HomeMy WebLinkAboutMap PLANNER 1/15/2008
Zoning Map Amendment - Type III
Staff Report and Findings
Hearln2: Uate:
January IS, 2008
l.ase Number:
ZON 2007-00053
~ublect "rooertv:
- --
Assessor Map No. 17-03-35-41,
TL 4600,4700,4800 & 4900
Aoolicant fOwner
Attn: Patricia Wright
Brethren Community Srvc
Spfld Church of Brethren
1072 Main Street
Springfield, Or 97477
Aoolicant's Reoresentative
- - -
Destin Ferdun
Lunabridge
3575 NE Shaver
Portland, OR 97212
Date Submitted:
October 17, 2007
REOUEST: The Applicant requests a Zoning Map Amendment-Type III to change the zoning of
approximately 1.05 acres of land from Community Commercial (CC) to Mixed-Use Residential
(MUR). The land is located at 1062 Main Street, 1072 Main Street, 1082 Main Street & 1096
Main Street in Springfield, and identified on Assessor Map 17-03-35-41 Tax Lots 4600, 4700,
4800 & 4900. The purpose of this proposed action is to correct an inconsistency between the
Metro Plan Diagram (Exhibit A) and the local zoning map. The existing CC zoning is not
consistent with the Metro Plan Diagram and the Director has determined that this application
qualifies to be processed as a City-sponsored Zoning Map Amendment-Type III, as established by
department policy in 2006. The Planning Commission is asked to consider the applicant's
request and the findings of fact contained herein, and then to confirm that the proposed zoning
is consistent with the Metro Plan and that the MUR zone designation is appropriate in this case.
VICINITY MAP (not to scale)
UBjECT PROPERTY
1062, 1072, 1082 & 1096
Main Street (1.05 acres)
Alley right of way
C)
NORTH
Tax Lots 4900. 4800. 4700 & 4600
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: The subject property is located on the north side. of Main
Street, east of 10th Street as shown above and in Exhibit B. The subject property is
approximately 1.05 acres, which encompasses four tax lots as IdentIfied on Assessor Map 17-03-
35-41 Tax Lots 4600, 4700, 4800 & 4900. The land IS currently under one owner, the
Springfield Church of the Brethren, dOing non-profit business and known as Brethren
Community Services (BCS). The property IS developed With several structures, which serve the
BCS's mission. The property has access from both Main Street and the abutting alley to the
north.
REVIEW PROCESS: ThiS City sponsored Zoning Map Amendment-Type'" application IS a
quasI-Judicial zoning map amendment that includes four abutting tax lots owned by the BCS;
Involves the application of eXisting policy to a speCific factual setting; and, does not require a
- Metro Plan DIagram amendment. SDC Section 5.22-115(A) states that QuasI-Judicial Zonmg Map
Amendments may be approved by the Planning Commission and that the Planning Commission's
deCISion is the final local decision. This application IS reviewed under Type III procedures listed
in SDC Section 5.1-135 and Section 5.22-110. The application was accepted as complete on
Oct 17, 2007.
Approval of thiS request would allow development In accordance With the standards of SDC
Section 3.2-600 Springfield Mixed-Use Zoning Districts. The owner IS Interested in seeking new
redevelopment approval for the subject property, thus the zoning must be made consistent With
the Metro Plan DIagram designatIon prior to sIte plan approval. There are no maximum
reSidential d~nsitles established for MUR districts except those regulated by bUilding heights.
Future development of the site Will require either a Type II or Type III land-use review process
(Site Plan ReVIew and/or approval of a land diVision), which shall include notice to surrounding
property owners.
DISCUSSION: In thiS report, staff will demonstrate that the proposed MUR zoning IS
appropriate and consistent With the Metro Plan Diagram (see Exhibit A attached to thiS report)
and that the proposal meets the criteria for approval of quasi~judicial Zonmg Map amendments in
accordance at Springfield Development Code Section 5.22-115(C).
RECOMMENDATION: Upon review of the applicant's request, staff finds that the proposed
Mixed-Use ReSidential zoning IS consistent WIth both the Metro Plan Diagram and the Metro Plan
poliCies and therefore recommends approval of the applicant's request.
ZONING OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: Land to the north IS currently zoned and
developed With Low Density ReSidential (LOR) uses. Land to the east, south, and the west is
currently zoned Community CommerCIal (CC). Prior to new development of the neighboring
properties, those owners will also have to resolve their own plan/zone conflicts. The Metro Plan
DIagram deSignation for the neighboring properties to the east and west is also Mixed-Use
ReSidential (MUR); designation for the neighboring properties to the south is Mixed-Use
Commercial (MUC).
SDC Section 5.22-1 15 Criteria of Approval - Zoning District Change
SDC Section 5.22-115 establishes the criteria to be used in approving zone changes. In
conSideration of thiS request, the Planning Commission or Hearings OffiCial shall approve
findings, which demonstrate that all of the follOWing applicable Criteria have been addressed:
2
SDC Section 5.22-115 C (I)
Criterion I: Consistency with applicable Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan Diagram
The Metro Plan provides the public with general gUidelines for individual planning decisions.
Reference to supplemental planning documents of a more localized scope, including
neighborhood refinement plans. IS advisable when applYing the Metro Plan to specific parcels of
land or Individual tax lots (Metro Plan page 1-2, #4). The Metro Pia." serves as a general planning
framework to be augmented. as needed, by more detailed planning programs In order to meet
the speCific needs of the various local governments (Metro Plan page 1-2, #8).
~bt
l I \
Finding #1: No refinement plan has been adopted for this specific area. There are no
supplemental planning-documents of a m_or~locallzed scope that Include the subject property.
Pl()O'U'\I~CA.IkIk'~'~ ~"'~:
Finding #2: In this case, the Metro Plan Diagram prOVides suffiCient speCifiCity to apply the
Metro Plan to the subject property because~ identifiable features are ~hown: ~l.' eel. a"J"
~!i;., c.c.j;::(See ~)El:lIblt At. r"~~~d J~ 'f""-e. DOIAU1i-bW,,", lteJIIIlltM.;/ P/4"'J &...d..ut-~
l S T'l-"-Th.4'-'<\. 1v\4'~ ~"l1"tt,~.
The Metro Plan DIagram clearly indicates Mixed-Use Residential (MUR) plan deSignation in the
area of land east of 10th Street and north of Main Street. The Metro Plan Diagram also
establishes the northerly limit of thiS MUR plan deSignation area as seen in Exhibit A I
Finding #3: The Metro Plan designation of the subject property IS Mixed-Use ReSidential
(MUR). The applicant's proposed MUR zoning is therefore consistent With the Metro Plan
deSignation anq the Plan policies. The eXisting. local, Community Commercial zoning represents
a Plan/zone conflict that must be corrected prior to further development of the site.
The follOWing Metro Plan poliCIes support the applicant's request:
Metro Plan Land SUDDlv and Demand Policy A2: Residentially designated land
within the UGB should be zoned consistent with the Metro Plan and
applicable plans and policies.
Metro Plan Land SUDDlv and Demand Policy A 4: Use annexation, provision of
adequate public facilities and services, rezoning, redevelopment, and infill to
meet the 20-year projected housing demand.
Metro Plan ReSidential DenSIty Policy AI 0: Promote higher residential density
inside the urban growth boundary that utilizes existing infrastructure,
improves the efficiency of public services and facilities, and conserves rural
resource lands outside the urban growth boundary.
Metro Plan ReSidential DenSity Pollcv All: Generally locate higher density
residential development near employment or commercial services, in
proximity to major transportation systems or within transportation-efficient
nodes.
Metro Plan ReSidential DenSity Policy A12: Coordinate higher density residential
development with the provision of adequate infrastructure and services,
open space, and other urban amenities.
3
f..- .....
\,\"" '\!u
. \, \ . "4,r",, :,.$~ r~.lj,.:,\ ~,'1
i"'" n. ,.... \
, ...
....,.~.u...\ ...:~ !'It.t.:,_\l..
t~ i
tv i'.:.~ ..:. D",~~,Ji;::'
-)' '..
t ..{.; ~....:- t .>>....-.) :-=JHfiU\',l'.'l :'1
\ . I
.......
--.
'Yih: '-'J h."ISL~I:"C. . -..--- .-
2..~,t~l,....~~ l~l.f~..."~~\ h.....~.....J+ A..~~r
~""'-,
..::
.... j
4'. .
Vt:... ~.'
.~::.. I
, I
'-
Metro Plan ResIdential Densltv PolicyAl3: Increase overall residential density in
the metropolitan area by creating more opportunities for effectively
designed in-fill, redevelopment, and mixed use while considering impacts of
increased residential density on historic, existing, and future neighborhoods.
Finding #4: Approval of the applicant's request would allow an Increase of residential density
on the subject property from a maximum of one Unit per commercial development site to
unlimited residential Unit denSIty, except that which will be restricted by bUilding height. (The
maxImum # of reSIdential Units wIll be revIewed at the time of site plan review.)
Finding #5: Approval of the applicant's request would create an opportunity for effectively
deSigned In-fill development in accordance with Metro Plan policies that Includes both
commercial and reSIdentIal use. Metro Plan ReSIdentIal Densitv Policy AI4 states: Review
. .
local zoning and development regulations periodically to remove barriers to higher
density housing and to make provisions for a full range of housing options.
Finding #6: The presence of inconSIstent Community CommercIal-only (CC) zOning Within
areas designated Mixed-Use Residential on the Metro Plan limits and restricts redevelopment
opportunities through limitation of both reSidential denSity and restraints on deSign. The
eXisting CC zOning creates a restraint on both reSidential and commercial Infill.
)
Finding #7: fpproval of the proposed zone change Will create an opportUnity to Increase the
number of residential Units permitted and thus increase overall density and additional housing
options Within the metropolitan area. Metro Plan page III-A-8 ReSidential Densitv PoliCY AI6
states: Allow for the development of zoning districts which allow overlap of the
established Metro Plan density ranges to promote housing choice and result in
either maintaining or increasing housing density in those districts. Under no
circumstances, shall housing densities be all9wed below existing Metro Plan density
ranges.
Finding #8: The existing Springfield zoning for the subject property presently permits a
reSidential denSity allocation (one per commercial site) that IS lower than local Mixed-Use
Residential zoning (minimum of 20 per gross acre).
Finding #9: The existing CC zoning IS inconsistent with the Metro Plan text.
Conclusion #1: Staff finds that the MUR zoning requested by the applicant IS consistent with
the applicable Metro Plan poliCies. In addition, the Metro Plan Diagram prOVides the level of
speCifiCity necessary to apply the MUR deSignation to the subject property. The proposal
therefore satisfies the approval criterion of SDC SectIon 5.22-115 C (I).
SDC Section 5.22- I 15 C (2)
Criterion 2: Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps,
Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans; and
'-
Finding #1 0: There are no Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, or Conceptual Development
Plans for the subject property; Metro Plan deSignations establish the basis for functional plans
v
4
(transportation, public facIlities, etc.) In the metro area, thus zoning In accordance with the
Metro Plan deSignation shall be consistent with the applicable functional plans.
Conclusion #2: Staff finds that the proposal satisfies the approval Criterion of SDC Section
5.22-115 C (2).
SDC Section 5.22-115 C (3)
Criterion 3: The property is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services
and transportation networks to support the use, or these facilities, services; and
transportation networks are planned to be provided concurrently with the development
of the property.
Finding # II: The subject property has approximately 255 feet of frontage on Main, a Major
Arterial public street, which is under the JUrisdiction of the State of Oregon Highway
Department (9.D.O.T.)
Finding #12: Main Street IS fully improved and the existing transportation systems provide
access to the property. Specific access requirements Will be addressed through the site plan
review process when the applicant submits a redevelopment proposal.
Finding #13: The City'S Conceptual Street Map shows the current right-of-way and does not
propose any future changes.
Finding #14: A public, IS-Inch stormwater line IS located In Main Street along the frontage of
the subject property. An a-inch public sanitary sewer IS located In the public alley right-of-way
to the north of the subject property.
Finding #15: The property IS served by Springfield Fire and Life Safety. SpeCific access to the
site for fire and life safety vehicles is currently adequate. Note: Future access for
redevelopment Will be determined through the site plan review process.
Finding #16: The site IS served by Springfield School District' 19.
Finding # 17: The site IS within the Wlllamalane Parks and Recreation District.
Finding #18: Traffic impacts of the proposed rezoning to MUR and future redevelopment
proposals will be reviewed at the time of site plan revIew.
Finding #19: Lane TranSit District (L TD) reviewed the application and found that the
proposed zone change Will not affect eXisting transit service.
Finding #20: Solid waste management service IS available at the subject property. The City
and Sanlpac have an exclUSive franchise arrangement for garbage service inSide the City limits.
~
Finding #21: The site receives police protection from the City of Springfield that IS consistent
With service proviSion throughout the city and With service that IS now prOVided to adjacent
properties.
Finding #22: Qwest and Comcast currently prOVide telephone and cable communication
service In thiS area. There are also an array of Wireless companies that prOVide communication
5
services. The City has no exclusive franchise arrangements with telecommunication or wireless
companies; the field IS competitive and therefore guarantees a Wide selectIon.
Conclusion #3: The property is presently provided with adequate public facilities, services and
transportation networks to support the current use; therefore, the proposal satisfies the
Criterion at SDC Section 5.22-115 C3 as desCribed herein. Note: All future public and private
Improvement requirements and utility connection pOints will be determined when the applicant
submits a site plan review application for redevelopment.
SDC Section 5.22-115 C (4)
Criterion 4: Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram
amendment shall:
(a) Meet the approval criteria specified in SDC Section 5.14-100; and
(b) Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-0 I 2-0060, where applicable.
Finding #23: As deScribed herein the applicant's request meets the approval Criteria speCified
in SDC Section 5.14-100.
Finding #24: ThiS City Sponsored Zoning Map Amendment-Type III application IS a QuasI-judicial
Zoning Map amendment which affects a Single applicant's property; involves the application of
eXisting policy to a ~pecific factual setting; and, does not reqUIre a Metro Plan DIagram
amendment.
Conclusion #4: Staff finds that the proposal satisfies the approval criterion of SDC Section
5.22-1 J 5 C (2) as described herein.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: SDC Section 5.22-120: The Approval Authority may
attach conditions as may be reasonably necessary to allow the Zoning Map
amendment to be granted.
Conclusion #4:
RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds that the proposed Zonmg Map Amendment-Type III is
consistent with the Criteria of SDC Section 5.22-115 as desCribed herein. Staff recommends
that the Planning CommiSSion approve the requested Zomng Map amendment WIthout additional
conditions.
6
EXHIBIT A
METRO PLAN DIAGRAM MAP
....\~\~l BLVD
JT E \~;:J
~I;l
-.......
---
t:::....
C)
Eugene-Springfield
Metropolitan Area
General Plan
Plan Diagram
(!he intetp1'etatioo and plllpOse of the Pl.lll Diagram and descriptions
of the land uses and s}lIlbols sho\\l1, are COIuained in Ch.1pter IT-G.)
'~".'
Urban Growth Boundary
D low Density Reoldentlal D light Medium industrial mI AgrlclAture
D Medium Oenoity Residential ~ Cempus Industrial 0 Forest land
D Hgh Densbv Residential [J Unlverslly Research D Rural Residential
D Commercial D Government and education ~ Rural Commercial
m Malar Retal Centers . Parks and Open Space ~ Rural Industrial
D Heavy Industrial D Natural Resource ~ Airport Reserve
~ Special Heavy Industrial D Sand and Gravel
",.........,,'
Metro Plan Boundary
/'./
~
RaDroads
RIvers and Ponds
Overlays:
~ Mixed U"" Areas
8 Nodal Development Area
o WlDam!lU!l Gr....nway
EXHIBIT B
SPRINGFIELD VICINITY MAP
IV.
\
~
Vicinity map is not to scale
. . t of 10th Street and includes four tax lots addressed as
~~~~e~~i~~~:t:s 1~~2 Main Street, 1082 Main Street and 1096 Main Street