility plan
must be adopted as part of the comprehensive plan. Once areas are added to the UGB, the City can begin
the process to identify needed public facilities and amend appropriate facilities plans. In addition,
adoption of plan amendments initiated by development proposals that will trigger a need for significant
public facility projects to support the proposed land uses will require amendments to facilities plans.
Updates to facility plans must include:
• A list of the significant public facility projects which are to support the land uses designated in
the acknowledged comprehensive plan;
• Public facility project descriptions or specifications of these projects as necessary;
• Rough cost estimates of each public facility project;
• A map or written description of each public facility project's general location or service area;
• Policy statement(s) or urban growth management agreement(s) identifying the provider of each
public facility system. If there is more than one provider with the authority to provide the system
within the area covered by the public facility plan, then the provider of each project shall be
designated;
• An estimate of when each facility project will be needed; and
• A discussion of the provider's existing funding mechanisms and the ability of these and possible
new mechanisms to fund the development of each public facility project or system.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: None. This item is for Council’s information and discussion only.
Attachment 1-5
Estimated Cost & Difficulty of Extending Urban Services
How do Springfield’s UGB study areas compare?
Note: these numbers estimated order of magnitude costs to extend infrastructure to the
boundary of the study area and do not include internal extensions to specific sites
Comparison of Estimated Cost of Service and Difficulty**
UGB
Study
Area
Suitable
Acres
Transportation Stormwater Wastewater Total
Difficulty Cost
Range*
Difficulty Cost
Range*
Difficulty Cost
Range*
Difficulty Cost
Range*
North
Gateway
226 5 $15-
20M
1 $1-5M 1 $5-10M 7 $21-
35M
South Mill
Race
126 3 $5-10M 3 $1-5M 1 $1-5M 5 $7-20M
North
Springfield
Hwy
265 1 $5-10M 1 $1-5M 1 $1-5M 3 $7-20M
Seavey
Loop
152 5 >$20M 1 $1-5M 3-5 $2-10M 8-11 >$23-
>35M
Mahogany
Lane
574 3 $5-10M 1 $1-5M 1 $5-10M 5 $11-
25M
Higher number = higher difficulty
* 2009 Dollars (Millions)** Right-of-way/Easement acquisition costs are not included. With transportation
projects in particular these costs can add significantly to project amounts.
Comparison of Estimated Cost per Suitable Acre Gained by
Expansion**
UGB Study Area Suitable
Acres Difficulty Cost Range*
Service Cost
Per Acre Gained***
(in Thousands of Dollars)
North Gateway
226 7 $21-35M $ 93-155
South Mill Race
126 5 $7-20M $ 55-159
North Springfield
Hwy
265 3 $7-20M $ 26-75
Seavey Loop
152 8-11 >$23-35M > $ 152-230
Mahogany Lane 574 5 $11-25M $ 19-43
*2009 Dollars (Millions)
**Right-of-way/Easement acquisition costs are not included. With transportation projects in
particular these costs can add significantly to project amounts.
***Includes Transportation, Stormwater and Wastewater services
Attachment 2-1
PROFILEABCDEFGHIJ
CRITERIA
Regionally to
Nationally Scaled
Clean-Tech
Manufacturer
Globally Scaled
Clean Technology
Campus
Heavy Industrial /
Manufacturing
General
Manufacturing Food Processing
High-Tech
Manufacturing or
Campus Industrial
Regional (multi-
state) Distribution
Center
Warehouse /
Distribution
Call Center /
Business
Services
Rural / Frontier
Industrial
1
PHYSICAL SITE
2Total Site** (Acres)Competitive
Acreage*50100251020252002535
3Competitive Slope:Maximum Slope
0 to 5%0 to 5%0 to 5%0 to 5%0 to 5%0 to 7%0 to 5%0 to 5%0 to 12%0 to 5%
WORKFORCE
4 Available workforce
population in 50 mile radius People
150,000750,00030,00030,00020,00060,00075,00020,00025,0001,000
TRANSPORTATION
5TRIP GENERATION: ADT/Acre 50 to 75 (per
)
50 to 75 (per
)
42 to 58 (per
)
76 to 106 (per
)
75 to 100 (per
)
50 to 75 (per
)
64 to 86 (per
)
65 to 86 (per
)
144 to 192
()
5 to 10 (per
)
STATE OF OREGON - Oregon Business Development Department
Industrial Development Competitiveness Matrix
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Use is permitted outright, located in UGB or equivalent and outside flood plain; and site (NCDA) does not contain contaminants, wetlands, protected species,
or cultural resources or has mitigation plan(s) that can be implemented in 180 days or less.
5TRIP GENERATION: ADT/Acre acre)acre)acre)acre)acre)acre)acre)acre)(per acre)acre)
6
MILES TO INTERSTATE OR
OTHER PRINCIPLE
ARTERIAL:
Miles
w/ in 10w/ in 10 w/ in 10 w/ in 20 w/ in 30 w/ in 15
w/ in 5 (only
interstate or
equivalent)
w/ in 5 (only
interstate or
equivalent)
N/A N/A
7RAILROAD ACCESS: Dependency
PreferredPreferred Preferred Preferred PreferredNot Required Preferred PreferredNot RequiredN/A
8 PROXIMITY TO MARINE
PORT: Dependency
PreferredPreferred Preferred Preferred PreferredNot RequiredPreferredPreferredNot RequiredN/A
9 PROXIMITY TO AIRPORT-
REGIONAL(Commercial)): Dependency
CompetitiveRequired PreferredPreferred PreferredCompetitive Preferred PreferredPreferredN/A
Distance (Miles)
w/ in 60w/ in 30w/ in 60w/ in 60w/ in 60w/ in 30w/ in 60w/ in 60w/ in 60N/A
10 PROXIMITY TO AIRPORT-
INTERNATIONAL: Dependency
PreferredCompetitive Preferred Preferred Preferred PreferredPreferredPreferredPreferredN/A
Distance (Miles)
w/ in 100 w/ in 100 w/ in 300 w/ in 300 w/ in 300 w/ in 100 w/ in 300w/ in 300w/ in 300N/A
UTILITIES
11 WATER: Min. Line Size
(Inches/Dmtr)10108" 8"10" 10" 4"4"4"4"
Min. Fire Line Size
(Inches/Dmtr)10"10"10"10"10"10"10"10"8"
6" (or
alternative
source)
High Pressure Water
Demand
Dependency
PreferredPreferredPreferredNot RequiredPreferredPreferredNot RequiredNot RequiredNot RequiredNot Required
Flow (GPD)
250,0001MGD36,10017,00024,90065,30011,70011,7004,600750o(G)
250,0001 MGD36,10017,00024,90065,30011,70011,7004,600750
12SEWER: Min. Service Line
Size (Inches/Dmtr)10" 10" 8" 8"10" 10" 4"4"4"4' (or on-site
source)
Flow (GPD)
250,0001 MGD32,50015,300100,00058,80011,70011,7004,600750
13NATURAL GAS:
Preferred Min.
Service Line Size
(Inches/Dmtr)
6"6"6"4"6"6"2" 2" 2" N/A
On Site
CompetitiveCompetitiveCompetitiveCompetitivePreferredCompetitivePreferredPreferredPreferredPreferred
14ELECTRICITY: Minimum Service
Demand 2 MW10 MW1 MW.25 MW.25 MW.25 MW1 MW.25 MW0.15 MW.1 MW
Close Proximity to
Substation CompetitiveCompetitiveCompetitivePreferredNot RequiredCompetitiveNot RequiredNot RequiredPreferredNot Required
Secondary System
Dependency PreferredCompetitiveRequiredNot RequiredNot RequiredRequiredNot RequiredNot RequiredRequiredNot Required
15TELECOMMUNICATIONS:
Major Communi-
cations
Dependency
RequiredRequiredPreferredPreferredPreferredRequiredPreferredPreferredRequiredPreferred
Route Diversity
Dependency PreferredPreferredNot RequiredNot RequiredNot RequiredRequiredNot RequiredNot RequiredRequiredNot Required
Fiber Optic
Dependency PreferredPreferredPreferredPreferredPreferredRequiredPreferredPreferredRequiredNot Required
Demanding
criteria-driven
site selection.
High material
andvisitor
Surrounding
environment of
greatconcern
Transportation
routing and
16 SPECIAL CONSIDER-
ATIONS
Acreage
allotment
includes
expansion
space (often an
exercisable
option). Very
high utility
volumes in one
or more areas
common.
Sensitive to
nearby uses.
and visitor
throughput.
Major
Commercial
Airport a must.
Redundency in
trip routes and
utilities vital.
Surrounding
Environmentals
(vibration,
noise, etc).
Buffering and
expansion
space
necessary.
Sensitive to
encroachment
activities of
nearby uses
(residential,
institutional,
commercial).
Adequate
distance from
sensitive land
uses
(residential,
parks, large
retail centers)
necessary. High
throughput of
materials. Large
yard spaces
and/or buffering
required. Often
transportation
related
requiring
marine/rail
links.
Adequate
distance from
sensitive land
uses
(residential,
parks)
necessary.
May require
high
volume/supply
of water and
sanitary sewer
treatment. Often
needs
substantial
storage/yard
space for input
storage. Ons
site water pre-
treatment
needed in many
instances.
great concern
(vibration, noise,
air quality, etc.).
Increased
setbacks may
be required
and/or on-site
utility service
areas. Avoid
sites close to
wastewater
treatment plants,
landfills, sewage
lagoons, and
other such land
uses. May
require high
volume/supply
of water and
sanitary sewer
treatment.
proximity
to/from major
highways is
crucial.
Expansion
options
required. Truck
Staging
requirements
mandatory.
Does not like to
site or have
routing issues
between site
and interstate
that have rail
crossings,
school zones,
airport runways,
or drawbridges.
Transportation
infrastructure
such as roads
and bridges
to/from major
highways is
most
competitive
factor.
Relatively
higher parking
ratios may be
necessary. Will
be very
sensitive to
labor force
considerations
and the
location of
other similar
centers in the
region.
Located in more
remote locations
in the state.
Usually without
direct access
(within 50 miles)
of Interstate or
City of more
than 50,000
people.
Terms:
More Critical
'Preferred' increases the feasibility of the subject property and its future reuse. Other factors may, however, prove more
Group Mackenzie; Business Oregon
'Competitive' significantly increases marketability and is highly recommended by OBD. May also be linked to financing in
order to enhance the potential reuse of the asset in case of default.
'Required' factors are seen as mandatory in a vast majority of cases and have become industry standards
Less Critical
yjppyy,,p
critical
**Total Site: Building footprint, including buffers, setbacks, parking, mitigation, and expansion space
* Competitive Acreage: Acreage that would meet the site selection requirements of the majority of industries in this sector.
Attachment 3-1
Prime Industrial Land Characteristics
How do Springfield’s UGB study areas compare?
Suitability Matrix (Goal 9 Factors)
Prime Industrial Land Characteristics
(from Oregon Industrial Site Certification Program)
UGB Study Area
N
Gateway
Mill
Race/S.
28th
N. Spfd
Highway/N.
52nd
Seavy Mahogany
Net, contiguous developable acreage in large, flat and
symmetrical configurations
Y Y Y Y Y
Minimal or no development constraints present
N N N N N
Suitable net, contiguous developable acreage in large, flat
and symmetrical configurations without “absolute
development constraints” as identified in Springfield
CIBL/EOA
Y Y Y Y Y
Access to available workforce for a specific industry type
Y Y Y Y Y
Sufficient capacity in the local transportation system*
N Y Y N N
Proximity to interstate highways, rail, marine ports and/or
airports
Y
I-5
Y
rail
Y
I-105
Y
I-5,
rail
N w/o
future
connection
to Straub
Pkwy-I-15
Easy access to water, sewer, gas, electricity and
telecommunications
N N N N N
Attachment 3-2
Special considerations such as being free from
encroachment of incompatible uses or needing high
volumes of water and sewer or needing significant local
transportation infrastructure
N N Y N N
Proximity of suppliers, customers, markets and related uses.
Y Y Y Y Y
Location within a functioning industrial district
N N Y Y N
Land is viable for the targeted industrial use**
TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD
* Future designation of land for urban employment use will require submittal of a Transportation Impact Analysis to
determine how vehicular trips associated with the proposed use would impact the local and state transportation system.
Known capacity limitations of the system are noted with red flag.
** Determination of viability for development is not part of this suitability analysis. Cost/benefit analysis (including market
analysis, land values) would be conducted at the time of development.
Attachment 3-3
UGB Study Areas with Suitable Employment Land
Springfield’s Employment Land Need = 640 suitable acres
STUDY AREA Gross
Acres*
Suitable Acres
In floodplain Outside
floodplain
Total
Gateway 347.4 225.2 1.1 226.3
N. Hwy 126 569.3 167.5 97.4 264.9
S. Millrace 132.3 33.2 92.9 126.1
Mahogany
Lane
637.3 227.5 346.7 574.2
Seavey Loop 361.5 46.3 105.5 151.8
*Within taxlots (excludes Right-of-Way, open water, and partial lots
outside of study areas)
Attachment 4-1
Employment Site Needs: Springfield 2030
Type of
employment use
Number and size of
needed sites
Site characteristics
Warehousing
and Distribution
1 site 35-50 acres
On arterial within ½ mile of an I-5
Interchange
Traffic should not be routed through
residential areas
Sites with a maximum of two owners are
preferred to minimize the cost and
uncertainties of land assembly.
Slopes preferably <5%
General Industrial 2 sites 35-50 acres
each
2 sites 80-120 acres
each
1 site 150-180 acres
On arterial within 1 mile of an I-5 or Hwy
126/I-105 Interchange
Traffic should not be routed through
residential areas
Rail access may benefit some users
Sites with a single owner are strongly
preferred to minimize the cost and
uncertainties of land assembly.
Slope preferably <5%, not more than 10%
Office 5 sites 10-15 acres
each
1 site 30-40 acres for
Office Park
On arterial or collector
Traffic should not be routed through
residential areas
Sites with two or fewer owners are
necessary to reduce the cost and
uncertainty of land assembly.
Slope preferably <10%, not more than 15%
Attachment 5-1
Employment Site Needs: Springfield 2030
Type of
employment use
Number and size of
needed sites
Site characteristics
Retail* 1 site 10-15 acres for
Community
Shopping Center
On arterial or collector
Traffic should not be routed through
residential areas
Sites with two or fewer owners are
necessary to reduce the cost and
uncertainty of land assembly.
Visible from arterial or I-5
Slope preferably <5%, not more than
10%
Other Services 4 sites 10-15 acres
each
On arterial or collector
Traffic should not be routed through
residential areas
Sites with two or fewer owners are
necessary to reduce the cost and
uncertainty of land assembly
Slope preferably <10%, not more than
15%
* Council directed staff to accommodate this retail land need within the existing UGB.
Exact # of acres to be included in Springfield’s UGB amendment TBD.
Attachment 5-2
Employment site and land deficiency
Springfield UGB, 2010-2030
Source: ECONorthwest Economic Opportunities Analysis, Sept. 2009, page vii
Note: Total sites and total acres needed represent the sites and acres Springfield needs
to add to its UGB.
Less
than 55 to 2020 to 50
Greater
than 50Total
Industrial
Sites needednonenone33 6
Land need (acres)nonenone150300 450
Commercial and Mixed Use
Sites needednone101none 11
Land need (acres)none15040none 190
Total sites needednone104317
Total acres needednone150190300640
Site Size (acres)
Attachment 5-3
Attachment 6-1