Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrdinance 6369 06/19/2017 CITY OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON ORDINANCE NO. 6369 (GENERAL) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN (METRO PLAN) DIAGRAM BY REDESIGNATING APPROXIMATELY 1.96 ACRES OF LAND FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR); CONCURRENTLY AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD ZONING MAP BY REZONING THE SAME APPROXIMATELY 1.96 ACRES OF LAND FROM LDR TO MDR; AMENDING THE METRO PLAN DIAGRAM BY REDESIGNATING APPROXIMATELY 1.39 ACRES OF LAND FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(HDR); CONCURRENTLY AMENDING THE SPRINGFIELD ZONING MAP BY REZONING THE SAME APPROXIMATELY 1.39 ACRES OF LAND FROM LDR TO HDR; ADOPTING A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD FINDS THAT: WHEREAS, Section 5.14--100 of the Springfield Development Code(SDC) sets forth procedures for Metro Plan diagram amendments; and WHEREAS, Section 5.14-115.A of the SDC classifies amendments to the Metro Plan diagram for land inside the Springfield City limits as being Type I Metro Plan amendments that require approval by Springfield only; and WHEREAS, Section 5.14-125.A of the SDC sets forth procedures for property owners to initiate a Type I Metro Plan diagram amendment for property under their ownership; and WHEREAS, the applicant/owner of the subject property initiated a Type I Metro Plan diagram amendment for six contiguous parcels as follows: Redesignate two parcels comprising approximately 1.78 acres that include a parcel addressed as 1993 51h Street along with an adjoining non-addressed parcel, that are identified as Assessor's Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600 and 5000 from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential (Planning Case TYP417-00002); and Redesignate four parcels comprising approximately 1.57 acres that are addressed as 1975, 1981, 1987 and 1995 5th Street and identified as Assessor's Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4601,4700, 4800, and 4900 from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential (Planning Case TYP417-00002); and WHEREAS, Section 5.22-110 of the SDC sets forth procedures for property owners to initiate an amendment to the Springfield Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, Section 5.22-110.A.1 sets forth procedures for concurrent amendments to the Metro Plan diagram and Springfield Zoning Map through the Legislative Zoning Map amendment process; and WHEREAS the applicantlowner of the subject property initiated the following Springfield Zoning Map amendment: Rezone approximately 1.78 acres of property identified herein and more particularly described in Exhibit A to this Ordinance,from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential (Planning Case TYP3-00004); and Page 1 of 3 Rezone approximately 1.57 acres of property identified herein and more particularly described in Exhibit A to this Ordinance, from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential (Planning Case TYP3-00004); and WHEREAS, on April 4, 2017 the Springfield Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment request and concurrent request for Zoning Map amendment. The Development &Public Works Department staff report, including criteria of approval, findings and recommendations, together with the testimony and submittals of the persons testifying at that hearing, were considered and were made a part of the record of the proceeding. WHEREAS,the Planning Commission deliberated on both requests and voted 7 in favor and 0 opposed to forward a recommendation of approval to the City Council on the following modified Metro Plan diagram and zoning map amendments: Redesignate and rezone three parcels comprising approximately 1.96 acres that include parcels addressed as 1993 5th Street and 1975 Stn Street along with an adjoining non-addressed parcel, that are identified as Assessor's Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600 and 5000 as generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit A to this Ordinance, from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential (Planning Case TYP417-00002); and Redesignate and rezone three parcels comprising approximately 1.39 acres that are addressed as 1981, 1987 and 1995 5th Street and identified as Assessor's Map 1703-26-24, Tax Lots 4700, 4800, and 4900, as generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit B to this Ordinance, from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential (Planning Case TYP417- 00002); and WHEREAS, on May 15, 2017 the City Council held a public hearing to receive testimony and hear comments on both proposals, and during which hearing the applicant stated its assent to the Planning Commission's recommendation to approve the modified application; WHEREAS, The City Council is now ready to take action on these proposals based upon the above recommendations of the Planning Commission and the evidence and testimony already in the record, as well as the evidence and testimony presented at this public hearing held in the matter of adopting this Ordinance amending the Metro Plan diagram and Springfield Zoning Map; and WHEREAS, substantial evidence exists within the record and the findings set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, that the proposal meets the relevant approval criteria, NOW, THEREFORE, BASED ON THE FOREGOING FINDINGS, THE COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The above findings and conclusions are hereby adopted. Section 2. The staff report and recommendations, applicant narrative, and Planning Commission findings and recommendation to this Ordinance set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, are hereby adopted. Section 3. The Metro Plan diagram designation of the subject property identified as Assessor's Map 17-03-26-24,Tax Lots 4600, 4601 and 5000, more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby amended from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential(MDR). Page 2 of 3 Section 4. The Metro Plan diagram designation of the subject property identified as Assessor's Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4700, 4800, and 4900 more particularly described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, is hereby amended from Low Density Residential (LDR) to High Density Residential (HDR). Section 5. The Springfield Zoning Map is hereby amended to rezone the subject property identified as Assessor's Map 17--03--26-24, Tax Lots 4700, 4800, and 4900, more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, from LDR to MDR. Section 6. The Springfield Zoning Map is hereby amended to rezone the subject property identified as Assessor's Map 1703-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, and 5000, more particularly described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, from LDR to HDR. Section 7. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, phrase, or portion of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, that portion shall be deemed a separate, distinct, and independent provision and that holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance. Section 8. Notwithstanding the effective date of ordinances as provided by Section 2.110 of the Springfield Municipal Code 1997, this ordinance shall become effective 30 days from the date of passage by the City Council and approval by the Mayor or upon the date of acknowledgement as provided in ORS 197.625, whichever date is later. ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Springfield this_I_q_day of 1J1INE 2017 by a vote of-g—for and-g—against. APPROVED by the Mayor of the City of Springfield this_14–day of IJ N E , 2017. Mayor ATTEST: tT7d1�G� City Recorder REVIEWED APPROVED AST 1=n� DAT OFFICE F ITY A 7 RiVEY Page 3 of 3 EXHIBIT A PROPERTIES REDESIGNATED AND REZONED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL T Street I , iv L L N L Attachment 1, Page 4 of 121 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel 1 (Tax Lot 4600): Beginning at a point 989.418 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; running thence North 116.792 feet to the Southeast corner of the tract described in Deed No. 43434; thence West 566.33 feet, more or less, to the East line of Fifth Street, in the town of Springfield; thence South along said East line of Fifth Street, 64.792 feet; thence East 150 feet; thence South 52 feet; thence East 416.33 feet to the point of beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. Parcel 2 (Tax Lot 5000): Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, extended 153.70 feet; thence East 130 feet to the place of beginning; all in Springfield, Lane County, Oregon. Parcel 3 (Tax Lot 4601): Beginning at a point 989.418 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; running thence North 116.792 feet to the Southeast corner of the tract described in Deed, Reception No. 43434; thence West 566.33 feet more or less to the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended; thence South on and along said East line, 64.792 feet to the True Point of Beginning;thence South along said East line of Fifth Street, 52.0 feet; thence East 150 feet; thence North approximately 52.0 feet to the point directly East of the True Point of Beginning; thence West 150.0 feet to the True Point of Beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. Attachment 1, Page 5 of 121 EXHIBIT B PROPERTIES REDESIGNATED AND REZONED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL T Street ami a L L N L Attachment 1, Page 6 of 121 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel 4 (Tax Lot 4700): Commencing at a point 835.68 feet due North and 390 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West, Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 176.65 feet to the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended; thence South on and along the said East line of Fifth Street 153.70 feet; and thence East 176.81 feet; more or less, to the place of beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. EXCEPT that portion conveyed and dedicated to the City of Springfield by instrument recorded July 6, 1978, Recorder's Reception No. 78-46741, Lane County Oregon Official Records. Parcel 5 (Tax Lot 4800): Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North and 260 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47 in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended, 153.70 feet; thence East 130 feet to the Place of Beginning, all lying in and being in what is known as the Seavey tracts lying North of Springfield, Oregon. EXCEPTING THEREFROM the northerly 20 feet as conveyed to the City of Springfield for a public road, by document recorded April 8, 1989, Reception No. 88-13697, Lane County Oregon Records. Parcel 6 (Tax Lot 4900): Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North and 130 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47 in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended, 153.70 feet; thence East 130 feet to the place of beginning all lying in and being in what is known as the Seavey tracts lying North of Springfield, Oregon. Attachment 1, Page 7 of 121 Staff Report and Findings Springfield City Council Type I Amendment to the Metro Plan Diagram Meeting Date: May 15, 2017 Case Number: TYP417-00002 Applicant: Rick Satre, Schirmer Satre Group on behalf of CMC Development LLC Project Location: Six contiguous residential properties on the east side of 5th Street and south of T Street; properties are addressed as 1975 — 1995 5th Street and include one vacant, non-addressed parcel (Assessor's Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600 —5000). Request The City has received an application for a Type I Metro Plan diagram amendment and a concurrent Zoning Map amendment from a property owner (Attachments 3 & 4). The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment would change the plan designation for two parcels comprising 1.78 acres (Tax Lots 4600 and 5000) from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR); and change the plan designation for four parcels comprising 1.57 acres (Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800 and 4900) from LDR to High Density Residential (HDR). The proposed amendment to the Metro Plan diagram would also amend the adopted Q Street Refinement Plan diagram, which is a refinement plan to the Metro Plan. Concurrent with the comprehensive plan amendment, an amendment to the Springfield Zoning Map would change the zoning of Tax Lots 4600 and 5000 from LDR to MDR; and the zoning of Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800 and 4900 from LDR to HDR. Although uncommon, in accordance with Springfield Development Code (SDC) Section 5.14-125.A, an amendment to the Metro Plan diagram can be initiated by a property owner at any time. The application was submitted on February 3, 2017 and the Springfield Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment on April 4, 2017. The Planning Commission conducted deliberations on April 18, 2017 and unanimously adopted recommendations of support for the proposed Metro Plan Amendment and Zone Change with one amendment: Tax Lot 4601 is recommended to be redesignated and rezoned to MDR instead of HDR as originally proposed by the applicant (Attachment 8). The applications are now scheduled for a public hearing before the City Council on May 15, 2017. Overview of Proposed Metro Plan Diagram Amendment The adopted Metro Plan diagram designates the subject property for Low Density Residential land use. The applicant has initiated a Metro Plan diagram amendment and concurrent Zoning Map amendment to change the zoning and plan designation from LDR to MDR and HDR. The applicant has not indicated the specific type of residential housing form that is intended for the property, but the proposed zoning would allow for duplex, four-plex, townhouse or apartment style units, or a combination thereof, as provided by SDC 3.2-200. A nursing home or group care facility also could be constructed on the property under the proposed zoning and comprehensive plan designation. In accordance with SDC 5.14-115.A.1, proposals for redesignating land inside the City limits are classified as a Type I Metro Plan diagram amendment requiring approval by Springfield only. In accordance with SDC 5.14-130, the property-owner initiated amendment to the Metro Plan diagram is processed as a Type IV (legislative) land use action that requires public hearings before the Springfield Planning Commission and City Council. Attachment 1, Page 8 of 121 Notification and Written Comments In accordance with the Oregon Administrative Rules (OARS) 660-018-0020, prior to adopting a change to an acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulation, local governments are required to notify the state Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) at least 35 days prior to the first evidentiary hearing. A Notice of Proposed Amendment was transmitted to the DLCD on February 28, 2017, which is 35 days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing on the matter. In accordance with SDC 5.2-110.B, Type IV legislative land use decisions require mailed notification as well as notice in a newspaper of general circulation. Notification of the April 4, 2017 Planning Commission public hearing was mailed to adjacent property owners and residents on March 1, 2017 and published in the legal notices section of The Register Guard on March 15, 2017. Staff mailed a second notification of the City Council public hearing on April 19, 2017 to adjacent residents and property owners, and persons providing written testimony to the record up to April 18, 2017. Additionally, a legal notice of the City Council public hearing was published in The Register Guard on May 8, 2017. Staff posted a notice of the May 15, 2017 public hearing on the subject property, in the lobby of City Hall, on the Development & Public Works office digital display, and on the City's webpage. Over the course of the public notification process, staff responded to numerous phone calls, front counter inquiries, and requests for additional information regarding the proposal. At the time of writing, 22 written comments, including three neighborhood petitions, have been received from nearby property owners and residents opposing the proposal. Six people spoke in opposition to the proposal at the Planning Commission public hearing on April 4, 2017. The written comments submitted during the public notification period are included as Attachment 6 to the AIS. Staff Response: The written comments submitted by adjacent property owners and residents have several common elements of concern about the proposal, including: increased building heights and shading of backyards, incompatibility with existing single family housing in the neighborhood and the provisions of the adopted Metro Plan and Q Street Refinement Plan, and increased traffic and noise. Staff advises that the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment and zone change would allow for a variety of larger and more intensive housing forms to be constructed on the property. However, the developer has not provided any specific type or configuration of proposed housing units yet, nor is this specifically required at this point. Any future development would be subject to the Multi-unit Design Standards of SDC 3.2-200, including building height limitations for properties to the south or west of existing single family homes, multi-unit development standards that provide for increased building setbacks from perimeter property lines, and provision of site landscaping and common outdoor amenity space for multi-family developments. The applicant has submitted a supplementary Transportation Planning Rule Analysis for the project (Attachment 5) that demonstrates the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the public street system. One written comment submitted prior to the hearing raised the issue that the initial Notice of Public Hearing provided for these applications is not legally sufficient under Oregon law. That concern was forwarded to the City Attorney's Office for review. The City Attorney's Office has advised that the notice provided at the outset of this proceeding was legally sufficient for conducting the Planning Commission public hearing (Attachment 9). As stated above, staff subsequently re-notified property owners, residents, and persons providing written and verbal testimony of the City Council public hearing on May 15, 2017. Written comments were submitted just prior to and at the April 4 Planning Commission public hearing meeting, including testimony from William Carpenter. Mr. Carpenter identifies a number of alleged deficiencies in the application and reiterates his position (communicated in a letter dated March 24, 2017; see Attachment 7) that inadequate public notification was provided for the Planning Commission public hearing. Staff maintains that the initial public notification is adequate, and in any event has been more than satisfactorily addressed through the second round of public notification for the City Council public hearing. Attachment 1, Page 9 of 121 Staff provided additional clarification of the affected tan lots in the public notification issued for the City Council public hearing scheduled for May 15, 2017. In his written and verbal testimony delivered on April 4, Mr. Carpenter also championed the Q Street Refinement Plan as the overriding comprehensive plan for the neighborhood. Staff advises that certain provisions of the Q Street Refinement Plan remain pertinent to the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment and Zone Change, and its application in the subject neighborhood. However, other provisions of the 1987 Refinement Plan have been replaced or superseded by more contemporary provisions of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element. Staff identifies some key policies in the Q Street Refinement Plan that do not overlap or conflict with the Residential Land Use and Housing Element and these are discussed primarily in Findings 37 and 38 of this staff report. Based on staff's and the applicant's analysis of the Metro Plan, Q Street Refinement Plan, and the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element, the most relevant and applicable policy provisions are identified in the project narrative and staff findings herein. Background Applicant's Project Narrative: "There is a change in circumstances that makes this requested change to the Metro Plan diagram necessary. Between 2010 and 2030, Springfield can expect to see a 27% increase of residents living within its city limits (RLS, ECONorthwest, pg. ii). Currently, 824 buildable acres of land are zoned Low Density Residential, which equates to 60% of Springfield's residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, providing 4% of the City's residential development capacity. To accommodate growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units to accommodate population growth. While there is a total surplus of residential land, there is a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land. But there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Therefore, circumstances have indeed changed greatly since the subject site was designated at Low Density Residential in the Metro Plan." Criteria of Approval Section 5.14-135 of the SDC contains the criteria of approval for the decision maker to utilize during review of Metro Plan diagram amendments. The Criteria of approval are: SDC 5.14-135 CRITERIA A Metro Plan amendment may be approved only if the Springfield City Council and other applicable governing body or bodies find that the proposal conforms to the following criteria: A. The amendment shall be consistent with applicable Statewide Planning Goals; and B. Plan inconsistency: 1. In those cases where the Metro Plan applies, adoption of the amendment shall not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. 2. In cases where Springfield Comprehensive Plan applies, the amendment shall be consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan. Attachment 1 , Page 10 of 121 A. Consistency with Applicable State-Wide Planning Goals Finding L Of the 19 statewide goals, 13 should be considered in general terms as "urban" goals, that is, these goals will be applicable for purposes of review to any plan map amendments in the city; however, it is the proposal and its effect on the purpose of these goals that will determine whether or not the proposed amendment is "consistent with" the applicable goals. The goals that are to be evaluated are: Goal 1 — Citizen Involvement; Goal 2 — Land Use Planning; Goal 5 Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces; Goal 6 Air, Water and Land Resources Quality; Goal 7 —Areas Subject to Natural Hazards; Goal 8 Recreational Needs; Goal 9 —Economic Development; Goal 10 — Housing; Goal 11 Public Facilities and Services; Goal 12 Transportation; Goal 13 Energy Conservation; Goal 14 — Urbanization; and Goal 15 Willamette River Greenway. All of the statewide goals are listed below; the narrative that accompanies each is more expositive when the discussion applies to the 13 goals identified above. Goal 1 —Citizen Involvement Applicant's Narrative: "The City has acknowledged provisions for citizen involvement that ensure the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. Specifically, the Springfield Development Code includes a requirement that adequate notice of the proposed amendment and public hearings is provided prior to a decision being made. The process for adopting amendments is in accordance with Statewide Planning Goal 1, as it complies with the requirements of the State's citizen involvement provisions. This proposed Metro Plan amendment does not amend the citizen involvement program." Finding 2: Goal 1 — Citizen Involvement calls for "the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process". The proposed citizen initiated amendment to the adopted Metro Plan diagram is subject to the City's acknowledged plan amendment process — SDC Section 5.14- 100 Metro Plan Amendments and the City's public notice standards — SDC Section 5.2-115 which requires a public hearing before the Springfield Planning Commission and a public hearing before the Springfield City Council, and includes specifications for the content, timing and dispersal of mailed notice (see description following). The Planning Commission is scheduled to conduct a public hearing to consider the proposed amendments on April 4, 2017. Mailed notification of the Planning Commission public hearing was provided to all property owners and residents within 300 feet of the subject property on March 1, 2017. The Planning Commission public hearing was advertised in the legal notices section of the Register-Guard on March 15, 2017. The recommendation of the Planning Commission will be forwarded to the Springfield City Council for consideration at a public hearing meeting scheduled for May 15, 2017. Notification of the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings was published in the Register-Guard newspaper at least one week prior to the meeting dates. Staff finds that the notice for this proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment complies with SDC 5.2-115 and is consistent with Goal 1 requirements. Goal 2 —Land Use Planning Applicant's Narrative: "The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) is the policy tool that provides a basis for decision-making in the Eugene-Springfield area. The Metro Plan was acknowledged by the State in 1982 to be in compliance with statewide planning goals. These findings and record show that there is an adequate factual base for decisions to be made concerning the proposed amendment. Goal 2 requires plans be coordinated with the plans of affected governmental units and that opportunities be provided for review and comment by those units. To comply with the Goal 2 coordination requirement, the City will coordinate the review of Attachment 1, Page 11 of 121 the amendment with affected governmental units. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2." Finding 3: Goal 2 — Land Use Planning outlines the basic procedures for Oregon's statewide planning program. In accordance with Goal 2, land use decisions are to be made in accordance with a comprehensive plan, and jurisdictions are to adopt suitable implementation ordinances that put the plan's policies into force and effect. Consistent with the City's coordination responsibilities and obligations to provide affected local agencies with an opportunity to comment, the City sent a copy of the application submittals to the following agencies: Willamalane Park & Recreation District; Springfield Utility Board (water, ground water protection, electricity and energy conservation); Lane 911; USPS; Northwest Natural Gas; Emerald People's Utility District; Rainbow Water District; Eugene Water and Electric Board—Water and Electric Departments; Springfield School District#19 Maintenance, Safe Rotes to School and Financial Services; Lane County Transportation, County Sanitarian; Lane Regional Air Pollution Authority; Comcast Cable; CenturyLink; Lane Transit District; and ODOT Planning and Development, State Highway Division. Additionally, notice was provided electronically to DLCD on February 28, 2017. Finding 4: The Metro Plan is the acknowledged comprehensive plan for guiding land use planning in Springfield. The City has adopted other neighborhood- or area-specific plans (such as Refinement Plans) that provide more detailed direction for land use planning under the umbrella of the Metro Plan. The subject property is within the adopted Q Street Refinement Plan area and the proposed amendment to the Metro Plan diagram would concurrently amend the adopted Refinement Plan diagram. Additionally, the City is in the process of developing and adopting the Springfield Comprehensive Plan, the final adopted version of which will replace the Metro Plan. The City's initial action to this end was the adoption of Ordinance 96268 on June 20, 2011,which "establishes a separate Urban Growth Boundary for the City of Springfield as required by ORS 197.304 and a tax lot specific map of the UGB in accordance with OAR 660-024-0020(2); and the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element and Springfield Residential Land and Housing Needs Analysis February 2011 attached as Exhibit A and B and incorporated here by this reference are adopted pursuant to ORS 197.304 as refinements to the Metro Plan." This action effectively replaced the Metro Plan's Residential Element, including findings, objectives and policies: "Section 3: The prior versions of the Metro Plan and its diagram superceded or replaced by this Ordinance shall remain in full force and effect to authorize prosecution of persons in violation thereof prior to the effective date of this Ordinance." (emphasis added) See SDC 5.14- 120 Relationship to Refinement Plans, Special Area Studies or Functional Plan amendments. Finding 5: The public hearing process used for amendment of the Metro Plan and adopted Refinement Plans is specified in Chapter IV Metro Plan Review, Amendments, and Refinements. The findings under Criteria B (below) demonstrate that the proposed amendment will not make the adopted Metro Plan internally inconsistent. Finding 6: The Springfield Development Code is a key mechanism used to implement the goals and policies of the City's adopted comprehensive plans, particularly the Metro Plan. The proposal is classified as a Type I amendment to the adopted Metro Plan diagram that is approved by Springfield only in accordance with SDC 5.14-115.A. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is processed as a Type IV land use action (legislative) as described in SDC 5.1-140 and 5.14-130. The process observed for the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is consistent with the policies Attachment 1, Page 12 of 121 pertaining to Review, Amendments and Refinements. Additionally, the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment has been initiated in accordance with the provisions of the City's acknowledged Comprehensive Plan and Development Code. Staff finds the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment does not affect City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 2 requirements, and that notice and coordination requirements "with those local governments, state and federal agencies and special districts which have programs, land ownerships, or responsibilities within the area" that includes this proposal have been provided consistent with Goal 2. Goal 3 —Agricultural Land Applicant's Narrative: "Goal 3 is not applicable to this amendment, as the subject property and proposed action is located within an acknowledged urban growth boundary and does not affect any agricultural plan designation or use. Goal 3 excludes lands inside an acknowledged urban growth boundary, Goal 3 is not relevant and the amendment does not affect the subject site's compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 3." Finding 7: Goal 3 — As noted by the applicant in their narrative, Agricultural Land applies to areas subject to farm zoning that are outside acknowledged urban growth boundaries (UGBs): "Agricultural land does not include land within acknowledged urban growth boundaries or land within acknowledged exceptions to Goals 3 or 4." (Text of Goal 3). The City has an acknowledged UGB and therefore consistent with the express language of the Goal, does not have farm land zoning within its jurisdictional boundary. Furthermore, the site of the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is inside the City's acknowledged UGB and within a mature, long-developed residential neighborhood. Consequently, and as expressed in the text of the Goal, Goal 3 is not applicable. Goal 4—Forest Land Applicant's Narrative: "Goal 4 is not applicable as the subject property and proposed action does not affect any forest plan designation or use. Goal 4 does not apply within urban growth boundaries and, therefore, does not apply to the subject property nor affect the area's compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 4. Finding 8: Goal 4 — Forest Land applies to timber lands zoned for that use that are outside acknowledged UGBs with the intent to conserve forest lands for forest uses: "Oregon Administrative Rule 660-006-0020: Plan Designation Within an Urban Growth Boundary. Goal 4 does not apply within urban growth boundaries and therefore, the designation of forest lands is not required." The City has an acknowledged UGB and does not have forest zoning within its incorporated area. Furthermore, the site of the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is inside the City's UGB. Consequently, and as expressed in the text of the Goal, Goal 4 is not applicable. Goal 5 —Natural Resources, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Open Spaces Applicant's Narrative: "The subject property does not include a Goal 5 resource site. The proposed amendment does not create or amend a list of Goal 5 resources, does not amend a plan or code provision adopted to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address specific requirements of Goal 5, does not allow new uses that could be conflicting uses with Goal 5 resource site, and does not amend the acknowledged Urban Growth Boundary. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 5 does not apply to this amendment." Attachment 1 , Page 13 of 121 Finding 9: Goal 5 — Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources applies to more than a dozen natural and cultural resources such as wildlife habitats and wetlands, and establishes a process for each resource to be inventoried and evaluated. The site that is subject of the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment has not been identified in the City's Natural Resources inventory, Register of Historic Sites, or the Willamalane Park & Recreation District Comprehensive Plan. Additionally, the city does not have a specific zoning district which it applies to inventoried Goal 5 natural resources; the presence of these resources is completely independent of the process used to zone and designate land. Protective measures for all of the city's inventoried Goal 5 resources are applicable to the resource and are not circumscribed or altered based on zoning classification. The proposed amendment to the Metro Plan diagram and the Q Street Refinement Plan diagram does not modify or alter the City's Development Code or other Metro Plan policies relating to identified natural resources. The proposed diagram amendment does not make any changes to adopted Goal 5 natural resources development standards or protective measures adopted to comply with Goal 5 requirements. Therefore, this action does not alter the City's acknowledged compliance with Goal 5. Goal 6 —Air, Water and Land Resources Quality Applicant's Narrative: "Goal 6 addresses waste and process discharges from development and is aimed at protecting air, water, and land from impacts from those discharges. Nothing in the proposal, character of the site, or potential uses indicates a future development that would compromise air, water quality, or land resource policies. The City can reasonably expect that future development of the site complies with applicable environmental laws. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 6." Finding 10: Goal 6 — Air, Water and Land Resources Quality applies to local comprehensive plans and the implementation of measures consistent with state and Federal regulations on matters such as clean air, clean water, and preventing groundwater pollution. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment and concurrent Q Street Refinement Plan amendment does not affect City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 6 requirements. Therefore, this action does not alter the City's acknowledged compliance with Goal 6. Goal 7 —Areas Subject to Natural Hazards Applicant's Narrative: "Goal 7 requires that local government planning programs include provisions to protect people and property from natural hazards such as floods, landslides, earthquakes and related hazards, tsunamis, and wildfires. The subject property is not located within known areas of natural disasters or hazards. The subject property is outside the flood zone and is not subject to hazards normally associated with steep slopes, wildfires, or tsunamis. Other hazards, such as earthquakes and severe winter storms can be mitigated at the time of development based on accepted building codes and building techniques. Therefore, this amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 7." Finding 11: Goal 7 — Areas Subject to Natural Hazards applies to development in areas such as floodplains and potential landslide areas. Local jurisdictions are required to apply "appropriate safeguards" when planning for development in hazard areas. The City has inventoried areas subject to natural hazards such as the McKenzie and Willamette River flood plains and potential landslide areas on steeply sloping hillsides. The subject site is within a mature, developed residential neighborhood and is not located within an area of known natural hazards. Attachment 1, Page 14 of 121 Finding 12: The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment has no effect on City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 7 requirements and siting standards for development within the mapped flood hazard area of the McKenzie and Willamette Rivers. Furthermore, the site proposed for Metro Plan diagram amendment is not exempted from conformance with regulations affecting these hazard areas. Therefore, this action has no effect on the City's acknowledged compliance with Goal 7. Goal 8 —Recreational Needs Applicant's Narrative: "Statewide Planning Goal 8 ensures the provision of recreational facilities to Oregon citizens and is primarily concerned with the provision of those facilities in non-urban areas of the state. There are no public or private recreational facilities on or adjacent to the subject property. Therefore, the proposed amendment will not impact the provision of public recreational facilities nor will they affect access to existing or future public recreational facilities. As such, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 8." Finding 13: Goal 8 — Recreational Needs requires communities to evaluate their recreation areas and facilities and to develop plans to address current and projected demand. The provision of recreation services within Springfield is the responsibility of Willamalane Park & Recreation District. Willamalane has an adopted 20-Year Comprehensive Plan for the provision of park, open space and recreation services for Springfield. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment would not affect Willamalane's adopted Comprehensive Plan or other ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 8 requirements. Therefore, this action has no effect on the City's acknowledged compliance with Goal 8. Goal 9 —Economic Development Applicant's Narrative: "The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment does not affect economic development, as it is not requesting to change the designation of the subject site to or from commercial. The amendment seeks to designate land currently identified as Low Density Residential to a mixture of Medium and High Density Residential. Therefore, the proposed amendment will not impact economic development or commercial land supply in any way. The amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 9." Finding 14: Goal 9 — Economic Development addresses diversification and improvement of the economy. It requires local jurisdictions to conduct an inventory of commercial and industrial lands, anticipate future needs for such lands, and provide enough appropriately-zoned land to meet the projected demand over a 20-year planning horizon. The City previously completed an analysis of its employment land base and determined that a deficit existed. To address the projected deficit of commercial and industrial land, the City has undertaken a multi-year process to expand the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) in the Gateway and South 28th Street areas. Expansion of the UGB is intended to provide sufficient employment-generating land area for the mandated 20-year planning horizon. The proposed redesignation and rezoning of the subject property from Low Density Residential to Medium and High Density Residential will not affect the amount of employment land within the City's inventory. Attachment 1 , Page 15 of 121 Goal 10 - Housing Applicant's Narrative: "Goal 10 requires that communities plan for and maintain an inventory of buildable residential land for needed housing units. The Administrative Rule for Statewide Planning Goal 10 (OAR 660 Division 8) states: `The mix and density of needed housing is determined in the housing needs projection. Sufficient buildable land shall be designated on the comprehensive plan map to satisfy housing needs by type and density range as determined in the housing needs projection. The local buildable lands inventory must document the amount of buildable land in each residential plan designation. ' The subject property is currently designated for Low Density Residential and the applicant wishes to redesignate the property as a mixture of Medium and High Density Residential. As mentioned in the applicant's response to SDC 5.14-105, there is a 72 acre surplus of Low Density Residential land. Yet, there is only a minor 18 acre surplus of Medium Density Residential and a 34 acre deficit of High Density Residential land." Finding 15: Goal 10 — Housing applies to the planning for — and provision of— needed housing types, including multi-family and manufactured housing. As noted by the applicant's narrative, staff and third-party analysis has determined that a surplus of LDR designated land exists within the City's land inventory. Redesignation and rezoning of the subject property would have an incremental impact to the City's residential land base; arguably, the impact would be limited to a recalculation of surplus versus deficit levels for each of the Low, Medium, and High Density Residential categories. Based on the applicant's submittal, the amount of surplus Low Density Residential land would be reduced by about 3.35 acres, and the amount of surplus Medium Density Residential land would increase by about 1.78 acres. The deficit of High Density Residential land would be reduced by about 1.57 acres. Staff observes that Findings 10 and 11 of the Residential Land Use and Housing Element identify a surplus of approximately 378 gross acres of LDR designation, a surplus of approximately 76 gross acres of MDR designation, and a deficit of approximately 28 gross acres of HDR designation. The Residential Land Use and Housing Element (Residential Finding 11, Page 11) goes on to state that the 28-acre deficit of HDR designation will be met through redevelopment in Glenwood. Staff is not certain where the applicant's numbers are derived from because no specific reference or citation is provided. The applicant's numbers depart from the calculated acreage of LDR, MDR and HDR in the adopted Residential Land Use and Housing Element, but still identify a surplus of LDR and MDR designation and a deficit of HDR designation. Finding 16: The proposed redesignation and rezoning would change the anticipated type of housing form on the property from single-family residential homes to duplex, four-plex, attached home, townhouse, or apartment units, or a combination of these types. A congregate care facility or group care home also could be constructed on the property under the proposed MDR and HDR zoning. Finding 17: The Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element classifies the subject site as a combination of vacant and developed residential land. Tax Lot 4600 is identified as vacant, and the remainder of the subject site (Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900 and 5000) is identified as developed. Therefore, nearly one-half of the subject site is classified for further residential development or redevelopment. Attachment 1 , Page 16 of 121 Finding 18: The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change would not affect other City ordinances, policies, plans, and studies adopted to comply with Goal 10 requirements. Therefore, this action has no adverse effect on the city's acknowledged compliance with Goal 10. Goal 11 —Public Facilities and Services Applicant's Narrative: "The subject site affected by the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is located inside the City limits. The existing level of public facilities and services is adequate to serve the needs of existing and future development. The amendment to the Metro Plan diagram does not significantly affect the planning or development of future public facilities or services. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal IL" Finding 19: Goal 11 — Public Facilities and Services addresses the efficient planning and provision of public services such as sewer, water, law enforcement, and fire protection. In accordance with OAR 660-011-0005(5), public facilities include water, sewer and transportation facilities, but do not include buildings, structures or equipment incidental to the operation of those facilities. The proposed redesignation and rezoning will not result in permitted uses that will have an adverse effect on the demand for public facilities and services provided to the subject property and adjacent properties. This area is already planned for a combination of commercial (south of the site) and a full spectrum of residential development, and the public facilities serving this area have been designed accordingly. Therefore, the City's continued acknowledged compliance with Goal 11 is not affected by this proposal. Goal 12 —Transportation Applicant's Narrative: "Goal 12 is implemented through the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule OAR 660-012-0000, et. seq. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan) provides the regional policy framework through which the TPR is implemented at the local level. The TPR (OAR 660-012-0060) states that when land use changes, including amendments to acknowledged comprehensive plans, significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, the local government shall put in place measures to assure that the allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards of the facility. The result of this plan amendment and zone change application would increase the trip generation potential of the subject parcels, so the applicant will address the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) to determine if there's a significant effect. The TPR looks [at] capacity and performance to be consistent with the adopted Transportation System Plan. A trip generation comparison and capacity/LOS [Level of Service] analysis is being performed at the nearby intersections at Srh Street at Q Street and Srh Street at Hayden Bridge Road. The analysis will compare the trip generation under the proposed designation with the potential trip generation under the existing designation to determine if there is an impact as defined in OAR 660- 012-0060 under the planning horizon analysis year of the current TSP. A TPR Analysis will be included in the application package." Finding 20: Staff has reviewed the applicant's Goal 12 analysis prepared by Branch Engineering Inc. and submitted under separate cover. Based on the findings and conclusions of the supplementary TPR analysis (Attachment 5), the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment and Zone Change will not have a significant adverse impact on the local transportation system. Staff concurs with the findings and conclusions of the applicant's Goal 12 analysis and no further investigation or analysis is required at this time. Therefore, the proposal will not affect the City's acknowledged compliance with Goal 12. Attachment 1 , Page 17 of 121 Goal 13 —Energy Conservation Applicant's Narrative: "Statewide Planning Goal 13 calls for land uses to be managed and controlled `so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles'. Goal 13 is directed at the development of local energy policies and provisions. It does not state requirements with respect to other types of land use decisions. To the extent that Goal 13 could be applied to the proposed amendment, the amendment is consistent with Goal 13. The property and proposed amendment are intended to support higher-density, clustered development so future residential housing can make efficient use of energy with direct and efficient access. Therefore, this proposal is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 13." Finding 21: Goal 13 — Energy Conservation states that "land and uses developed on the land shall be managed and controlled so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles". The proposed comprehensive plan amendment and rezoning does not affect the City's ordinances, policies, plans, or studies adopted to comply with Goal 13 requirements. Converting the 3.35 acre property from LDR to a mixture of MDR and HDR should not have an appreciable impact to energy consumption, and in fact may offer opportunities for increased energy efficiency through contemporary multi-family housing design. The developer will have an opportunity to incorporate suitable energy conservation measures into the future site development upon redesignation and rezoning of the subject property. The City's building codes comply with all Oregon State Building Codes Agency standards for energy efficiency in residential building design. The site's solar access is not compromised by surrounding development. The City's conservation measures applicable to storm water management, temporary storage, filtration and discharge would apply to multi-family residential uses developed on this site; therefore, this action has no effect on the city's acknowledged compliance with Goal 13. Goal 14 -Urbanization Applicant's Narrative: "The amendment does not affect the transition from rural to urban land use, as the subject property is within the City limits. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 14 does not apply." Finding 22: Goal 14 —Urbanization requires cities to estimate future growth rates and patterns, and to incorporate, plan, and zone enough land to meet the projected demands. The City already planned for residential land use on the subject property when completing its residential buildable land inventory. Consistent with provisions of Goal 14, the City is responding to a request from a property owner to redesignate and rezone the subject property from low density residential to a mixture of higher density residential uses. As noted in Finding 15 above, the proposed comprehensive plan amendment and zone change will be noted on the City's residential land inventory; similar reporting of inventory changes due to development will occur as required by ORS. However, the proposed redesignation and zone change does not affect the City's adopted ordinances, policies, plans, or studies adopted to satisfy the compliance requirements of Goal 14. Goal 15 —Willamette River Greenway Applicant's Narrative: "The subject property is not within the boundaries of the Willamette River Greenway. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 15 does not apply." Finding 23: Goal 15 —Willamette River Greenway establishes procedures for administering the 300 miles of greenway that borders the Willamette River, including portions that are inside the City Attachment 1, Page 18 of 121 limits and UGB of Springfield. The subject site is not within the adopted Willamette River Greenway Boundary area so this goal is not applicable; therefore, this action has no effect on the city's acknowledged compliance with Goal 15. Goals 16-19 Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean Resources Applicant's Narrative: "There are no coastal, ocean, estuarine, or beach and dune resources on or adjacent to the subject property. Therefore, these goals are not relevant and the proposed amendment will not affect compliance with Statewide Planning Goals 16 through 19." Finding 24: Goals 16-19 — Estuarine Resources; Coastal Shorelands; Beaches and Dunes; and Ocean Resources; these goals do not apply to land within the Willamette Valley, including Springfield. Therefore, in the same way that Goals 3 and 4 do not apply in Springfield, Goals 16-19 do not apply in Springfield or to land use regulations adopted in Springfield. Conclusion: Staff has concluded that the proposed Metro Plan diagram land use designation amendment from Low Density Residential to a combination of Medium and High Density Residential is consistent with all applicable statewide land use planning goals and the criteria for such action in SDC 5.14-135 (A): "The amendment shall be consistent with applicable Statewide Planning Goals." B. Plan Inconsistency 1. In those cases where the Metro Plan applies, adoption of the amendment shall not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. 2. In cases where Springfield Comprehensive Plan applies,the amendment shall be consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan. Applicant's Narrative: "The adopted Metro Plan is the principal document that creates a framework for land use policy within the City of Springfield. The adopted Zoning Map implements the Metro Plan diagram and applicable refinement plans, which are amendments to the Metro Plan. Since the subject property is within an adopted Refinement Plan area, the Q Street Refinement Plan is the prevailing refinement plan for the subject property. When Metro Plan diagram amendments are approved, the applicable refinement plan diagram is also automatically amended. The proposed Metro Plan amendment does not make the Metro Plan internally [in/consistent. It does not affect any Metro Plan policies or text. The proposed amendment to the Metro Plan diagram also reduces the oversupply of Low Density Residential land and while slightly increasing the existing surplus of Medium Density Residential land, will decrease the deficit of High Density Residential land. Moreover, the Q Street Refinement Plan will not be made inconsistent through this amendment. The Q Street Refinement Plan will be amended automatically in conjunction with the Metro Plan amendment. There are no conflicts created by either of the proposed amendments to the residential land inventory, needed employment land inventory, nor any other land use elements of the Metro Plan or Q Street Refinement Plan. The City of Springfield also previously adopted the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. As previously mentioned in this written statement, 824 buildable acres of land are zoned Low Density Residential. This equates to 60% of Springfield's residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, which provides only 4%of the City's residential development capacity. To accommodate expected population growth, Attachment 1, Page 19 of 121 Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units. While there is a total surplus of residential land, which includes a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land, there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Therefore, the proposed rezoning will not have an adverse impact on available Low Density Residential land within the urban growth boundary. The criteria in SDC 5.14-135.8 is met. Based on the information contained in this written statement, the applicant believes that the requested Metro Plan amendment can be approved." Finding 25: The adopted Metro Plan is the principal policy document that creates the broad framework for land use planning within the City of Springfield. The City's adopted Zoning Map implements the zoning designations of the Metro Plan diagram and localized Refinement Plans, which are adopted amendments to the Metro Plan. The subject property is within an adopted Refinement Plan area, the Q Street Refinement Plan, but as noted in Finding #4, adoption of Springfield Ordinance 96268 included the new Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element, the policies and implementation actions of which replaced the goals, objectives and policies of the Metro Plan's Residential Land Use and Housing Element. This relationship therefore requires the proposed amendment to be consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan, the prevailing Comprehensive Plan residential and land use policies for the site. Inasmuch as Ordinance 46268 identified the results of that adoption as replacing the corresponding elements of the Metro Plan, the amendment process for adopted plans and implementation ordinances has not changed. Therefore, the process and criteria for amending refinement plans is found in SDC 5.6-115 and as preempted in SDC 5.14-120 and 5.14-135. Finding 26: In accordance with Chapter IV —Metro Plan Review, Amendments, and Refinements, the City's Comprehensive Plan is not designed or intended to remain static and unyielding in its assignment of land use designations. To that end, provisions of Chapter IV, Policy 7.a, allow for property owners to initiate an amendment to the Metro Plan diagram to reflect a change in circumstances or need. The applicant is proposing to amend the Metro Plan designation for the subject property from LDR to a combination of MDR and HDR and to concurrently rezone 1.78 acres of the property to MDR and 1.57 acres of the property to HDR. There are no conflicts created by this proposed diagram amendment based on needed residential land inventories or needed employment land inventories. The development of this land with residential uses does not conflict with other land use elements in the Metro Plan including commercial, industrial, park and open space, or government and education. Adoption of the amendment to the Plan diagram will not result in an internal inconsistency. Therefore, Criteria B.1 will have been met. Finding 27: The Residential Land and Housing Policies and Implementation Actions of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element apply to the subject site. In accordance with Policy H.3, the City shall "support community-wide, district-wide and neighborhood-specific livability and redevelopment objectives and regional land use planning and transportation planning policies by locating higher density residential development and increasing the density of development near employment or commercial services, within transportation-efficient Mixed-Use Nodal Development centers and along corridors served by frequent transit service." Finding 28: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.6, the City shall "continue to seek ways to reduce development impediments to more efficient utilization of the residential land supply inside the UGB..." Finding 29: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.7, the City shall "continue to develop and update regulatory options and incentives to encourage and facilitate Attachment 1, Page 20 of 121 development of more attached and clustered single-family housing types in the low density and medium density districts." Finding 30: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.10, "through the updating and development of each neighborhood refinement plan, district plan or specific area plan, amend land use plans to increase development opportunities for qualify affordable housing in locations served by existing and planned frequent transit service that provides access to employment center, shopping, health care, civic, recreational and cultural services." Finding 31: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.11, the City shall "continue to seek ways to update development standards to introduce a variety of housing options for all income levels in both existing neighborhoods and new residential areas that match the changing demographics and lifestyles of Springfield residents." Finding 32: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.12, the City shall "continue to designate land to provide a mix of choices (eg. location, accessibility, housing types, and urban and suburban neighborhood character) through the refinement plan update process and through review of developer-initiated master plans." Finding 33: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.13, the City shall "promote housing development and affordability in coordination with transit plans and in proximity to transit stations." Finding 34: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.14, the City shall "continue to update existing neighborhood refinement plan policies and to prepare new plans that emphasize the enhancement of residential neighborhood identity, improved walkability and safety, and improved convenient access to neighborhood services, parks, schools, and employment opportunities." Finding 35: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.15, the City shall "update residential development standards to enhance the quality and affordability of neighborhood infill development (eg. partitions, duplex developments, transitional neighborhoods, rehab housing, accessory dwelling units) and multi-family development. Finding 36: In accordance with Residential Land Use and Housing Element Policy H.16, "as directed by the City Council in 2009, [the City shall] conduct analysis to implement `Heritage LDR' development standards to address Springfield's different historical development patterns/neighborhood scale and form, rather than a `one-size-fits-all' approach when updating City development standards." Finding 37: While the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element is the prevailing Comprehensive Plan for the site, the residential land use policies of the Q Street Refinement Plan also pertain to the proposed development. In accordance with Residential Criteria for Plan Designations 42, the Medium Density Residential plan designation shall be applied where the following circumstances predominate: a) areas that are primarily developed as high quality Medium Density Residential; b) areas that are designated Medium Density Residential, or adjacent to Medium Density Residential on the Metro Plan diagram; Attachment 1 , Page 21 of 121 c) areas that could serve as a buffer between Low Density Residential and Community Commercial; d) areas that are within one-half mile of a transit transfer station. Finding 38: In accordance with Residential Criteria for Plan Designations 43 of the Q Street Refinement Plan, the High Density Residential plan designation shall be applied where the following circumstances predominate: a) areas that are primarily developed as high quality High Density Residential; b) areas that are designated High Density Residential, or are adjacent to High Density Residential, on the Metro Plan diagram; c) areas that are within one-half mile of a transit transfer station; d) areas that are within one-half mile of large Community Commercial centers; e) areas which can meet the solar setback requirements and other Development Code standards; f) areas that are within one quarter mile of an arterial or collector street. Finding 39: Staff observes that the subject property already meets or could meet some of the above- listed criteria for Medium and High Density Residential plan designation as follows: there is existing Medium and High Density Residential designated land on the west side of 5th Street across from the subject site; the property abuts a large Community Commercial site (Fred Meyer store) to the south; the property could serve as a buffer and transitional zone between the Fred Meyer commercial site and existing single family homes along 7th Street and T Street; the property is less than 500 feet from an existing Lane Transit District park and ride station located in the Fred Meyer parking lot and a transit stop on the east side of 5th Street; the property is sufficiently large to meet the solar setback requirements of SDC 3.2-225; and the property has frontage on 5th Street, which is classified as a major collector street. Based on the foregoing, the proposal is largely consistent with the policy direction provide by the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan Residential Land Use and Housing Element and provisions of the adopted Q Street Refinement Plan for Medium and High Density Residential plan designation. Conclusion and Recommendation Based on the applicant's narrative, the findings above, testimony submitted prior to and at the public hearing meeting on May 15, 2017, and the criteria of SDC 5.14-135 for approving amendments to the Metro Plan, staff finds the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment, concurrent Q Street Refinement Plan amendment, and zone change from LDR to a combination of MDR and HDR is consistent with these criteria. For these reasons, staff recommends that the City Council gives first reading to the adopting Ordinance (Attachment 7). Attachment 1 , Page 22 of 121 Staff Report and Findings Springfield City Council Zone Change Request Meeting Date: May 15,2017 Case Number: TYP317-00004 Applicant: Rick Satre, Schirmer Satre Group, on behalf of CMC Development LLC Property Owner: CMC Development LLC Site: East side of 5th Street between Q Street and T Street; properties addressed as 1975 — 1995 5th Street and includes one vacant, non-addressed parcel (Assessor's Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600 — 5000) Request Rezone Tax Lots 4600 and 5600 from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR), and rezone Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800 and 4900 from LDR to High Density Residential (HDR). Site Information/Background The application was initiated and accepted as complete on February 3, 2017, and the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on the matter of the Zone Change request on April 4, 2017. The Planning Commission conducted deliberations on April 18, 2017 and unanimously adopted a recommendation of support for the proposed Zone Change with one amendment: Tax Lot 4601 is recommended to be rezoned to MDR instead of HDR as originally proposed by the applicant(Attachment 8). The applications are now scheduled for a public hearing before the City Council on May 15, 2017. The Zone Change request is being processed concurrently with a Metro Plan Diagram amendment submitted under separate cover, Case TYP417-00002. The City Council will be reviewing both applications at a public hearing meeting scheduled for May 15, 2017. The property that is subject of the Zone Change request is comprised of six contiguous parcels totaling approximately 3.35 acres and containing five existing single-family homes. The site has a rectangular configuration and is zoned and designated LDR in accordance with the Metro Plan and Q Street Refinement Plan diagrams and the Springfield Zoning Map. The site abuts 5th Street along the western boundary, the existing Fred Meyer store and parking lot along the southern boundary, and existing single family homes along the eastern and northern boundary. The applicant is proposing the zone change from LDR to a combination of MDR (1.57 acres) and HDR (1.78 acres) to facilitate future redevelopment of the property with higher-density housing forms. Notification and Written Comments In accordance with the Oregon Administrative Rules (OARS) 660-018-0020, prior to adopting a change to an acknowledged comprehensive plan or land use regulation, local governments are required to notify the state Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD) at least 35 days prior to the first evidentiary hearing. A Notice of Proposed Amendment was transmitted to the DLCD on February 28, 2017,which is 35 days prior to the Planning Commission public hearing on the matter. In accordance with SDC 5.2-110.13, Type III quasi-judicial land use decisions require mailed notification as well as notice in a newspaper of general circulation. Notification of the April 4, 2017 Planning Commission Attachment 1, Page 23 of 121 public hearing was mailed to adjacent property owners and residents on March 1, 2017 and published in the legal notices section of The Register Guard on March 15, 2017. Staff mailed a second notification of the City Council public hearing on April 19, 2017 to adjacent residents and property owners, and persons providing written testimony to the record up to April 18, 2017. Additionally, a legal notice of the City Council public hearing was published in The Register Guard on May 8, 2017. Staff posted a notice of the May 15, 2017 public hearing on the subject property, in the lobby of City Hall, on the Development & Public Works office digital display, and on the City's webpage. Over the course of the public notification process, staff responded to numerous phone calls, front counter inquiries, and requests for additional information regarding the proposal. At the time of writing, 22written comments, including three neighborhood petitions, have been received from nearby property owners and residents opposing the proposal. Six people spoke in opposition to the proposal at the Planning Commission public hearing on April 4, 2017. The written comments submitted during the public notification period are included as Attachment 6 to the AIS. Staff Response: The written comments submitted by adjacent property owners and residents have several common elements of concern about the proposed rezoning, including: increased allowable building heights, shading of backyards, incompatibility with existing single family housing in the neighborhood, and increased traffic and noise. Staff advises that the proposed zone change could allow for a variety of larger and more intensive housing forms to be constructed on the property. However, the developer has not provided any specific type or configuration of proposed housing units yet, nor is this specifically required at this point. Any future development would be subject to SDC 3.2-200, including building height limitations for properties to the south or west of existing single family homes, multi-unit development standards that provide for increased building setbacks from perimeter property lines, and provision of site landscaping and common outdoor amenity space for multi-family developments. The applicant has submitted a supplementary Transportation Planning Rule Analysis for the project (Attachment 5) that demonstrates the project will not have a significant adverse impact on the public street system. Additional discussion about the verbal and written testimony submitted into the record of the proceedings for Cases TYP417-00002 and TYP317-00004, and the staff response, is found in the staff report for the proposed Metro Plan Diagram amendment(Attachment 1)incorporated herein by reference. Criteria of Approval Section 5.22-100 of the Springfield Development Code (SDC) contains the criteria of approval for the decision maker to utilize during review of Zoning Map amendment requests. The Criteria of Zoning Map amendment approval criteria are: SDC 5.22-115 CRITERIA C. Zoning Map amendment criteria of approval: 1. Consistency with applicable Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan diagram; 2. Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans;and 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. 4. Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram amendment shall: Attachment 1, Page 24 of 121 a. Meet the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100; and b. Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060, where applicable. Proposed Findings In Support of Zone Chante Approval Criterion: Zoning Map amendment criteria of approval: 1. Consistency with applicable Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan diagram; Applicant's Narrative: "The Zoning Map amendment is consistent with the Metro Plan policies and diagram. It does not amend any Metro Plan policies or text. The zoning Map amendment is submitted concurrently with a Metro Plan amendment. The following Metro Plan policies support the proposed zone change: • Metro Plan Policy 1 — The UGB and sequential development shall continue to be implemented as an essential means to achieve compact urban growth. The provision of all urban services shall be concentrated inside the UGB. The Metro Plan policies define compact growth as `the filling in of vacant and underutilized lands in the UGB'. The parcels affected by this application are currently within the[Springfield]portion of the Urban Growth Boundary (UGB) and are within the city limits of [Springfield]. The proposed rezoning is in compliance with the acknowledged comprehensive plan, implementing ordinances, and future development will have access to urban facilities and services. As such, the subject site provides for compact urban growth and essential services. • Metro Plan Policy A.1 — Encourage the consolidation of residentially zoned parcels to facilitate more options for development and redevelopment of such parcels. The proposed rezoning will permit more options for development and ensure subsequent development is clustered together. Through rezoning the six parcels as a mixture of high and medium density residential, the subject site is able to balance the need to accommodate greater density with the need to appropriately transition from the single family neighborhoods to the north and east to high density on the subject site and more intense commercial zoning to the south. • Metro Plan Policy A.3 — Provide an adequate supply of buildable residential land within the UGB for the 20-year planning period at the time of Periodic Review. As mentioned in the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment application, 824 buildable acres of land within the Springfield UGB are zoned Low Density Residential. This equates to 60% of Springfield's residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, which provides only 4% of the City's residential development capacity. To accommodate expected population growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units. While there is a total surplus of Low Density Residential land, there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Attachment 1 , Page 25 of 121 • Metro Plan Policy A.4 — Use annexation, provision of adequate public facilities and services, rezoning, redevelopment and infill to meet the 20-year projected housing demand. See response to Metro Plan Policy A.3 (above). • Metro Plan Policy A.7 — Endeavor to provide key urban services and facilities required to maintain a five-year supply of serviceable, buildable residential land. The site is located inside the UGB and subsequent development will have access to urban facilities and services. • Metro Plan Policy A.9 — Establish density ranges in local zoning and development regulations that are consistent with the broad categories of this plan. The proposed rezoning will result in development that meets the broad density requirements of the Metro Plan. • Metro Plan Policy A.10 — Promote higher residential density inside the UGB that utilizes existing infrastructure, improves the efficiency of public services and facilities, and conserves rural resource lands outside the UGB. As previously mentioned, the rezoning will result in higher density development than what is allowed on the current low density residential zoning. In this manner, a higher number of residents will use existing infrastructure. This creates more efficient use of public services and facilities, as a greater number of people are living in proximity to existing facility. Moreover, rural resource lands are conserved, as more units are provided within the UGB. • Metro Plan Policy A.11 — Generally locate higher density residential development near employment or commercial services, in proximity to major transportation systems or within transportation-efficient nodes. The proposed rezoning will locate medium and high density residential development near Q Street, 5th Street and Pioneer Parkway, all of which are key corridors in the City of Springfield. The subject site is also located near parks, schools, and services and amenities. It is also located near an EmX line (Pioneer Parkway) and both Q Street and 5th Street have transit service. It is an ideal location to provide access and opportunities to commercial services, education, employment, and major transportation systems. • Metro Plan Policy A.12 — Coordinate higher density residential development with the provision of adequate infrastructure and services, open space, and other urban amenities. As mentioned in the response to Metro Plan Policy A.10 (above), the proposed rezoning will be coordinated with ensuring adequate infrastructure and services are provided to the subject site. Open space will be provided through the requirements found throughout the Springfield Development Code. Attachment 1, Page 26 of 121 • Metro Plan Policy A.13 — 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. The proposed zoning mix provides for lots that abut single family homes to be zoned medium density residential (Tax Lots 4600 and 5000), so there is an effective and compatible transition between densities. In short, the lots proposed to be zoned medium density residential act as a `buffer' between the lots proposed as high density residential and adjacent single family homes. The lots proposed to be rezoned high density residential (Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800, and 4900) abut Fred Meyer and 5th Street, which is an ideal location for higher density housing, as it is not adjacent to nearby single family housing. Furthermore, the proposed zoning allows for effective infill development that maximizes land utility. • Metro Plan Policy A.17 — Provide opportunities for a full range of choice in housing type, density, size, cost, and location. As the proposed rezoning includes both medium and high density designations on the same subject site, there are many opportunities provided to ensure a full range of housing choices. • Metro Plan Policy A.19 — Encourage residential development in or near downtown core areas in both cities. The subject site is a mile away from downtown Springfield and is located a half-mile from a key transit corridor. • Metro Plan Policy A.23 — Reduce impacts of higher density residential and mixed-use development on surrounding uses by considering site, landscape, and architectural design standards or guidelines in local zoning and development regulations. The proposed rezoning is compatible with surrounding uses and therefore, shall have minimal impact on adjacent commercial and residential uses. As the proposal calls for a mix of medium and high density residential to best transition to and from adjacent uses, the suggested zoning is compatible with this policy. Therefore, the Metro Plan diagram will not be inconsistent with the zoning map amendment, should both amendments be approved." Finding l: Metro Plan Chapter IV, Policy 7.a states: "A property owner may initiate a [Type I Metro Plan diagram] amendment for property they own at any time. Owner initiated amendments are subject to the limitations for such amendments set out in the development code of the home city." Finding 2: The property owner initiated a concurrent Metro Plan Diagram amendment in accordance with provisions of SDC 5.14-100 (Case TYP417-00002). Upon adoption of the amending Ordinance, the Metro Plan Diagram would be amended and the requested zone change from LDR to a combination of MDR and HDR would be consistent with the provisions of the Attachment 1, Page 27 of 121 adopted Comprehensive Plan. Prior or concurrent amendment of the Metro Plan Diagram will be required for the subject zone change request to be approved. Finding 3: The proposed zone change is consistent with provisions of the Metro Plan whereby zoning can be monitored and adjusted as necessary to meet current urban land use demands. The requested change from LDR to MDR and HDR would facilitate the future review and approval of multi-family housing on the site. Finding 4: The subject site abuts properties that are zoned and designated LDR along the northern and eastern boundaries. The site is proximate to properties that are zoned and designated for medium and high density residential development on the opposite side of 5th Street to the west and southwest of the subject property. The site also abuts Community Commercial zoning along the southern boundary. As such, the proposed Zone Change is consistent with nearby zoning and the zone change is compatible with existing uses in the vicinity. The proposed zoning would create a transitional, higher-density residential area between the Fred Meyer site and existing single-family homes along T Street and 7th Street. Recommended Condition of Approval: Prior to or concurrent with approval of the Zone Change request, the Metro Plan Diagram shall be amended as initiated by Planning Action TYP417-00002. 2. Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans; Applicant's Narrative: "As an amendment to the Metro Plan automatically amends the applicable refinement plan, in this case, the Q Street Refinement Plan, the proposed Zoning Map amendment is consistent with the applicable refinement plan. The City of Springfield also previously adopted the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. As specified in the written statement submitted along with the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment application, 824 buildable acres of land are zoned Low Density Residential. This equates to 60% of Springfield's residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, which provides only 4% of the City's residential development capacity. To accommodate expected population growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units. While there is a total surplus of Low Density Residential land, which includes a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land, there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Therefore, the proposed rezoning will not have an adverse impact on available Low Density Residential land within the urban growth boundary." Finding 5: The property lies within the adopted Q Street Refinement Plan area of Springfield. Therefore, the Residential land use policies of the Q Street Refinement Plan apply to the subject site. In accordance with Residential Policy #1, "the City shall actively participate in efforts to maintain and enhance existing residential neighborhoods and attract compatible medium and high density residential developments that would enhance and benefit the Q Street area. This shall include requiring development to be large enough in size to insure efficient land use." In accordance with Residential Policy #5, "provide for buffering of multiple family development from single family development through the Site Plan Review process." Residential Policy #6 states: "minimize conflicts between residentially-designated land and commercial uses through the Site Plan Review process." Attachment 1 , Page 28 of 121 Finding 6: Staff observes that, in aggregate, the subject property is sufficiently large to represent a viable multi-family development area. Upon rezoning of the subject property, should this occur, the developer would be required to undertake a Site Plan Review for any type of development on the property. Under the current zoning and property configuration, the developer would only require a Building Permit for constructing, reconstructing or remodeling a single-family home. Finding 7: The City previously adopted the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. The subject property was identified as low density residential inventory in the 2030 Plan because of its LDR zoning. A portion of the property (Tax Lot 4600) is identified as vacant and potentially developable or redevelopable on the inventory map. Finding 8: The Residential Land Use and Housing Element (Table 6-7) identifies approximately 378 acres of surplus LDR designated land within the City's buildable land inventory. A recent Metro Plan diagram amendment and Zone Change for property on Highbanks Road (Cases TYP416-00003 and TYP316-00005) reduced this amount by approximately 8 acres. Upon redesignation and rezoning of the subject site, should this occur, a surplus of about 366.6 acres of LDR designated land would remain. The proposed rezoning would slightly increase the amount of surplus MDR zoned land and slightly reduce the deficit of HDR zoned land as identified in the City's inventory. Therefore, the proposed rezoning will not have a significant adverse impact on available LDR, MDR, or HDR designated land within the City's inventory. 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. Applicant's Narrative: "Finally, the subject site has adequate public facilities, services, and transportation network to support the proposed use. Stormwater and wastewater service are both available to the site through the system in 5th Street. There is also sufficient water and electric system capacity to serve the site. Moreover, the subject site fronts onto 5th Street, which is a minor arterial with bike lanes, sidewalks, and a center turn lane. There is also a LTD Park and Ride location in 5th Street in the Fred Meyer parking lot, immediately south of the subject property. Transit service is also provided by LTD via Route 17, which provides service to and from Springfield station." Finding 9: The property requested for Zone Change has frontage on 5th Street along the western boundary, which is classified as a major collector street. Along the property frontage, 5th Street is a fully developed urban collector street with one vehicle travel lane and bicycle lane in each direction and a bi-directional center turn lane. The paved street has lane striping, street lighting, street trees, sidewalks and piped stormwater management facilities. A full suite of public utilities and services are available on the perimeter of the subject property. Future development of the site with Medium and High Density Residential uses will be subject to the land use approval process outlined in Section 5.17-100 of the City's Development Code. In addition, the applicant's submittal for Metro Plan diagram amendment is supplemented with findings addressing the requirements of the Transportation Planning Rule and is included as Attachment 5 to the packet. 4. Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram amendment shall: a. Meet the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100; and b. Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060,where applicable. Attachment 1 , Page 29 of 121 Applicant's Narrative: "Regarding the criteria contained in SDC 5.22-115.C.4.a and SDC 5.22-115.C.4.b, compliance with the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100 is established in the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment. Compliance with OAR 660-012-0060 is also established in the written statement for the concurrent Metro Plan amendment. The change from Low Density Residential to Medium and High Density Residential...would increase the trip generation potential of the subject parcels, so the applicant will address the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR) to determine if there's a significant effect. The TPR looks [at] capacity and performance to be consistent with the adopted Transportation System Plan. A trip generation comparison and capacity/LOS[Level of Service] analysis is being performed at the nearby intersections at 5th Street at Q Street and 5th Street at Hayden Bridge Road. The analysis will compare the trip generation under the proposed designation with the potential trip generation under the existing designation to determine if there is an impact as defined in OAR 660-012-0060 under the planning horizon analysis year of the current TSP. A TPR Analysis will be included in the application package. Therefore, SDC 5.22-115 is met." Finding 10: The applicant has submitted a concurrent Metro Plan Diagram amendment application (Case TYP417-00002) under separate cover. The applicant's submittal materials, narrative, and staff findings and recommendations demonstrate compliance with the Metro Plan amendment provisions of Chapter IV of the Metro Plan and SDC 5.14-135. Finding 11: The requested Zone Change is being undertaken as a site-specific change in compliance with provisions of the adopted Metro Plan and the City's Development Code. The applicant has initiated an amendment to the Metro Plan Diagram to change the designation from LDR to MDR and HDR under separate cover (Case TYP417-00002). Oregon Administrative Rules (OAR) 660-012-0060 requires that, "if an amendment to a functional plan, an acknowledged comprehensive plan, or a land use regulation (including a zoning map), would significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, then the local government must put in place measures" to mitigate the impact, as defined in OAR 660-012-0060(2). Staff has reviewed the applicant's TPR Analysis (Attachment 5) and concurs with the summary and conclusion, which concluded that the proposed plan amendment and zone change from LDR to MDR and HDR will not significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility. Conclusion: Based on the above-listed criteria, staff has determined that the criteria have been met and recommends support for the request. Conditions of Approval SDC Section 5.22-120 allows for the Approval Authority to attach conditions of approval to a Zone Change request to ensure the application fully meets the criteria of approval. The specific language from the code section is cited below: 5.22-120 CONDITIONS The Approval Authority may attach conditions as may be reasonably necessary in order to allow the Zoning Map amendment to be granted. Staff advises that the Zone Change request was initiated in accordance with provisions of the City's Development Code. The proposal was found to be consistent with the criteria of approval; however, because the applicant has initiated a concurrent Metro Plan Diagram amendment (Case TYP417-00002), Attachment 1, Page 30 of 121 the comprehensive plan amendment will need to be completed prior to or concurrent with approval of the Zone Change. The City Council is reviewing both land use applications at a public hearing meeting on May 15, 2017. Staff recommends the following condition of approval: Recommended Condition of Approval: Prior to or concurrent with approval of the Zone Change request, the Metro Plan Diagram shall be amended as initiated by Planning Action TYP417-00002. The City Council may choose to apply other conditions of approval as necessary to comply with the Zone Change criteria or as further demonstrated by testimony and evidence entered into the record of the hearing. Additional Approvals The subject application will facilitate review of future land use applications for the affected property. Any future site development, including but not limited to grading, paving, or new construction on the property, will be subject to the provisions of the SDC for the applicable zoning district. Attachment 1 , Page 31 of 121 City of Springfield Development Services Department SPRINGFIELD 225 Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 Phone: (541)726-3753 Fax: (541)726-3689 Metro Plan Amendment Application, Type IV Type of Plan Amendment(Check One) ❑ Type I: is a non-site specific amendment of the Plan. Type II: changes the Plan diagram; or is a site-specific Plan text amendment. Property Subject to the Amendment(if applicable) Tax Assessor Map 17-03-26-24 Tax Lot(s)4600,460114700,4800,4900, 4900 Street Address Varies Acres 3.35 Metro Plan Designation LDR Refinement Plan Designation LDR Description of Proposed Amendment(Attach additional sheets if needed) Amend existing Metro Plan designation from Low Density Residential to a mixture of Medium and High Density Residential. Applicant/Owner Information Printed Name of Applicant Rick Sates, ASLA Phone:541 6864540 Applicant Signature Date v Mailing Address 375 W 4 h;A enue, Suite 201, Eugene, OR 97401 v J 0�, Property Owner Signature Z= _Ac Date aoil Mailing Address CMC Development, PO BOX 117, Walterville, OR 97489 For Office Use Only: Case No. Received By Date Accepted as Complete Attachment 1, Page 32 of 121 THE APPLICATION PACKET A COMPLETE APPLICATION CONSISTS OF: 1. A complete application page(all of the sections on the opposite side of this page must be filled out). 2. A statement containing Findings of Fact addressing the Criteria of Approval found in Springfield Development Code(SDC) 7.070(3). In order for the Planning Commission and the City Council to consider an amendment of a plan text and/or diagram,there must be Findings of Fact submitted by the applicant. The Findings of Fact must show reason for the request consistent with the Criteria of Approval(shown below). If insufficient or unclear information is submitted by the applicant,the request may be denied or delayed. The application must include requirements for addressing specific statewide goals that the Oregon legislature has said must be part of the amendment analysis. In particular, Statewide Planning Goal 9 Economy and Goal 10 Housing must be addressed for impact on buildable lands inventories, and a Goal 12 Transportation analysis must address criteria contained in OAR 660-012-060(1) and (2) of the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR). Goals 9, 10 and 12 are three of several "Applicable State-Wide Planning Goals" that must be specifically addressed in criteria(a) of the Springl7eld Development Code (SDC) 7.070(3). These specific items must be included in the application submittal to be considered a complete application. In reaching a decision on these actions,the Planning Commission and the City Council shall adopt findings which demonstrate conformance to the following Criteria of Approval(SDC 7.070(3)): a)The amendment must be consistent with the relevant statewide planning goals adopted by the Land Conservation and Development Commission; and b) Adoption of the amendment must not make the Metro Plan internally inconsistent. 3. A map to scale depicting the existing and proposed diagram change. (If applicable) 4. The application fee. Refer to the Development Code Fee Schedule for the appropriate fee. A copy of the Fee Schedule is available at the Development Services Department. Revised 1/03 Attachment 1 , Page 33 of 121 January 31, 2017 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC —5T" STREET PROPERTY Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 WRITTEN STATEMENT In accordance with SDC 5.14-100 through SDC 5.14-145, Metro Plan Amendments, the applicant, CMC Development LLC, is requesting that the City of Springfield review this Metro Plan Amendment request for Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 of Assessor's Map 17-03-26-24. The applicant requests the City determine that the proposal complies with the approval criteria and approve this application. To aid Springfield staff in their review, the following information is provided. Background Local long-range land use is governed by the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan). Often supplemented with more specific refinement plans and/or neighborhood plans, the Metro Plan is then followed by site-specific zoning. Sometimes, zoning is comprised of base zoning and overlay zones. In this instance, the Q Street Refinement Plan is the applicable refinement plan and the Drinking Water Protection Overlay Zone is the applicable overlay zone for the subject property. Further information regarding individual tax lots is available in the table below. Map and Tax Metro Plan Q Street Zoning(Existing) Zoning(Proposed) Lot Designation Refinement Plan 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential Base: Medium Density Residential 4600 Residential I Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ = Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential Base: High Density Residential 4601 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential Base: High Density Residential 4700 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential Base: High Density Residential 4800 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential Base: High Density Residential 4900 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential Base: Medium Density Residential 5000 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Physical Setting The site is located north of Q Street in north-central Springfield. It is comprised of six tax lots (Map 17-03- 26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000) and is approximately 3.35 acres in size. The site abuts 5t" Street to the west, with single family housing to the north and east and a commercial shopping center to the south. Development Objective The development objective is to change the Metro Plan designation and base zoning of the six tax lots from Low Density Residential (LDR) to a mix of Medium Density Residential (MDR) and High Density Residential (HDR). See the table above for further detail. Therefore, the applicant is submitting concurrent Metro Plan Amendment and Zone Change applications for the subject property. W, + LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS + 375 West 4th,Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 SCHIRMER PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS Phone:541.686.4540 'Fax..541.686.4577i - www.schirmersatre.com Attachment 1, Page 34 of 121 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC—5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 2 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24,Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 COMPLIANCE WITH METRO PLAN AMENDMENT REQUIREMENTS Applicable sections of the code are in bold italics, followed by proposed findings of fact in normal text. SDC 5.14-105 Purpose. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan)is a long-range public policy document that establishes the broad framework upon which Springfield, Eugene and Lane County make coordinated land use decisions. While the Metro Plan is Springfield's acknowledged land use policy document, it may require update or amendment in response to changes in the law or circumstances of importance to the community. Additionally, the Metro Plan may be augmented and implemented by more detailed plans and regulatory measures. Response:There is a change in circumstances that makes this requested change to the Metro Plan diagram necessary. Between 2010 and 2030, Springfield can expect to see a 27% increase of residents living within its city limits (RLS, ECONorthwest, pg. ii). Currently, 824 buildable acres of land are zoned Low Density Residential, which equates to 60% of Springfield's residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, providing 4% of the City's residential development capacity. To accommodate growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units to accommodate population growth. While there is a total surplus of residential land, there is a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land. But there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Therefore, circumstances have indeed changed greatly since the subject site was designated at Low Density Residential in the Metro Plan. SDC 5.14-110 Review. A. A Development Issues Meeting is encouraged for citizen initiated amendment applications. B. Metro Plan amendments are reviewed under Type IV procedures as specified in Section 5.1-140. C. A special review, and if appropriate, Metro Plan amendment, shall be initiated if changes in the Metro Plan basic assumptions 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. Response:A Development Issues Meeting was held December 15, 2016 to discuss potential ideas and issues related to the subject site. As referenced in the applicant's response in SDC 5.14-105, the applicant is requesting to amend the Metro Plan based on a change in circumstances related to residential land supply that influences the basic assumptions that inform the Metro Plan diagram. SDC 5.14-115 Metro Plan Amendment Classifications. A proposed amendment to the metro Plan shall be classified as Type I, Type II or Type 111 depending on the number of governing bodies required to approve the decision. A. A Type I amendment requires approval by Springfield only: 1. Type 1 Diagram amendments include amendments to the Metro Plan Diagram for land inside Springfield's city limits. Response: The proposed amendment will be processed as a Type I decision, as it only requests an amendment to the Metro Plan Diagram for land inside Springfield's city limits. Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 •(541)686-4540•Fax(541)686-4577 Attachment 1, Page 35 of 121 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC—5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 3 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24,Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 SDC 5.14-120 Relationship to Refinement Plans, Special Area Studies or Functional Plan Amendments. A. In addition to a Metro Plan update, refinement studies may be undertaken for individual geographical areas and special purpose or functional elements, as determined appropriate by Springfield, Eugene or Lane County. B. All refinement and functional plans shall be consistent with the Metro Plan. Should inconsistencies occur, the Metro Plan is the prevailing policy document. C. When a Metro Plan amendment is enacted that requires an amendment to a refinement plan or functional plan map or diagram for consistency, the Metro Plan Diagram amendment automatically amends the diagram or map if no amendment to refinement plan or functional plan text is involved. Response: The development site is also subject to the Q Street Refinement Plan, which designates the property as Low Density Residential. Therefore, in accordance with SDC 5.14-120.C, the Q Street Refinement Plan diagram will be automatically amended in conjunction with the Metro Plan diagram. SDC 5.14-125 Initiation. Metro Plan amendments shall be initiated as follows: A. A Type 1 amendment may be initiated by Springfield at any time. A property owner may initiate an amendment for property they own at any time. Owner initiated amendments are subject to the limitations for such amendments set out in this Code (also see Subsection E)... E. Metro Plan updates shall be initiated no less frequently than during the state required Periodic Review of the Metro Plan, although Springfield, Eugene and Lane County may initiate an update of the Metro Plan at any time. Response: In accordance with SDC 5.14-125.A. this Type I Amendment to the Metro Plan diagram is being initiated by a property owner for a property they currently own. SDC 5.14-130 Approval Process. A. The initiating government body of any Type 1, Type 11 or Type 111 amendment shall notify all governing bodies of the intended amendment and the Type of amendment proposed within 20 days. If any governing body disagrees with the Type of proposed amendment, that governing body may refer the matter to the process specified in Subsections E. or F. as appropriate. B. For any Type 1, Type 11 or Type 111 amendment, a public hearing shall be set for the Springfield Planning Commission, and the Planning Commissions of Eugene and Lane County, as applicable, within 90 days. C. For Type 1, Type 11 and Type 111 amendments, the Springfield Planning Commission and the Planning Commissions of Eugene and Lane County, shall conduct a single or joint public hearing, as appropriate, and forward that record and their recommendations to the Springfield City Council and to their respective elected officials. The Springfield City Council and the participating elected officials shall also conduct a public hearing, as appropriate,prior to making a final decision... Response:The proposed Type I Amendment to the Metro Plan diagram complies with this standard and will be subject to public hearings and subsequent decisions conducted by the Springfield Planning Commission and the Springfield City Council. Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 •(541)686-4540•Fax(541)686-4577 Attachment 1, Page 36 of 121 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC—5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 4 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24,Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 SDC 5.14-135 Criteria. A Metro Plan amendment may be approved only if the Springfield City Council and other applicable governing body or bodies find that the proposal conforms to the following criteria: A. The amendment shall be consistent with applicable Statewide Planning Goals; B. Plan inconsistency: 1. In those cases where the Metro Plan applies, adoption of the amendment shall not make the Metro Plan internally consistent. 2. In cases where Springfield Comprehensive Plan applies, the amendment shall be consistent with the Springfield Comprehensive Plan. Response to SDC 5.14-135.A. The amendment is consistent with the following Statewide Planning Goals: 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. The City has acknowledged provisions for citizen involvement that ensure the opportunity for citizens to be involved in all phases of the planning process. Specifically, the Springfield Development Code includes a requirement that adequate notice of the proposed amendment and public hearings is provided prior to a decision being made. The process for adopting amendments is in accordance with Statewide Planning Goal 1, as it complies with the requirements of the State's citizen involvement provisions. This proposed Metro Plan amendment does not amend the citizen involvement program. Goal 2—Land Use Planning: To establish a land use 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. The Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan) is the policy tool that provides a basis for decision-making in the Eugene-Springfield area. The Metro Plan was acknowledged by the State in 1982 to be in compliance with statewide planning goals. These findings and record show that there is an adequate factual base for decisions to be made concerning the proposed amendment. Goal 2 requires plans be coordinated with the plans of affected governmental units and that opportunities be provided for review and comment by those units. To comply with the Goal 2 coordination requirement, the City will coordinate the review of the amendment with affected governmental units. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 2. Goal 3—Agricultural Land: To preserve and maintain agricultural lands. Goal 3 is not applicable to this amendment, as the subject property and proposed action is located within an acknowledged urban growth boundary and does not affect any agricultural plan designation or use. Goal 3 excludes lands inside an acknowledged urban growth boundary, Goal 3 is not relevant and the amendment does not affect the subject site's compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 3. Goal 4—Forest Land: To conserve forest lands. Goal 4 is not applicable as the subject property and proposed action does not affect any forest plan designation or use. Goal 4 does not apply within urban growth boundaries and, therefore, does not apply to the subject property nor affect the area's compliance with Statewide Planning Goal 4. Goal 5— Open Spaces, Scenic and Historic Areas, and Natural Resources: To conserve open space and protect natural and scenic resources. Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4`h Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 •(541)686-4540•Fax(541)686-4577 Attachment 1, Page 37 of 121 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC—5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 5 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24,Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 The subject property does not include a Goal 5 resource site. The proposed amendment does not create or amend a list of Goal 5 resources, does not amend a plan or code provision adopted to protect a significant Goal 5 resource or to address specific requirements of Goal 5, does not allow new uses that could be conflicting uses with Goal 5 resource sites, and does not amend the acknowledged Urban Growth Boundary. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 5 does not apply to this amendment. Goal 6—Air, Water and Land Resources Quality: To maintain and improve the quality of the air, water, and land resources of the state. Goal 6 addresses waste and process discharges from development and is aimed at protecting air, water, and land from impacts from those discharges. Nothing in the proposal, character of the site, or potential uses indicates a future development that would compromise air, water, and land resources. The proposal does not amend the metropolitan area's air, water quality, or land resource policies. The City can reasonably expect that future development of the site complies with applicable environmental laws. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 6. Goal 7—Areas Subject to Natural Disasters and Hazards: To protect life and property from natural disasters and hazards. Goal 7 requires that local government planning programs include provisions to protect people and property from natural hazards such as floods, landslides, earthquakes and related hazards, tsunamis, and wildfires. The subject property is not located within known areas of natural disasters or hazards. The subject property is outside the flood zone and is not subject to hazards normally associated with steep slopes, wildfires, or tsunamis. Other hazards, such as earthquakes and severe winter storms can be mitigated at the time of development based on accepted building codes and building techniques. Therefore, this amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 7. Goal 8—Recreational Needs: To satisfy the recreational needs of the citizens of the state and visitors and, where appropriate, to provide for the siting of necessary recreational facilities including destination resorts. Statewide Planning Goal 8 ensures the provision of recreational facilities to Oregon citizens and is primarily concerned with the provision of those facilities in non-urban areas of the state. There are no public or private recreational facilities on or adjacent to the subject property. Therefore, the proposed amendment will not impact the provision of public recreational facilities nor will they affect access to existing or future public recreational facilities. As such, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 8. Goal 9—Economic Development: To provide adequate opportunities throughout the state for a variety of economic activities vital to the health, welfare, and prosperity of Oregon's citizens. The proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment does not affect economic development, as it is not requesting to change the designation of the subject site to or from commercial. The amendment seeks to designate land currently identified as Low Density Residential to a mixture of Medium and High Density Residential (see table on pg. 1). Therefore, the proposed amendment will not impact economic development or commercial land supply in any way. The amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 9. Goal 10—Housing: To provide for the housing needs of the citizens of the state. Goal 10 requires that communities plan for and maintain an inventory of buildable residential land for needed housing units. The Administrative Rule for Statewide Planning Goal 10 (OAR 660 Division 8) states: Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4`h Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 •(541)686-4540•Fax(541)686-4577 Attachment 1, Page 38 of 121 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC—5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 6 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24,Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 "The mix and density of needed housing is determined in the housing needs projection. Sufficient buildable land shall be designated on the comprehensive plan map to satisfy housing needs by type and density range as determined in the housing needs projection. The local buildable lands inventory must document the amount of buildable land in each residential plan designation". The subject property is currently designated for Low Density Residential and the applicant wishes to redesignate the property as a mixture of Medium and High Density Residential (see table on pg.1). As mentioned in the applicant's response to SDC 5.14-105, there is a 72 acre surplus of Low Density Residential land. Yet, there is only a minor 18 acre surplus of Medium Density Residential and a 34 acre deficit of High Density Residential land. 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. The subject site affected by the proposed Metro Plan diagram amendment is located inside the City limits. The existing level of public facilities and services is adequate to serve the needs of existing and future development. The amendment to the Metro Plan diagram does not significantly affect the planning or development of future public facilities or services. Therefore, the amendment is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 11. Goal 12— Transportation: To provide and encourage a safe, convenient and economic transportation system. Goal 12 is implemented through the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR), as defined in Oregon Administrative Rule OAR 660-012-0000, et seq. The Eugene—Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan) provides the regional policy framework through which the TPR is implemented at the local level. The TPR (OAR 660-012-0060)states that when land use changes, including amendments to acknowledged comprehensive plans, significantly affect an existing or planned transportation facility, the local government shall put in place measures to assure that the allowed land uses are consistent with the identified function, capacity, and performance standards of the facility. The result of this plan amendment and zone change application would increase the trip generation potential of the subject parcels, so the applicant will address the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR)to determine if there's a significant effect. The TPR looks capacity and performance to be consistent with the adopted Transportation System Plan. A trip generation comparison and capacity/LOS analysis is being performed at the nearby intersections at 5th Street at Q Street and 5th Street at Hayden Bridge Road. The analysis will compare the trip generation under the proposed designation with the potential trip generation under the existing designation to determine if there is an impact as defined in OAR 660-012-0060 under the planning horizon analysis year of the current TSP. A TPR Analysis will be included in the application package. Goal 13—Energy Conversation: To conserve energy. Statewide Planning Goal 13 calls for land uses to be managed and controlled "so as to maximize the conservation of all forms of energy, based upon sound economic principles." Goal 13 is directed at the development of local energy policies and provisions. It does not state requirements with respect to other types of land use decisions. To the extent that Goal 13 could be applied to the proposed amendment, the amendment is consistent with Goal 13. The property and proposed amendment are intended to support higher-density, clustered development so future residential housing can make efficient use of energy with direct and efficient access. Therefore, this proposal is consistent with Statewide Planning Goal 13. Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 •(541)686-4540•Fax(541)686-4577 Attachment 1, Page 39 of 121 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC—5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 7 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24,Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 Goal 14— Urbanization: To provide for an orderly and efficient transition from rural to urban land use. The amendment does not affect the transition from rural to urban land use, as the subject property is within the City limits. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 14 does not apply. Goal 15— Willamette River Greenway: To protect, conserve, enhance and maintain the natural, scenic, historical, agricultural, economic and recreational qualities of lands along the Willamette River as the Willamette River Greenway. The subject property is not within the boundaries of the Willamette River Greenway. Therefore, Statewide Planning Goal 15 does not apply. Goal 16 through 19—Estuarine Resources, Coastal Shorelands, Beaches and Dunes, and Ocean Resources: There are no coastal, ocean, estuarine, or beach and dune resources on or adjacent to the subject property. Therefore, these goals are not relevant and the proposed amendment will not affect compliance with statewide planning Goals 16 through 19. This proposed Metro Plan Amendment meets the applicable Statewide Planning Goals. Response to SDC 5.14-135.B. The adopted Metro Plan is the principal document that creates a framework for land use policy within the City of Springfield. The adopted Zoning Map implements the Metro Plan diagram and applicable refinement plans, which are amendments to the Metro Plan. Since the subject property is within an adopted Refinement Plan area, the Q Street Refinement Plan is the prevailing refinement plan for the subject property. When Metro Plan diagram amendments are approved, the applicable refinement plan diagram is also automatically amended. The proposed Metro Plan amendment does not make the Metro Plan internally consistent. It does not affect any Metro Plan policies or text. The proposed amendment to the Metro Plan diagram also reduces the oversupply of Low Density Residential land and while slightly increasing the existing surplus of Medium Density Residential land, will decrease the deficit of High Density Residential land. Moreover, the Q Street Refinement Plan will not be made inconsistent through this amendment. The Q Street Refinement Plan will be amended automatically in conjunction with the Metro Plan amendment. There are no conflicts created by either of the proposed amendments to the residential land inventory, needed employment land inventory, nor any other land use elements of the Metro Plan or Q Street Refinement Plan. The City of Springfield also previously adopted the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. As previously mentioned in this written statement, 824 buildable acres of land are zoned Low Density Residential. This equates to 60% of Springfield's residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, which provides only 4% of the City's residential development capacity. To accommodate expected population growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units. While there is a total surplus of residential land, which includes a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land, there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Therefore, the proposed rezoning will not have an adverse impact on available Low Density Residential land within the urban growth boundary. The criteria in SDC 5.14-135.6. is met. Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4`h Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 •(541)686-4540•Fax(541)686-4577 Attachment 1, Page 40 of 121 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC—5TH STREET PROPERTY Page 8 of 8 Metro Plan Amendment Map 17-03-26-24,Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 January 31, 2017 IN CONCLUSION Based on the information contained in this written statement, the applicant believes that the requested Metro Plan amendment can be approved. If there are any questions regarding the above information, or other application materials, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (541) 686-4540 or ricka-schirmersatre.com. Sincerely, Richard M. Satre, AICP, ASLA, CSI, Principal Schirmer Satre Group Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 •(541)686-4540•Fax(541)686-4577 Attachment 1, Page 41 of 121 Attachment 1 November 28, 2016 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC 5T" STREET PROPERTY Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 Land Use Analysis The key to successful property development in Oregon is thorough research and analysis of prospective regulations and requirements. This is followed by the planning, design, and regulatory approval processes. Success comes by taking things one step at a time; each step providing clarity and focus for the next round of activity. The first step is research and analysis, where we identify land use, physical, and environmental requirements, as well as lay the groundwork for next steps. The results of our initial land use analysis is presented below. This analysis is based on public data and documents existing conditions and potentially applicable land use regulations. I. BACKGROUND A. Planning Context Local long-range land use is governed by + �• .w. a N;.., I the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area A �• - ;:e"�� �' A General Plan (Metro Plan)and is often =......_:� --� :•:,- t_. supplemented with a more specific x ..••••••. refinement plan and/or neighborhood plan. r A z • E z The Metro Plan and if applicable, refinement plan, is then followed by site- I specific zoning. Sometimes, zoning is ;F , comprised of base zoning and additional overlay zones. The Q Street Refinement Plan and the Drinking Water Protection 'Zg -- Overlay Zone are applicable to the subject property. .a M Excerpt Springfield Zoning Map 2016 Map and Tax Lot _ Metro Plan Q Street Refinement = Zoning Designation Plan 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential 4600 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential 4601 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03=26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential 4700Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ € Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential 4800 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential 4900 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential 5000 : Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection + LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS + 375 West 4th,Suite 201, Eugene,0R 97401 SCHIRMER PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS Phone:541.686.4540 Fax:541 Z86,4577 I _ www.schirmersatre.com SA IRE 1, Page 42 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 2 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 B. Physical Setting The site is located north of Q Street, in ° north-central Springfield. It is comprised of ` six tax lots (Map 17-03-26-24, tax lots 4600, a_ k� 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000)and is �� j"-M approximately 3.35 acres in size. The site tic " abuts 5th Street to the west, with single _ t�- r '° family housing to the north and east and a commercial shopping center to the south. ' 14 - �.• r 41014-� .74 ' Subject Property Google Earth May 29,2016 C. Development Objective The development objective is to change the designation and zoning of the six tax lots from Low Density Residential (LDR)to Medium Density Residential (MDR) and/or High Density Residential (HDR). The potential zoning will be discussed more in-depth at a Development Issues Meeting (DIM). II. LAND USE ANALYSIS A. Regulatory Review The following plans, documents and database sources were included in this review: 1. Planning and Zoning. a. Aerial Photographs (Google Earth and Bing Maps). b. Regional Land Information Database (RLID). c. Eugene—Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan). d. Springfield 2030 Plan. e. Q Street Refinement Plan. f. Springfield Zoning Map. 2. Transportation. a. Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan). b. City of Springfield Street Classification Map and Conceptual Local Street Plan. c. Lane Transit District(LTD) System Map. 3. Utilities. a. Springfield Stormwater Facilities Master Plan. b. Springfield Wastewater Master Plan. c. Springfield Storm and Sanitary Infrastructure. d. Springfield Wellhead Protection Areas Map. e. Springfield Utility Board (SUB)—Water and Electric Infrastructure. 4. Natural Resources. a. Springfield Natural Resources Study Report b. Springfield Wetlands Map— National and Local Wetland Inventories c. Springfield Water Quality Limited Watercourses Map 5. Parks and Open Space. a. Willamalane Park and Recreation District Comprehensive Plan — Project Maps. Schirmer Satre Group.375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 . (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 43 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 3 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 6. Development Standards. a. Springfield Development Code— Land Use Districts (Chapter 3), Development Standards (Chapter 4), and Land Use Process and Applications (Chapter 5) B. Findings. 1. Planning and Zoning. a. Jurisdiction: City of Springfield b. Metro Plan: Low Density Residential c. Base Zoning: Low Density Residential d. Refinement Plan: Q Street Refinement Plan e. Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Overlay Zone f. Map: 17-03-26-24 g. Tax Lots: 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 h. Acreage: Lot 4600: 1.32 acres Lot 4601: 0.18 acres Lot 4700: 0.53 acres Lot 4800: 0.40 acres Lot 4900: 0.46 acres Lot 5000: 0.46 acres 3.35 acres 4302 4394 ® z r r�:�. ;29 32 23 27 „ 3501 ,a p-� usr 5 V C 4310 4311 4313H 306. 4314 4393 A -' , e 3502 p� ,� '�4306, .z. 5 22 24 25 2B _ �'sj 30 31 3504 3503 \ s/��f iPff>S`�flfri4fff-f�}fffr4�,ftfff�°r + y 2 .fit a s ET 4500 4504 4595 4596 4507 4508 o.3t Ac 4509 � � 4519 2t is CJ M02 3401 T zo .wl¢` 17 h�j 15 V` f 4fi00 t a.s „4601 s" 4700 4800 4990 5009 (1.54AC f s 3102,. 4.15AC A SEE MAP 17032613 a 5101 5100 ,G-21 AC 03 AC 5102 1.18AC _____ _ ______ Hrs •ee,. 5290 DA AC -- ---- ---- ----- W Schirmer Satre Group.375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 . (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 44 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 4 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 2. Transportation. a. Metro Area TransPlan. The metro area's adopted transportation plan, The Eugene—Springfield Transportation System Plan (TransPlan), adopted in 2001 and amended in 2002, does not include any projects within the vicinity of the subject property. b. City of Springfield Transportation System Plan. The City of Springfield's transportation plan, adopted in 2014, does not include any projects within the vicinity of the subject's property. c. Conceptual Local Street Plan. The City of Springfield Conceptual Local Street Plan depicts where h" future streets and street u- ------- connections may be required. The current map, dated August 2012, does not show any new streets on or adjacent to the subject property. - k, k r Excerpt Conceptual Local Street Plan City of Springfield d. Street Classification. Springfield's Street Classification Map identifies 5th Street as a minor arterial. Each street classification carries with it a standard right-of-way (ROW). The standards for 5th Street is as follows: Street Classification Existing ROW Minimum ROW Min.Curb-to-Curb 5th Street Minor Arterial 60 feet 70 feet 48 feet e. Public Transit. The metro area's public transit system, Lane Transit District (LTD), provides service to Springfield Station via Route 17 on 5th Street. There is a Park and Ride location on 5th Street in the Fred Meyer parking lot immediately south of the subject property. f. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities. There are bikes lanes, sidewalks, and a center turn lane on 5th Street. 3. Utilities. a. Stormwater and Wastewater. • The subject site is located in the West Springfield/Q Street Basin. The Springfield Stormwater Facilities Master Plan identifies one capital improvement project, "Higher Priority CIP 4," to address current issues around flooding of draining facilities during certain storm event conditions. Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 • (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 45 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 5 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 10 River _ --- enxie River T Glen 17 �V4cK I %BLOW RD HAYD.E = - -fLRIJDGE WAY 29 3Q,Y 3 23 +v Harlow Orth Spi Eris;Spur v 39 - R 25 ' ° tiC �2 1 F 16 15 40 ' 21 _ 12 19 r� ,--]owntown Capital Improvement Map Excerpt(Fig.5-1) System Improvements Map Excerpt(Fig. 5-3) Stormwater Facilities Master Plan Sanitary Facilities Master Plan City of Springfield City of Springfield • Stormwater service is available to the subject site through a 27 inch concrete �� pipe in 5th Street that runs along the same side of the street as the subject site. Wastewater service is also n available to the site and there is a 10 inch concrete pipe that runs along 5 t A { v Street. There is also an 8 inch concrete ° .,�,. _., ,, �,�� , ���-. pipe in a 20 foot right of way access strip that runs along the southern boundary line of tax lots 4601 and 73 4600. It also runs along the northern Existing Sanitary and Storm Facilities boundary of tax lots 4700 and 4800. City of Springfield Map 2009 b. Water and Electric Service. • Lots 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 are served with a single 3/"water meter on 5th Street. There is sufficient capacity within the electric system to support the proposal. e - i -- sa- --arm --- Existing Water Infrastructure ' Existing Electric Infrastructure Springfield Utility Board Springfield Utility Board SSeptember 2016 September 2016 Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 . (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 46 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 6 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 c. Wellhead Protection. The Springfield Wellhead Protection • Areas Map lists the subject site as within the 20 year Time of Travel Zone and is therefore subject to the Drinking Water Protection Overlay District. - - Certain land use criteria may apply. • Al Wellhead Protection Areas Map Excerpt m + City of Springfield + January 2013 m 4. Natural Resources. a. Natural Resources Study. The Springfield Natural Resources Study does not identify any resources on or near the site. There are no wetland resources on or near the subject property, as well as no Water Quality Limited Watercourses on or near the property. 5. Parks and Open Space. a. Willamalane Park and Recreation District. There are no proposed park and recreation projects nearby the subject site. 6. Development Standards. The Springfield Development Code (SDC) is a comprehensive land use document that governs all lands within Springfield's city limits and its urban services area. All six of the SDC chapters apply to the subject site, but three in particular are cited here. These include Chapter 3-Land Use Districts, Chapter 4-Development Standards, and Chapter 5-The Development Review Process and Applications. a. Within Chapter 3, the project will need to comply with SDC 3.2-210 Schedule of Use Categories, SDC 3.2-215 Base Zone Development Standards, and SDC 3.2-240 Multi- Unit Design Standards. b. Within Chapter 4, some of the applicable standards include requirements related to setbacks, height, building frontage, landscaping, and minimal parcel size. c. Within Chapter 5, the project will need to address Site Plan Review requirements. III. LAND USE APPLICATIONS Land use approval is required prior to the issuance of any building permits. Required land use applications for the subject property, in sequential order, are as follows. A. Development Issues Meetings (SDC 5.1-120A) 1. A Development Issues Meeting (DIM) is required for certain land use applications. For other applications, a Development Issues Meeting is voluntary. Regardless, a DIM is an excellent opportunity to present a development proposal and ask questions of city staff prior to generating a particular application. The meeting is tailored to address specific issues or concerns. 2. As part of the DIM process, the City of Springfield distributes application material to key staff that review, prepare for, and attend the meeting. Schirmer Satre Group.375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 . (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 47 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 7 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 3. As this is not a land use decision, no official decision is issued. However, there is a take- away of city responses to submitted questions. 4. Meetings are generally scheduled 15 to 20 days from application submittal. B. Metro Plan Amendment(SDC 5.14-100) 1. A Metro Plan Amendment is a Type IV land use decision. A Type IV decision is a legislative decision and is described in SDC 5.1-140. It is a City Council decision and includes both public notice and a public hearing. An amendment or change to the Metro Plan diagram is known as a Metro Plan Amendment—Type II. 2. The application package is submitted to the city. There are number of specific steps that guide the processing of an application. These include: • Pre-Submittal Meeting (SDC 5.1-120.C). A Pre-Submittal Meeting is Springfield's process for determining if an application is complete and ready for processing. After submitting what the applicant believes is a complete application, the applicant meets with City representatives. The city aims to hold Pre-Submittal meetings within 7 to 14 days. The application submittal is reviewed and determined if it is complete and ready for processing. If not complete, the applicant is provided a list of items needing to be addressed. • Re-Submittal. The application package is revised in accordance with Pre-Submittal comments. It is then re-submitted to the city and the city conducts a quick check to determine if the application is complete. State law requires an applicant to re-submit an application within 180 days. If this does not occur, the original application is null and void. If the applicant completes the application, the next step, Processing, begins. • Processing. For a Type IV process, the initial public hearing held by the Planning Commission shall take place within 60 days of acceptance of a complete application. Public notice is provided at least 20 days before the public hearing and is provided to property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the property being reviewed, the local newspaper, appropriate neighborhood associations where applicable, and the newspaper. The Planning Commission will hold a hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council's will hold another public hearing and make the final decision, which goes into effect 30 days after the decision is made. • The decision is appealable within 21 calendar days of the decision being issued. Type IV appeals go the Land Use Board of Appeals. C. Refinement Plan Amendment (SDC 1. A Refinement Plan Amendment application is a Type IV land use decision. When a Metro Plan amendment is enacted that requires an amendment to a refinement plan diagram for consistency, the Metro Plan diagram amendment automatically amends the refinement plan diagram if no amendment to the refinement plan text is needed. A Refinement Plan Amendment and Metro Plan Amendment can be processed concurrently. 2. For specific information on application submittal and process, see the section on Metro Plan Amendments above. D. Zone Change (SDC 5.22-100) 1. A Zone Change application is a Type IV land use decision when it includes concurrent amendments to the Metro Plan diagram and a refinement plan. The property is designated and zoned Low Density Residential in the Metro Plan diagram, City of Springfield Zoning Map, and Q Street Refinement Plan. Therefore, a Zone Change application is required for the applicant to rezone the property to Medium Density Residential and/or High Density Residential. A Type IV land use decision is a legislative application and is described in SDC 5.1-140. It is a City Council decision and includes both public notice and a public hearing. 2. The application package is submitted to the city. There are a number of specific steps that guide the processing of an application. These include: Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 • (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 48 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 8 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 • Pre-Submittal Meeting (SDC 5.1-120.C). A Pre-Submittal Meeting is Springfield's process for determining if an application is complete and ready for processing. After submitting what the applicant believes is a complete application, the applicant meets with City representatives. The city aims to hold Pre-Submittal meetings within 7 to 14 days. The application submittal is reviewed and determined if it is complete and ready for processing. If not complete, the applicant is provided a list of items needing to be addressed. • Re-Submittal. The application package is revised in accordance with Pre-Submittal comments. It is then re-submitted to the city and the city conducts a quick check to determine if the application is complete. State law requires an applicant to re-submit an application within 180 days. If this does not occur, the original application is null and void. If the applicant completes the application, the next step, Processing, begins. • Processing. For a Type IV process, notice is provided to property owners within 300 feet of the property being reviewed, as well as to the newspaper and appropriate neighborhood association where applicable. The Planning Commission will hold a hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council's will hold another public hearing and make the final decision, which goes into effect 30 days after the decision is made. • The decision is appealable within 21 calendar days of the decision being issued. Type IV appeals go the Land Use Board of Appeals. E. Site Plan Review(SDC 5.17-100) 1. Site Plan Review is a Type II land use application that provides a process to regulate the manner in which land is used and developed, ensuring compliance with various public policies and objectives. In Springfield, Site Plan Review is required for most new development, additions, or expansions. It is a Planning Director decision and includes public notice, but no public hearing. 2. The application package is submitted to the city and the application is processed. There are a number of required steps that make up this process. These include: • Pre-Submittal Meeting (SDC 5.1-120.C). A Pre-Submittal Meeting is Springfield's process for determining if an application is complete and ready for processing. After submitting what the applicant believes is a complete application, the applicant meets with City representatives. The city aims to hold Pre-Submittal meetings within 7 to 14 days. The application submittal is reviewed and determined if it is complete and ready for processing. If not complete, the applicant is provided a list of items needing to be addressed. • Re-Submittal. The application package is revised in accordance with Pre-Submittal comments. It is then re-submitted to the city and the city conducts a quick check to determine if the application is complete. State law requires an applicant to re-submit an application within 180 days. If this does not occur, the original application is null and void. If the applicant completes the application, the next step, Processing, begins. • Processing. Notice (7 days); Public Comment (14 days); Review (21-35 days); and Staff Report (generally within 60-75 days of the application being deemed complete). Under state law, the date a decision is effective and any allowance for local appeals must be within 120 days of an application being deemed complete. 3. For a Type II process, the staff report contains a decision —approval, approval with conditions, or denial. The report is mailed to the applicant and any parties who submitted public comment or otherwise participated in the process. 4. The decision is appealable within 15 calendar days of the decision being issued. Type II appeals go to the Planning Commission. There is new public notice and an updated staff report. A public hearing is held by the Planning Commission. The Commission will uphold, modify, or reverse the decision. Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 • (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 49 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 9 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 5. If the decision is not appealed, the decision is in effect 15 calendar days after the initial staff decision. If the decision is appealed, the decision is in effect when the appeal decision is rendered. F. Final Site Plan Review(SDC 5.17-135) 1. The Final Site Plan submittal incorporates all approval conditions from the Site Plan Review decision. 2. The application is reviewed for completeness. The complete application is reviewed by staff and a Type I (no public notice or hearing) decision is issued. Upon approval, the Planning Director drafts a Development Agreement for signing by the City of Springfield and the developer. 3. A positive decision (approval) is based on staff finding compliance with the conditions of approval. 4. A Final Site Plan Review is a Type I process. There are no appeals available for a Type I process. 5. The Site Plan Review application is in effect upon the execution of the Development Agreement. 6. Final Site Plan Review must be submitted within 90 days of the initial Site Plan Review decision. Following that, there is a 30-day completeness review period and a 15 to 30 day processing period. Final Site Plan and Development Agreement is null and void if construction does not begin within 2 years of signing the Development Agreement. G. Drinking Water Protection (SDC 3.3-200) 1. The Drinking Water Protection (DWP) Overlay District is established to protect aquifers used as potable water supply sources from contamination. DWP requirements establish procedures and standards for the physical use and storage of hazardous or other materials harmful to groundwater by requiring development approval for new and existing land uses. 2. Drinking Water Protection and Site Plan Review applications can be submitted concurrently. 3. Drinking Water Protection applications are a Type I process. It is a staff decision with no public notice. In that regard, Process and Decision are the same as for Site Plan Review. 4. A Type I decision is not appealable. 5. The decision is in effect the day it is issued. IV. PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN A site plan has been generated for the proposed development of the property. It is attached hereto. A site plan has great value in assisting with initial land use analysis and in providing an explanation and the asking questions in a pre-application meeting. As detailed plans will of course be required for Site Plan Review and any other applications, it is never too soon to be thinking of the physical arrangement of contemplated improvements. V. ATTACHED INFORMATION 1. Planning and Zoning a. Google Earth —Aerial Photograph with Site Boundaries. b. Bing Maps —Aerial Photograph. c. Lane Regional Information Database—Tax Lot Map. d. City of Springfield — Refinement Plan Map. e. City of Springfield — Base Zoning. 2. Transportation a. Metro Area TransPlan — Projects Map. b. City of Springfield —Street Classification Map. 3. Utilities Schirmer Satre Group.375 West 4'h Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 . (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 50 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 10 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 a. City of Springfield — Existing Stormwater and Wastewater Infrastructure Map. b. Springfield Utility Board (SUB)—Existing Water Infrastructure Map. c. Springfield Utility Board (SUB)—Existing Electric Infrastructure Map. VI. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION The above information represents a brief outline of known applicable planning, zoning and site development requirements for the contemplated development of the subject property. We recommend scheduling a DIM to clarify and/or confirm the findings herein, as well as to discuss potential rezoning of the subject site. We hope this initial land use analysis proves helpful. Our office is available to discuss these findings, provide additional graphics upon request, or assist with additional project needs. Sincerely, 'IR 6cleww L M. Sat-rel Richard M. Satre, AICP, ASLA, CSI Principal Schirmer Satre Group Schirmer Satre Group.375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 . (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 51 of 121 d E JEQ per,- 1 ILI ��,,��llKS17 •q P,. v c. r f LO 4 fq .s• '1 � _""R til'.y 6" +�,�yt LM V Ae •` � ,, a i •� 4. i Il� MRi 1. ` C'. "ya nT ^ �,�,,y�}�,t`�y+��y,�� I .. �'l J- Ash ���ti • �4`� -��.jd� � . �+ �`• '��. �! �'�+' frit f^g f �y tA do L H.. '-'�k l S• rays s 1. e\ V i f r d E a N LLJ U2 ETEoo LL Cl) ZM _O d d U) 1332i1S HIL <~ M 10 cp 12 m H1S a9l-- U N ' W w" c �j �� �� �� w= w;a d Coale uj x sYMzar _■ ■1111■ ■ - — ��_ 1111111 �1 ii �:■■,f .'� _- ■ ■ ■■■■■■ ON '-� ■i ` 11 ■ ■■■■ ■ :■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■� ■ loolooloom ii son 0 ESSM 1 on INNER ■■■►11111 ■■ iii 1■■�■■ ■■■■■■� �,. �, �■ ■■■■ ■ �,� =■ �\11111111 11 11111 ` I �� ■■ � ■1111111 ' - - 1 11 � I ■ ■� ��� ■mow �� i ■■■■■■■ ■■ ■ 111111111111111■11 ■ ■■ , ■ ■■■■IN ■� 7 ■■ ■� ■i ■i ■■ ■■ ■i an IN a �►��,���■ ■1 111111 ■ X1111: ■� : , ♦ ���� ■■ -� �■ ■1111111 111■ ■■ • �� .■ :. ■ ,p ■_■ - � ♦ ���■ �. —■ -1 MENEM �� ■1■ ■111111►� ��� - ■. p�1■ ■■ ■■ ■� ■■■ . �- - bi I- 1. ■ ■,�■ �i MW■LEE C sig '',: .� � Iii � ■ ■ � - ,- ■ -- -- '� WE 0 SM ME WAN F11111 IN ■ 'i :1► ♦ MM �■ �■� ��� ,11 milli + 1'1111111 I J 111 111111MEN�If.���■ /II 111111 111111111■Illl�l�i I� CC ���11`���: : ■ ■111'111IN 1111111■ ■ r �■: p !■ ■■� ►� ■ ■ ` 11111�Illlrtl ■i 111■ IN M1 NINE 1■ ■ 111 1��1111 111111 �: ■ 1■ - 11■■11: ■ 111 =1� x:111 ; It ./IIIIIIIIIII� IIIIL' 1■■111■ ■ ILL- NO C: �■ . : ■ �■ ■■■ ■■ O■■� oil06 NONE ■1111■■ i ■: .: ■ 1 i1 ■■■■■■■ . -� ;; ■ �■ SII ■+ � I = ■■ 1 i 1 ■ ' I d d E m a ....... ; n �a ' : ° a y+. a 8 ¢ II ' tb— a i x v E E a v e 3 _•. ••• � r 1. `s 3 yl U� _ t 04 j T yEl � 0 LO P 1I t•i CO 5u 14.4 I Is 3r _}—, ORA 4z 0 All Is `o A o o Q a o it c'm:-allo Q ' �•+ N y oa`o_U'o o m -o.X� �Toc 'o °�° t: a � omos a �a�U � 1 o5-o 1 3 i ooa�y�oow Amo � Eo Ip .16_•1� 1 lI L, 00 ` •v co o = �N 9 ��� "�aa`� "~o �I p cQ N = °'Emcomy�o you I /oar LU Em Eooa H.M. m ' Bs r E y E E E m`e m`e 56 ° o E v � m � E Sx �E DoE ac 1 X99 aea 3a �a � zaj i, I s - 9b 1 'nry z° 1 061 e Vo Wo ° -� ', � •'., 1� � u� u { oda � �Nsisxizovsxnrvcx � yy 297 n737 05 ° , ami boa '25 �I a 6�40 9 96907" /_�__\ (� �1 � � •� sa o -�� Q 233 J 9 L sd ew<nn <� 545 9b Vii.unn / a °3 dop 472 a� o Doom 4' 60F PA�ptC � � �� �o o °m x000 ��ta >o b �o LSo o�c 3 �8 s 1 1b M a6b �° ~ 1 _ 98b �Lbm m o a / .otsEE 00 -.SBb V I o 1 CREEK I ov inx x33n° N'N --o m �D oho 0 1 2O390 651 N C Qf t V N Q a R k� isf � L ItV F� 00 i Ef d' �s ` c i a i if i v E n. �f \ a f ■ R EM LL 2ti A — Mi . — M LL � ma L A 3 cL Woocco, RIN to ININ a a m al 1-4 o IRON\\\\N\\\ IN ol 1w W V D ME 1414 ol INNO MR� m M > V > ul Ln n Q V) > > N N N N Ln 0 00 iS � H 99"13 9 » »> 7 Ln > > o N (-o N d o �6 691 N Q N N� N N � N � 9N9 > o >1 o� 9 03N > N O Cl �,Z 03 0 > L09 m N � � a )9 U 969 E E _ t � o m 900 Cl) Q X99 � N EL co 62, 1 9 EJ Ln 9 O N N N O n o N 0-) 1 � N >> > �z > > Ln »> » > 9L, 1a „9 1-7 10" CI"50 og"13 „o N co 6� t 0 � > > w N 6� > NDO 0-) 01 r' FT Z t, Ln t- 0 co � O 03 Attachment 3c I l �I I.J l l b Li Li l I � U w CD ka 05 to ka z ISOI y I CO v M 2029 y 78E0 1 SP2" C 78017-2 125A 75C7312 C-78016 2 �0 91097-45 37C4P1306 2011 1995 LC 780 73 26 ~ `! 6802-1 I /I 1975 1981 1987 1993 I 63080-40 25C4P09 1 3023-15 '7015C51730'70 12 5 A 1-6Cu,6Cu I I ?-45 1917 I I yD I 76017-45 37C4P284 Attachment 1 , Page 61 of 121 � E w���" �r oo«oos.A1213d021d 1332llS 41S � O-n IMM013AM OWO 1N3W(3N3WV NVId ON13W 5 anoas aaivs aaixnixa LAh� - G AZ LU � b U) U = 00 Lli LU m ~ U) � m � w 00 m LU ui Q = 1SH15 P10NEER - LU EE EY o 0 Q n28nn0n � J vamead ❑❑■❑�❑ Z � Q r W � (D c ry E3 z U) Ws W � w J . z � I a W a .. N C) 0 Wo a s & U � 4`x'9��z J�� A1213d021d 1332115 41S N 011 1N3WdOl3A3O OWO 1N3W(3N3WV NVId ON13W G anoas aaivs aaixnix� LAh - U) O w LU m0- ~ o D cn m cn cD w 000 z w w 0 = 1S H15 Q Y El 1:1 o PCO ER LU E E Q Q n28F�ln■n > 1- 40 J = � Claz oam = oe a Joo■o®o Z r Z po r LLI O Z wO Lu LUW Q W Q v W ;1Z �..a U City of Springfield SPRINGFIELD Development Services Department 225 Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 / Zoning Map Amendment, Type III Required Project Information (Applicant: complete this section) Applicant Name: Rick Satre Phone: (541) 686-4540 Company: Schirmer Satre Group Fax- (541) 686-4577 Address: 375 W54 Avenue, Sui 201, Eugene, 74 Applicant Signature: Property Owner: Roy Gray Phone: (541) 915-8587 Company: CMC Development LLC Fax: N/A Address: PO Box 117, Walterville, OR 97489 Owner Signature: If the applicant is other than the owner, the owner hereby grants permission for the applicant to act in his or her behalf ASSESSOR'S MAP NO: 17-03-26-24 TAX LOT NO(S): See line below Property Address: Tax Lots: 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000. Addresses vary. Area of Request Square Feet: 145,926 Acres:3.35 Existing Use(s) of Property: Property is current zoned low density residential. Mixture of vacant lots and lots with single family housing (some currently unoccupied). Description of The Proposal- Rezone six tax lots from low density residential to a mixture of medium and high density residential. Required Property Information (City Intake Staff.- complete this section) Received by: Case No.: Date: (initials) Application Fee: Postage Fee: Total Fee: Edited 7/19/2007 bjones Attachment 1, Page 64 of 121 Zoning Map Amendment Submittal Requirements Checklist 1. The application fee - Refer to the Development Code Fee Schedule for the appropriate application and postage fee. A copy of the Fee Schedule is available at the Development Services Department. 2. Deed - A copy of the deed to show ownership. 3. Vicinity Map - A map of the property and the surrounding vicinity which includes the existing zoning and plan designations. One copy must be reduced to 8 '/z" by 11" which will be mailed as part of the required neighboring property notification packet. 4. Findings - Before the Planning Commission can approve a Zone/Overlay District Change Request, there must be information submitted by the applicant which adequately supports the request. The Criteria the Planning Commission will consider in making their decision is listed below. If insufficient or unclear data is submitted by the applicant, there is a good change that the request will be denied or delayed. It is recommended that you hire a professional planner or land use attorney to prepare your findings. Criteria of Approval (Ouasi-iudicial) SDC 12.030 requires that in reaching a decision on these actions, the Planning Commission or Hearings Official map approve, approve with conditions or deny a quasi- judicial Zoning Map amendment based upon approval criteria (a)-(c), below. (a)Consistency with the Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan Diagram; (b)Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans; and (c)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. Attachment 1, Page 65 of 121 January 31, 2017 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC—5T" STREET PROPERTY Zoning Map Amendment Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lot 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 WRITTEN STATEMENT In accordance with SDC 5.22-100 through SDC 5.22-125, Zoning Map Amendments, the applicant, CMC Development LLC, is requesting that the City of Springfield review this Zoning Map Amendment request for Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 of Assessor's Map 17-03-26-24. The applicant requests the City determine that the proposal complies with the approval criteria and approve this application. To aid Springfield staff in their review, the following information is provided. Background Local long-range land use is governed by the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan). Often supplemented with more specific refinement plans and/or neighborhood plans, the Metro Plan is then followed by site-specific zoning. Sometimes, zoning is comprised of base zoning and overlay zones. In this instance, the Q Street Refinement Plan is the applicable refinement plan and the Drinking Water Protection Overlay Zone is the applicable overlay zone for the subject property. Further information regarding individual tax lots is available in the table below. Map and Tax Metro Plan Q Street Zoning(Existing) Zoning(Proposed) Lot Designation 1 Refinement Plan 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential Base: Medium Density Residential 4600 Residential Residential 1 Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 1 Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential Base: High Density Residential 4601 Residential Residential 1 Overlay: DrinkinWater Protection Overlay: DrinkinWater Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential Base: High Density Residential 4700 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential Base: High Density Residential 4800 Residential Residential 1 Overlay: DrinkinWater Protection Overlay: DrinkinWater Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential Base: High Density Residential 4900 Residential Residential 1 Overlay: DrinkinWater Protection Overlay: DrinkinWater Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential Base: Medium Density Residential 5000 Residential Residential 1 Overlay: DrinkinWater Protection Overlay: DrinkinWater Protection Physical Setting The site is located north of Q Street in north-central Springfield. It is comprised of six tax lots (Map 17-03- 26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000) and is approximately 3.35 acres in size. The site abuts 5th Street to the west, with single family housing to the north and east and a commercial shopping center to the south. Development Objective The development objective is to change the Metro Plan designation and base zoning of the six tax lots from Low Density Residential (LDR) to a mix of Medium Density Residential (MDR)and High Density Residential (HDR). See the table above for more information. Therefore, the applicant is submitting concurrent Metro Plan Amendment and Zone Change applications for the subject property. Attachment 1, Page 66 of 121 COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING MAP AMENDMENT REQUIREMENTS Applicable sections of the code are in bold italics, followed by proposed findings of fact in normal text. SDC 5.22-105 Purpose. The purpose of this section is to provide standards and procedures for legislative and quasi-judicial amendments to the Official Zoning Maps. Response: The proposed Zoning Map amendment complies with all applicable standards and procedures. SDC 5.22-110 Review. Official Zoning Map amendments may be initiated by the Director, the Planning Commission, the Hearings Official, the City Council, or a citizen. Zoning Map amendments shall be reviewed as follows: A. Legislative Zoning Map amendments involve broad public policy decisions that apply to other than an individual property owner, generally affecting a large area and/or require a concurrent Metro Plan diagram amendment as specified in Section 5.14.100. Legislative Zoning Map amendments are reviewed using Type IV procedure. 1. Metro Plan diagram amendment determination. An amendment to the Metro Plan diagram shall be required if the proposed Zoning Map amendment is not consistent with the Metro Plan diagram. Both amendments may be processed concurrently. 2. Transportation Planning Rule Compliance. Where applicable, legislative Zoning Map amendments shall be reviewed to determine whether the application significantly affects a transportation facility, as specified in Oregon Administrative Rule(OAR) 660-012-0060. In this case a Traffic Impact Study shall be submitted as specified in Section 4.2-105A.4. B. Quasi-judicial Zoning Map amendments involve the application of existing policy to a specific factual setting, generally affecting a single or limited group of properties and may or may not include a Metro Plan diagram amendment. Quasi-judicial Zoning Map amendments are reviewed using Type 111 procedure, unless a Metro Plan diagram amendment is required. In this case, the Quasi-judicial Zoning Map amendment will be raised to a Type IV review. Response:The proposed Zoning Map amendment will comply with the criteria in SDC 5.14-110(B). The amendment is quasi-judicial in nature and includes a limited group of properties with a concurrent Metro Plan diagram amendment. Both proposed amendments are subject to Type IV review. SDC 5.22-115 Criteria. A. Quasi-judicial Zoning Map Amendments. The Planning Commission or Hearings Official may approve, approve with condition or deny a quasi-judicial Zoning Map amendment based on approval criteria C.1. through 3., below. The Planning Commission or Hearings Official shall make the final local decision on all quasi- judicial Zoning map amendments that do not include a Metro Plan diagram amendment. B. Legislative Zoning Map Amendments and Quasi-judicial Zoning Map Amendments Raised to a Type IV Review. The Planning Commission or Hearings Official may make a recommendation to the City Council to approve, approve with conditions or deny Zoning Map amendments and Metro Plan diagram amendments based upon approval criteria in Subsection C.1. through 4., below. The City Council shall make the final local decision on all Zoning Map amendments involving a Metro Plan diagram amendment. C. Zoning Map amendment criteria of approval: 1. Consistency with applicable Metro Plan policies and the Metro Plan diagram; Attachment 1 , Page 67 of 121 2. Consistency with applicable Refinement Plans, Plan District maps, Conceptual Development Plans and functional plans;and 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 concurrently with the development of the property. 4. Legislative Zoning Map amendments that involve a Metro Plan Diagram amendment shall: a. Meet the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100;and b.Comply with Oregon Administrative Rule (OAR) 660-012-0060, where applicable. Response to SDC 5.22-115.A. —B. The proposed Zoning Map amendment will be processed as a quasi-judicial decision. The amendment is submitted concurrently with a Metro Plan diagram amendment and therefore, will be processed as a Type IV decision. Response to SDC 5.22-115.C.1. The Zoning Map amendment is consistent with the Metro Plan policies and diagram. It does not amend any Metro Plan policies or text. The Zoning Map amendment is submitted concurrently with a Metro Plan amendment. The following Metro Plan policies support the proposed zone change: • Metro Plan Policy 1. — The UGB and sequential development shall continue to be implemented as an essential means to achieve compact urban growth. The provision of all urban services shall be concentrated inside the UGB. The Metro Plan policies define compact growth as "the filling in of vacant and underutilized lands in the UGB". The parcels affected by this application are currently within the Eugene portion of the Urban Growth Boundary(UGB) and are within the city limits of Eugene. The proposed rezoning is in compliance with the acknowledged comprehensive plan, implementing ordinances, and future development will have access to urban facilities and services. As such, the subject site provides for compact urban growth and essential services. • Metro Plan Policy A.1 —Encourage the consolidation of residentially zoned parcels to facilitate more options for development and redevelopment of such parcels. The proposed rezoning will permit more options for development and ensure subsequent development is clustered together. Through rezoning the six parcels as a mixture of high and medium density residential, the subject site is able to balance the need to accommodate greater density with the need to appropriately transition from the single family neighborhoods to the north and east to higher density on the subject site and more intense commercial zoning to the south. • Metro Plan Policy A.3—Provide an adequate supply of buildable residential land within the UGB for the 20-year planning period at the time of Periodic Review. As mentioned in the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment application, 824 buildable acres of land within the Springfield UGB are zoned Low Density Residential. This equates to 60% of Springfield's residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, which provides only 4% of the City's residential development capacity. To accommodate expected population growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units. While there is a total surplus of residential land, which includes a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land, there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Attachment 1, Page 68 of 121 • Metro Plan Policy A.4. — Use annexation, provision of adequate public facilities and services, rezoning, redevelopment, and infill to meet the 20-year projected housing demand. See response to Metro Plan Policy A.3. • Metro Plan Policy A.7—Endeavor to provide key urban services and facilities required to maintain a five-year supply of serviceable, buildable residential land. The site is located inside the UGB and subsequent development will have access urban facilities and services. • Metro Plan Policy A.9—Establish density ranges in local zoning and development regulations that are consistent with the broad density categories of this plan. The proposed rezoning will result in development that meets the broad density requirements of the Metro Plan. • Metro Plan Policy A.10—Promote higher residential density inside the UGB that utilizes existing infrastructure. Improves the efficiency of public services and facilities, and conserves rural resource lands outside the UGB. As previously mentioned, the rezoning will result in higher density development than what is allowed on the current low density residential zoning. In this manner, a higher number of residents will use existing infrastructure. This creates more efficient use of public services and facilities, as a greater number of people are living in proximity to existing facility. Moreover, rural resource lands are conserved, as more units are provided within the UGB. • Metro Plan Policy A.11 — Generally locate higher density residential development near employment or commercial services, in proximity to major transportation systems or within transportation-efficient nodes. The proposed rezoning will locate medium and high density residential development near Q Street, 5th Street, and Pioneer Parkway, all of which are key corridors in the City of Springfield. The subject site is also located near parks, schools, and services and amenities. It is also located near an EmX line (Pioneer Parkway) and both Q Street and 5th Street have transit service. It is an ideal location to provide access and opportunities to commercial services, education, employment, and major transportation systems. • Metro Plan Policy A.12— Coordinate higher density residential development with the provision of adequate infrastructure and services, open space, and other urban amenities. As mentioned in the response to Metro Plan Policy A.10, the proposed rezoning will be coordinated with ensuring adequate infrastructure and services are provided to the subject site. Open space will be provided through the requirements found throughout the Springfield Development Code. • Metro Plan Policy A.13—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. The proposed zoning mix provides for lots that abut single family homes to be zoned medium density residential (Tax Lots 4600 and 5000), so there is an effective and compatible transition between densities. In short, the lots proposed to be zoned medium density residential act as a "buffer" between the lots proposed as high density residential and adjacent single family homes. The lots proposed to be rezoned high density residential (Tax Lots 4601, 4700, 4800, and 4900) abut Fred Meyer and 5th Street, which is an ideal location for higher density zoning, as it is not adjacent to nearby single family housing. Furthermore, the proposed zoning allows for effective infill development that maximizes land utility. • Metro Plan Policy A.17—Provide opportunities for a full range of choice in housing type, density, size, cost, and location. As the proposed rezoning includes both medium and high density designations on the same subject site, there are many opportunities provided to ensure a full range of housing choices. Attachment 1, Page 69 of 121 • Metro Plan Policy A.19—Encourage residential development in or near downtown core areas in both cities. The subject site is a mile away from downtown Springfield and is located a half mile from a key transit corridor. • Metro Plan Policy A.23—Reduce impacts of higher density residential and mixed-use development on surrounding uses by considering site, landscape, and architectural design standards or guidelines in local zoning and development regulations. The proposed rezoning is compatible with surrounding uses and therefore, shall have minimal impact on adjacent commercial and residential uses. As the proposal calls for a mix of medium and high density residential to best transition to and from adjacent uses, the suggested zoning is compatible with this policy. Therefore, the Metro Plan diagram will not be inconsistent with the zoning map amendment, should both amendments be approved. Response to SDC 5.22-115.C.2. As an amendment to the Metro Plan automatically amends the applicable refinement plan, in this case, the Q Street Refinement Plan, the proposed Zoning Map amendment is consistent with the applicable refinement plan. The City of Springfield also previously adopted the Residential Land Use and Housing Element of the Springfield 2030 Refinement Plan. As specified in the written statement submitted along with the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment application, 824 buildable acres of land are zoned Low Density Residential. This equates to 60% of Springfield's residential development capacity. Yet, only 95 buildable acres are designated as Medium Density Residential, totaling a mere 30% of residential development capacity, and 16 buildable acres are designated as High Density Residential, which provides only 4% of the City's residential development capacity. To accommodate expected population growth, Springfield will need to provide 5,980 new dwelling units. While there is a total surplus of residential land, which includes a 72 gross acre surplus of Low Density Residential land, there is only a surplus of 18 gross acres of Medium Density Residential land and a deficit of 34 gross acres of High Density Residential land. Therefore, the proposed rezoning will not have an adverse impact on available Low Density Residential land within the urban growth boundary. Response to SDC 5.22-115.C.3. Finally, the subject site has adequate public facilities, services, and transportation network to support the proposed use. Stormwater and wastewater service are both available to the site through the system in 51h Street. There is also sufficient water and electric system capacity to serve the site. Moreover, the subject site fronts onto 5th Street, which is a minor arterial with bike lanes, sidewalks, and a center turn lane. There is also a LTD Park and Ride location in 5th Street in the Fred Meyer parking lot, immediately south of the subject property. Transit service is also provided by LTD via Route 17, which provides service to and from Springfield Station. Response to SDC 5.22-115.C.4.a. —b. Regarding the criteria contained in SDC 5.22-115.C.4.a and SDC 5.22-115.C.4.b., compliance with the approval criteria specified in Section 5.14-100 is established in the concurrent Metro Plan Amendment. Compliance with OAR 660-012-0060 is also established in the written statement for the concurrent Metro Plan amendment. The change from Low Density Residential to Medium and High Density Residential The result of this plan amendment and zone change application would increase the trip generation potential of the subject parcels, so the applicant will address the Transportation Planning Rule (TPR)to determine if Attachment 1, Page 70 of 121 there's a significant affect. The TPR looks capacity and performance to be consistent with the adopted Transportation System Plan. A trip generation comparison and capacity/LOS analysis is being performed at the nearby intersections at 5t" Street at Q Street and 5t" Street at Hayden Bridge Road. The analysis will compare the trip generation under the proposed designation with the potential trip generation under the existing designation to determine if there is an impact as defined in OAR 660-012-0060 under the planning horizon analysis year of the current TSP. A TPR Analysis will be included in the application package. Therefore, SDC 5.22-115 is met. SDC 5.22-120 Conditions. The Approval Authority may attach conditions as may be reasonably necessary in order to allow the Zoning Map amendment be granted. Response: The applicant acknowledges this potentiality and will comply with any conditions of approval attached to the proposed amendment. SDC 5.22-125 Mobile Home Park Notice. If a Zoning Map amendment involves property containing an existing mobile home park, the Director shall provide written notice to each unit in the mobile home park as specified in Section 5.2-115 and as specified in ORS 90.630(5). Response:There is no existing mobile home park included within the boundaries of the Zoning Map amendment. Therefore, this criterion does not apply. IN CONCLUSION Based on the information contained in this written statement, the applicant believes that the requested Zoning Map amendment can be approved. If there are any questions regarding the above information, or other application materials, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (541) 686-4540 or ricka-schirmersatre.com. Sincerely, 2 O1.Gwdl M. S atrei Richard M. Satre, AICP, ASLA, CSI, Principal Schirmer Satre Group Attachment 1 , Page 71 of 121 Attachment 1 November 28, 2016 CMC DEVELOPMENT LLC 5T" STREET PROPERTY Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 Land Use Analysis The key to successful property development in Oregon is thorough research and analysis of prospective regulations and requirements. This is followed by the planning, design, and regulatory approval processes. Success comes by taking things one step at a time; each step providing clarity and focus for the next round of activity. The first step is research and analysis, where we identify land use, physical, and environmental requirements, as well as lay the groundwork for next steps. The results of our initial land use analysis is presented below. This analysis is based on public data and documents existing conditions and potentially applicable land use regulations. I. BACKGROUND A. Planning Context Local long-range land use is governed by the Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area ,A �• - rt , " . General Plan (Metro Plan)and is often _.....•m.. ---�-`'` --.... - m supplemented with a more specific x • z : -_a; refinement plan and/or neighborhood plan. i • E z • 4 The Metro Plan and if applicable, refinement plan, is then followed by site- I specific zoning. Sometimes, zoning is ;F , comprised of base zoning and additional overlay zones. The Q Street Refinement € Plan and the Drinking Water Protection 'Zg -- Overlay Zone are applicable to the subject 1 property. .a M Excerpt Springfield Zoning Map 2016 Map and Tax Lot _ Metro Plan Q Street Refinement = Zoning Designation Plan 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential 4600 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential 4601 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential 4700 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density = Base: Low Density Residential 4800 Residential Residential =_ Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential 4900 Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection 17-03-26-24/ Low Density Low Density Base: Low Density Residential 5000 : Residential Residential Overlay: Drinking Water Protection + LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS + 375 West 4th,Suite 201,Eugene,OR 97401 SCHIRMER PLANNERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS Phone:541.6$6.4540 Fax:541.686.4577 I www.schirmersatre.com SA IRE 1, Page 72 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 2 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 B. Physical Setting The site is located north of Q Street, in ° north-central Springfield. It is comprised of ` six tax lots (Map 17-03-26-24, tax lots 4600, a_ k� 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000)and is �� j"-M approximately 3.35 acres in size. The site tic " abuts 5th Street to the west, with single _ t�- r '° family housing to the north and east and a commercial shopping center to the south. ' 14 - �.• r 41014-� .74 ' Subject Property Google Earth May 29,2016 C. Development Objective The development objective is to change the designation and zoning of the six tax lots from Low Density Residential (LDR)to Medium Density Residential (MDR) and/or High Density Residential (HDR). The potential zoning will be discussed more in-depth at a Development Issues Meeting (DIM). II. LAND USE ANALYSIS A. Regulatory Review The following plans, documents and database sources were included in this review: 1. Planning and Zoning. a. Aerial Photographs (Google Earth and Bing Maps). b. Regional Land Information Database (RLID). c. Eugene—Springfield Metropolitan Area General Plan (Metro Plan). d. Springfield 2030 Plan. e. Q Street Refinement Plan. f. Springfield Zoning Map. 2. Transportation. a. Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area Transportation Plan (TransPlan). b. City of Springfield Street Classification Map and Conceptual Local Street Plan. c. Lane Transit District(LTD) System Map. 3. Utilities. a. Springfield Stormwater Facilities Master Plan. b. Springfield Wastewater Master Plan. c. Springfield Storm and Sanitary Infrastructure. d. Springfield Wellhead Protection Areas Map. e. Springfield Utility Board (SUB)—Water and Electric Infrastructure. 4. Natural Resources. a. Springfield Natural Resources Study Report b. Springfield Wetlands Map— National and Local Wetland Inventories c. Springfield Water Quality Limited Watercourses Map 5. Parks and Open Space. a. Willamalane Park and Recreation District Comprehensive Plan — Project Maps. Schirmer Satre Group.375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 . (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 73 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 3 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 6. Development Standards. a. Springfield Development Code— Land Use Districts (Chapter 3), Development Standards (Chapter 4), and Land Use Process and Applications (Chapter 5) B. Findings. 1. Planning and Zoning. a. Jurisdiction: City of Springfield b. Metro Plan: Low Density Residential c. Base Zoning: Low Density Residential d. Refinement Plan: Q Street Refinement Plan e. Overlay: Drinking Water Protection Overlay Zone f. Map: 17-03-26-24 g. Tax Lots: 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 h. Acreage: Lot 4600: 1.32 acres Lot 4601: 0.18 acres Lot 4700: 0.53 acres Lot 4800: 0.40 acres Lot 4900: 0.46 acres Lot 5000: 0.46 acres 3.35 acres 4302 4394 ® z r r�:�. ;29 32 23 27 „ 3501 ,a p-� usr 5 V C 4310 4311 4313H 306. 4314 4393 A -' , e 3502 p� ,� '�4306, .z. 5 22 24 25 2B _ �'sj 30 31 3504 3503 \ s/��f iPff>S`�flfri4fff-f�}fffr4�,ftfff�°r + y 2 .fit a s ET 4500 4504 4595 4596 4507 4508 o.3t Ac 4509 � � 4519 2t is CJ M02 3401 T zo .wl¢` 17 h�j 15 V` f 4fi00 t a.s „4601 s" 4700 4800 4990 5009 (1.54AC f s 3102,. 4.15AC A SEE MAP 17032613 a 5101 5100 ,G-21 AC 03 AC 5102 1.18AC _____ _ ______ Hrs •ee,. 5290 DA AC -- ---- ---- ----- W Schirmer Satre Group.375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 . (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 74 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 4 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 2. Transportation. a. Metro Area TransPlan. The metro area's adopted transportation plan, The Eugene—Springfield Transportation System Plan (TransPlan), adopted in 2001 and amended in 2002, does not include any projects within the vicinity of the subject property. b. City of Springfield Transportation System Plan. The City of Springfield's transportation plan, adopted in 2014, does not include any projects within the vicinity of the subject's property. c. Conceptual Local Street Plan. The City of Springfield Conceptual Local Street Plan depicts where h" future streets and street u- ------- connections may be required. The current map, dated August 2012, does not show any new streets on or adjacent to the subject property. - k, k r Excerpt Conceptual Local Street Plan City of Springfield d. Street Classification. Springfield's Street Classification Map identifies 5th Street as a minor arterial. Each street classification carries with it a standard right-of-way (ROW). The standards for 5th Street is as follows: Street Classification Existing ROW Minimum ROW Min.Curb-to-Curb 5th Street Minor Arterial 60 feet 70 feet 48 feet e. Public Transit. The metro area's public transit system, Lane Transit District (LTD), provides service to Springfield Station via Route 17 on 5th Street. There is a Park and Ride location on 5th Street in the Fred Meyer parking lot immediately south of the subject property. f. Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities. There are bikes lanes, sidewalks, and a center turn lane on 5th Street. 3. Utilities. a. Stormwater and Wastewater. • The subject site is located in the West Springfield/Q Street Basin. The Springfield Stormwater Facilities Master Plan identifies one capital improvement project, "Higher Priority CIP 4," to address current issues around flooding of draining facilities during certain storm event conditions. Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 • (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 75 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 5 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 10 River _ --- enxie River T Glen 17 �V4cK I %BLOW RD HAYD.E = - -fLRIJDGE WAY 29 3Q,Y 3 23 +v Harlow Orth Spi Eris;Spur v 39 - R 25 ' ° tiC �2 1 F 16 15 40 ' 21 _ 12 19 r� ,--]owntown Capital Improvement Map Excerpt(Fig.5-1) System Improvements Map Excerpt(Fig. 5-3) Stormwater Facilities Master Plan Sanitary Facilities Master Plan City of Springfield City of Springfield • Stormwater service is available to the subject site through a 27 inch concrete �� pipe in 5th Street that runs along the same side of the street as the subject site. Wastewater service is also n available to the site and there is a 10 inch concrete pipe that runs along 5 t A { v Street. There is also an 8 inch concrete ° .,�,. _., ,, �,�� , ���-. pipe in a 20 foot right of way access strip that runs along the southern boundary line of tax lots 4601 and 73 4600. It also runs along the northern Existing Sanitary and Storm Facilities boundary of tax lots 4700 and 4800. City of Springfield Map 2009 b. Water and Electric Service. • Lots 4700, 4800, 4900, and 5000 are served with a single 3/"water meter on 5th Street. There is sufficient capacity within the electric system to support the proposal. e - i -- sa- --arm --- Existing Water Infrastructure ' Existing Electric Infrastructure Springfield Utility Board Springfield Utility Board SSeptember 2016 September 2016 Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 . (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 76 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 6 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 c. Wellhead Protection. The Springfield Wellhead Protection • Areas Map lists the subject site as within the 20 year Time of Travel Zone and is therefore subject to the Drinking Water Protection Overlay District. - - Certain land use criteria may apply. • Al Wellhead Protection Areas Map Excerpt m + City of Springfield + January 2013 m 4. Natural Resources. a. Natural Resources Study. The Springfield Natural Resources Study does not identify any resources on or near the site. There are no wetland resources on or near the subject property, as well as no Water Quality Limited Watercourses on or near the property. 5. Parks and Open Space. a. Willamalane Park and Recreation District. There are no proposed park and recreation projects nearby the subject site. 6. Development Standards. The Springfield Development Code (SDC) is a comprehensive land use document that governs all lands within Springfield's city limits and its urban services area. All six of the SDC chapters apply to the subject site, but three in particular are cited here. These include Chapter 3-Land Use Districts, Chapter 4-Development Standards, and Chapter 5-The Development Review Process and Applications. a. Within Chapter 3, the project will need to comply with SDC 3.2-210 Schedule of Use Categories, SDC 3.2-215 Base Zone Development Standards, and SDC 3.2-240 Multi- Unit Design Standards. b. Within Chapter 4, some of the applicable standards include requirements related to setbacks, height, building frontage, landscaping, and minimal parcel size. c. Within Chapter 5, the project will need to address Site Plan Review requirements. III. LAND USE APPLICATIONS Land use approval is required prior to the issuance of any building permits. Required land use applications for the subject property, in sequential order, are as follows. A. Development Issues Meetings (SDC 5.1-120A) 1. A Development Issues Meeting (DIM) is required for certain land use applications. For other applications, a Development Issues Meeting is voluntary. Regardless, a DIM is an excellent opportunity to present a development proposal and ask questions of city staff prior to generating a particular application. The meeting is tailored to address specific issues or concerns. 2. As part of the DIM process, the City of Springfield distributes application material to key staff that review, prepare for, and attend the meeting. Schirmer Satre Group.375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 . (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 77 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 7 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 3. As this is not a land use decision, no official decision is issued. However, there is a take- away of city responses to submitted questions. 4. Meetings are generally scheduled 15 to 20 days from application submittal. B. Metro Plan Amendment(SDC 5.14-100) 1. A Metro Plan Amendment is a Type IV land use decision. A Type IV decision is a legislative decision and is described in SDC 5.1-140. It is a City Council decision and includes both public notice and a public hearing. An amendment or change to the Metro Plan diagram is known as a Metro Plan Amendment—Type II. 2. The application package is submitted to the city. There are number of specific steps that guide the processing of an application. These include: • Pre-Submittal Meeting (SDC 5.1-120.C). A Pre-Submittal Meeting is Springfield's process for determining if an application is complete and ready for processing. After submitting what the applicant believes is a complete application, the applicant meets with City representatives. The city aims to hold Pre-Submittal meetings within 7 to 14 days. The application submittal is reviewed and determined if it is complete and ready for processing. If not complete, the applicant is provided a list of items needing to be addressed. • Re-Submittal. The application package is revised in accordance with Pre-Submittal comments. It is then re-submitted to the city and the city conducts a quick check to determine if the application is complete. State law requires an applicant to re-submit an application within 180 days. If this does not occur, the original application is null and void. If the applicant completes the application, the next step, Processing, begins. • Processing. For a Type IV process, the initial public hearing held by the Planning Commission shall take place within 60 days of acceptance of a complete application. Public notice is provided at least 20 days before the public hearing and is provided to property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the property being reviewed, the local newspaper, appropriate neighborhood associations where applicable, and the newspaper. The Planning Commission will hold a hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council's will hold another public hearing and make the final decision, which goes into effect 30 days after the decision is made. • The decision is appealable within 21 calendar days of the decision being issued. Type IV appeals go the Land Use Board of Appeals. C. Refinement Plan Amendment (SDC 1. A Refinement Plan Amendment application is a Type IV land use decision. When a Metro Plan amendment is enacted that requires an amendment to a refinement plan diagram for consistency, the Metro Plan diagram amendment automatically amends the refinement plan diagram if no amendment to the refinement plan text is needed. A Refinement Plan Amendment and Metro Plan Amendment can be processed concurrently. 2. For specific information on application submittal and process, see the section on Metro Plan Amendments above. D. Zone Change (SDC 5.22-100) 1. A Zone Change application is a Type IV land use decision when it includes concurrent amendments to the Metro Plan diagram and a refinement plan. The property is designated and zoned Low Density Residential in the Metro Plan diagram, City of Springfield Zoning Map, and Q Street Refinement Plan. Therefore, a Zone Change application is required for the applicant to rezone the property to Medium Density Residential and/or High Density Residential. A Type IV land use decision is a legislative application and is described in SDC 5.1-140. It is a City Council decision and includes both public notice and a public hearing. 2. The application package is submitted to the city. There are a number of specific steps that guide the processing of an application. These include: Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 • (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 78 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 8 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 • Pre-Submittal Meeting (SDC 5.1-120.C). A Pre-Submittal Meeting is Springfield's process for determining if an application is complete and ready for processing. After submitting what the applicant believes is a complete application, the applicant meets with City representatives. The city aims to hold Pre-Submittal meetings within 7 to 14 days. The application submittal is reviewed and determined if it is complete and ready for processing. If not complete, the applicant is provided a list of items needing to be addressed. • Re-Submittal. The application package is revised in accordance with Pre-Submittal comments. It is then re-submitted to the city and the city conducts a quick check to determine if the application is complete. State law requires an applicant to re-submit an application within 180 days. If this does not occur, the original application is null and void. If the applicant completes the application, the next step, Processing, begins. • Processing. For a Type IV process, notice is provided to property owners within 300 feet of the property being reviewed, as well as to the newspaper and appropriate neighborhood association where applicable. The Planning Commission will hold a hearing and make a recommendation to the City Council. The City Council's will hold another public hearing and make the final decision, which goes into effect 30 days after the decision is made. • The decision is appealable within 21 calendar days of the decision being issued. Type IV appeals go the Land Use Board of Appeals. E. Site Plan Review(SDC 5.17-100) 1. Site Plan Review is a Type II land use application that provides a process to regulate the manner in which land is used and developed, ensuring compliance with various public policies and objectives. In Springfield, Site Plan Review is required for most new development, additions, or expansions. It is a Planning Director decision and includes public notice, but no public hearing. 2. The application package is submitted to the city and the application is processed. There are a number of required steps that make up this process. These include: • Pre-Submittal Meeting (SDC 5.1-120.C). A Pre-Submittal Meeting is Springfield's process for determining if an application is complete and ready for processing. After submitting what the applicant believes is a complete application, the applicant meets with City representatives. The city aims to hold Pre-Submittal meetings within 7 to 14 days. The application submittal is reviewed and determined if it is complete and ready for processing. If not complete, the applicant is provided a list of items needing to be addressed. • Re-Submittal. The application package is revised in accordance with Pre-Submittal comments. It is then re-submitted to the city and the city conducts a quick check to determine if the application is complete. State law requires an applicant to re-submit an application within 180 days. If this does not occur, the original application is null and void. If the applicant completes the application, the next step, Processing, begins. • Processing. Notice (7 days); Public Comment (14 days); Review (21-35 days); and Staff Report (generally within 60-75 days of the application being deemed complete). Under state law, the date a decision is effective and any allowance for local appeals must be within 120 days of an application being deemed complete. 3. For a Type II process, the staff report contains a decision —approval, approval with conditions, or denial. The report is mailed to the applicant and any parties who submitted public comment or otherwise participated in the process. 4. The decision is appealable within 15 calendar days of the decision being issued. Type II appeals go to the Planning Commission. There is new public notice and an updated staff report. A public hearing is held by the Planning Commission. The Commission will uphold, modify, or reverse the decision. Schirmer Satre Group•375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 • (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 79 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 9 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 5. If the decision is not appealed, the decision is in effect 15 calendar days after the initial staff decision. If the decision is appealed, the decision is in effect when the appeal decision is rendered. F. Final Site Plan Review(SDC 5.17-135) 1. The Final Site Plan submittal incorporates all approval conditions from the Site Plan Review decision. 2. The application is reviewed for completeness. The complete application is reviewed by staff and a Type I (no public notice or hearing) decision is issued. Upon approval, the Planning Director drafts a Development Agreement for signing by the City of Springfield and the developer. 3. A positive decision (approval) is based on staff finding compliance with the conditions of approval. 4. A Final Site Plan Review is a Type I process. There are no appeals available for a Type I process. 5. The Site Plan Review application is in effect upon the execution of the Development Agreement. 6. Final Site Plan Review must be submitted within 90 days of the initial Site Plan Review decision. Following that, there is a 30-day completeness review period and a 15 to 30 day processing period. Final Site Plan and Development Agreement is null and void if construction does not begin within 2 years of signing the Development Agreement. G. Drinking Water Protection (SDC 3.3-200) 1. The Drinking Water Protection (DWP) Overlay District is established to protect aquifers used as potable water supply sources from contamination. DWP requirements establish procedures and standards for the physical use and storage of hazardous or other materials harmful to groundwater by requiring development approval for new and existing land uses. 2. Drinking Water Protection and Site Plan Review applications can be submitted concurrently. 3. Drinking Water Protection applications are a Type I process. It is a staff decision with no public notice. In that regard, Process and Decision are the same as for Site Plan Review. 4. A Type I decision is not appealable. 5. The decision is in effect the day it is issued. IV. PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN A site plan has been generated for the proposed development of the property. It is attached hereto. A site plan has great value in assisting with initial land use analysis and in providing an explanation and the asking questions in a pre-application meeting. As detailed plans will of course be required for Site Plan Review and any other applications, it is never too soon to be thinking of the physical arrangement of contemplated improvements. V. ATTACHED INFORMATION 1. Planning and Zoning a. Google Earth —Aerial Photograph with Site Boundaries. b. Bing Maps —Aerial Photograph. c. Lane Regional Information Database—Tax Lot Map. d. City of Springfield — Refinement Plan Map. e. City of Springfield — Base Zoning. 2. Transportation a. Metro Area TransPlan — Projects Map. b. City of Springfield —Street Classification Map. 3. Utilities Schirmer Satre Group.375 West 4'h Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 . (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 80 of 121 CMC Development LLC—511 Street Property Page 10 of 10 Land Use Planning Analysis Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600, 4601, 4700, 4800, 4900, 5000 November 28, 2016 a. City of Springfield — Existing Stormwater and Wastewater Infrastructure Map. b. Springfield Utility Board (SUB)—Existing Water Infrastructure Map. c. Springfield Utility Board (SUB)—Existing Electric Infrastructure Map. VI. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION The above information represents a brief outline of known applicable planning, zoning and site development requirements for the contemplated development of the subject property. We recommend scheduling a DIM to clarify and/or confirm the findings herein, as well as to discuss potential rezoning of the subject site. We hope this initial land use analysis proves helpful. Our office is available to discuss these findings, provide additional graphics upon request, or assist with additional project needs. Sincerely, 'IR 6cleww L M. Sat-rel Richard M. Satre, AICP, ASLA, CSI Principal Schirmer Satre Group Schirmer Satre Group.375 West 4th Avenue, Suite 201, Eugene,OR 97401 . (541)686-4540 Attachment 1, Page 81 of 121 d E JEQ per,- 1 ILI ��,,��llKS17 •q P,. v c. r f W 4 fq .s• '1 � _""R til'.y 6" +�,�yt LM V Ae •` � ,, a i •� 4. i Il� MRi 1. ` C'. "ya nT ^ �,�,,y�}�,t`�y+��y,�� I .. �'l J- Ash ���ti • �4`� -��.jd� � . �+ �`• '��. �! �'�+' frit f^g f �y L H.. r_3tA � P IY do 1. e\ V i f r d E a N W U2 ETEoo LL Cl) ZM _O d d U U 1332i1S HIL <~ M 10 cp co 12 ry H1S W C c W:* a�w" w � d � � 8ae -7� uj x ' sYMzar _■ ■1111■ ■ - — ��_ 1111111 �1 ii �:■■,f .'� _- ■ ■ ■■■■■■ ON '-� ■i ` 11 ■ ■■■■ ■ :■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■� ■ loolooloom ii son 0 ESSM 1 on INNER ■■■►11111 ■■ iii 1■■�■■ ■■■■■■� �,. �, �■ ■■■■ ■ �,� =■ �\11111111 11 11111 ` I �� ■■ � ■1111111 ' - - 1 11 � I ■ ■� ��� ■mow �� i ■■■■■■■ ■■ ■ 111111111111111■11 ■ ■■ , ■ ■■■■IN ■� 7 ■■ ■� ■i ■i ■■ ■■ ■i an IN a �►��,���■ ■1 111111 ■ X1111: ■� : , ♦ ���� ■■ -� �■ ■1111111 111■ ■■ • �� .■ :. ■ ,p ■_■ - � ♦ ���■ �. —■ -1 MENEM �� _ ■1■ ■111111►� ��: ■�. ■.LEE C :�1■ C. ■■ -- ■r� MWEE '',: .� � Iii � ■ ■ � - ,- ■ -- -- '� WE 0 SM ME WAN F11111 IN ■ 'i :1► ♦ MM �■ �■� ��� ,11 milli + 1'1111111 I J 111 111111MEN�If.���■ /II 111111 111111111■Illl�l�i I� CC ���11`���: : ■ ■111'111IN 1111111■ ■ r �■: p !■ ■■� ►� ■ ■ ` 11111�Illlrtl ■i 111■ IN M1 NINE 1■ ■ 111 1��1111 111111 �: ■ 1■ - 11■■11: ■ 111 =1� x:111 ; It ./IIIIIIIIIII� IIIIL' 1■■111■ ■ ILL- NO C: �■ . : ■ �■ ■■■ ■■ O■■� oil06 NONE ■1111■■ i ■: .: ■ 1 i1 ■■■■■■■ . -� ;; ■ �■ SII ■+ � I = ■■ 1 i 1 ■ ' I d d E m a ....... ; n �a ' : ° a y+. a 8 ¢ II ' tb— a i x v E E a v e 3 _•. ••• � r 1. `s 3 yl U� _ t 04 j T yEl � 0 P 1I t•i CO ju 14.4 I Is 3r _}—, ORA 4z 0 All Is `o A o o Q a o it c'm:-allo Q ' �•+ N y oa`o_U'o o m -o.X� �Toc 'o °�° t: a � omos a �a�U � 1 o5-o 1 3 i ooa�y�oow Amo � Eo Ip .16_•1� 1 lI L, 00 ` •v co o = �N 9 ��� "�aa`� "~o �I p cQ N = °'Emcomy�o you I /oar LU Em Eooa H.M. m ' Bs r E y E E E m`e m`e 56 ° o E v � m � E Sx �E DoE ac 1 X99 aea 3a �a � zaj i, I s - 9b 1 'nry z° 1 061 e Vo Wo ° -� ', � •'., 1� � u� u { oda � �Nsisxizovsxnrvcx � yy 297 n737 05 ° , ami boa '25 �I a 6�40 9 96907" /_�__\ (� �1 � � •� sa o -�� Q 233 J 9 L sd ew<nn <� 545 9b Vii.unn / a °3 dop 472 a� o Doom 4' 60F PA�ptC � � �� �o o °m x000 ��ta >o b �o LSo o�c 3 �8 s 1 1b M a6b �° ~ 1 _ 98b �Lbm m o a / .otsEE 00 -.SBb V I o 1 CREEK I ov inx x33n° N'N --o m �D oho 0 1 2O390 651 N C Qf t V N Q a R k� isf � L ItV F� 00 i Ef d' �s ` c ao i a i if i v E n. �f \ a f ■ R EM LL 2ti A — Mi . — M LL � ma L A 3 cL Woocco, RIN to ININ a a m al 1-4 o IRON\\\\N\\\ IN ol 1w W V D ME 1414 ol INNO MR� m M > V > ul Ln n Q V) > > N N N N Ln 0 00 iS � H 99"13 9 » »> 7 Ln > > o N (-o N d o �6 691 N Q N N� N N � N � 9N9 > o >1 o� 9 03N > N O Cl �,Z 03 0 > L09 rn N � � a )9 U 969 E E _ t � o m 900 Cl) Q X99 � N EL co 62, 1 9 EJ Ln 9 O N N N O n o N 0-) 1 � N >> > �z > > Ln »> » > 9L, 1a „9 1-7 10" CI"50 og"13 „o N co 6� t 0 � > > w N 6� > NDO 0-) 01 r' FT Z t, Ln t- 0 co � O 03 Attachment 3c I l �I I.J l l b Li Li l I � U w CD ka 05 to ka z ISOI y I CO v M 2029 y 78E0 1 SP2" C 78017-2 125A 75C7312 C-78016 2 �0 91097-45 37C4P1306 2011 1995 LC 780 73 26 ~ `! 6802-1 I /I 1975 1981 1987 1993 I 63080-40 25C4P09 1 3023-15 '7015C51730'70 12 5 A 1-6Cu,6Cu I I ?-45 1917 I I yD I 76017-45 37C4P284 Attachment 1 , Page 91 of 121 tE 4*v9 2p��z J9� ��A1213d021d 1332llS 41S � OT IMMOl3AM OWO Q ��■ �� � � 1N3WON3WV dVW ONINOZ N LU co � i33ais v1� <n¢ w o0 m x� D �w co _of } o � z 0 Q 5¢ �Q Z U Z V �Ir a0 1332115 41S Q LU K Q Z >J F— Q Z Z Z w W W W J z oWOn 00 •^' Q of U U V Zzo Z � W N >< J ¢ w ¢ x N U a t .- w . D 0 1 a C) U E 4*s9 p z J9� AL213d021d 1332llS 41S N 0T1N3WdOl3A3O 0W0 1 1N3WON3WV W ONINOZ oa�3a.ds a3,n , �Ar N LU �Q co i3aais 4�� w z U o0 mw D of co G } o � z — QN oa ga I.L �o �Z z o� m W �I a0 Q i33ais as W r Z >� Q z z Z z wof W D J 00 �of °° 0 o Zw _ U c Z0W N0 cm� Lu—j ¢ W ¢ x N U a € .- w . D 0 1 a 5 1 Z - U N After Recording Return to Attachment 4a First American Title 2892 Crescent Ave. Eugene,Oregon 97408 �S T ti M p•k.J f, THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE � 4 4 h Lane County Clerk 2016-047728 Lane County Deeds & Records 09/28/2016 11:21:57 AM RPR-DEED Cnt=1 Stn=4 CASHIER 01 2pages After recording return to: $10.00$11.00$10.00$21.00 $52.00 CMC Development, LLC P.O. Box 117 Walterville, OR 97489 Until a change is requested all tax statements shall be sent to the following address: CMC Development, LLC P.O. Box 117 Walterville, OR 97489 File No.: 7191-2711387 (TS) Date: August 03, 2016 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED Scott A. Cargill, as to a one-eighth (1/8) interest; Scott A. Cargill and Gail Cargill, also known as V. Gail Cargill, as tenants by the entirety, as to a one-eighth (1/8) interest; Opal Castle, as to a one-half(1/2) interest; and Amanda Pollard,who acquired title as Amanda Sorenson, as to a one-fourth (1/4) interest, as tenants in common, Grantor, conveys and warrants to CMC Development, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company , Grantee, the following described real property free of liens and encumbrances, except as specifically set forth herein: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Real property in the County of Lane, State of Oregon, described as follows: Beginning at a point 989.418 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26,Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; running thence North 116.792 feet to the Southeast corner of the tract described in Deed No. 43434; thence West 566.33 feet, more or less, to the East line of Fifth Street, in the town of Springfield; thence South along said East line of Fifth Street, 64.792 feet; thence East 150 feet; thence South 52 feet; thence East 416.33 feet to the point of beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. NOTE: This legal description was created prior to January 1, 2008. .Subject to: 1. The 2016-2017 Taxes, a lien not yet payable. 2. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements, if any, affecting title, which may appear in the public record, including those shown on any recorded plat or survey. The true consideration for this conveyance is $125,000.00. (Here comply with requirements of ORS 93.030) Page 1 of 2 APN:0219145 Statutory Warranty Deed File No.:7191-2711387(TS) continued BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND,195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY THAT THE UNIT OF LAND BEING TRANSFERRED IS A LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED LOT OR PARCEL, AS DEFINED IN ORS 92.010 OR 215.010, TO VERIFY THE APPROVED USES OF THE LOT OR PARCEL, TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES, AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930, AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. Dated thiol-1 day of20[-4. Opal M. Castle Amanda Pollar �;o(W- //'�- ��.- q -0 -(:70 1/-)e O-L Scott A. Cargill V. '6 argill STATE OF Oregon ) )SS. County of Lane ) This instrument was acknowledge a me on thisday of 3�f Vl,f J 20 `/' by Opal M. Castle and Amand i Pollar and S Ott A. Cargill and it Cargill. Lutaq OFFICIAL STAMP Notary Public for Oregon TERA BETH SCHMELIN(3 NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON My commission expires: COMMISSION NO.938070 *COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 09,2019 Page 2 of 2 Attachment 4b After Recording Return to First American Title 2892 Crescent Ave. Eugene,Oregon 97408 THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE Lane County Clerk 2016-047710 Lane County Deeds & Records 09/28/2016 11:05:00 AM RPR-DEED Cnt=1 Stn=4 CASHIER 01 3pages After recording return to: $15.00$11.00$10.00$21.00 $57.00 CMC Development, LLC P.O. Box 117 Walterville, OR 97489 Until a change is requested all tax statements shall be sent to the following address: CMC Development, LLC P.O. Box 117 Walterville, OR 97489 File No.: 7191-2711378 (TS) Date: September 23, 2016 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED Barbara]o Cargill, Surviving Trustee of the Barbara I Cargill Revocable Trust dated January 4, 1991, Grantor, conveys and warrants to CMC Development, LLC , Grantee, the following described real property free of liens and encumbrances, except as specifically set forth herein: See Legal Description attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference incorporated herein. Subject to: 1. The 2016-2017 Taxes, a lien not yet payable. 2. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements, if any, affecting title, which may appear in the public record, including those shown on any recorded plat or survey. The true consideration for this conveyance is $80,000.00. (Here comply with requirements of ORS 93.030) Page 1 of 3 APN:0219152 Statutory Warranty Deed File No.:7191-2711378(TS) -continued BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY THAT THE UNIT OF LAND BEING TRANSFERRED IS A LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED LOT OR PARCEL, AS DEFINED IN ORS 92.010 OR 215.010, TO VERIFY THE APPROVED USES OF THE LOT OR PARCEL, TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES, AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930, AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. The Barbara J. Cargill Revocable Trust dated January 4, 1991 Barbara Jo Carcyl, TrustCe STATE OF Oregon ) )ss. County of Lane ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on this 1'day of September, 2016 by Barbara Jo Cargill as Trustee of The Barbar J. Cargill Revocable Trust dated January 4, 1991, on behalf of the trust. OFFICIA S-"'j4 TERA BETH r 1 NOTARY Notary Public for Oregon FUEL C-c ---)N (� COMMISSION NO.93 7"� N�/ �V COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 03.?_'19 My commission expires: t 7 OFFICIAL STAMP TERA BETH SCHMEUNG NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO,938070 Page 2 of 3 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 09,2019 APN:0219152 Statutory Warranty Deed File No.: 7191-2711378(TS) -continued EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Real property in the County of Lane, State of Oregon, described as follows: BEGINNING AT A POINT 989.418 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE JACOB HALSTEAD AND WIFE DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 47, IN SECTION 26,TOWNSHIP 17 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN; RUNNING THENCE NORTH 116.792 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE TRACT DESCRIBED IN DEED, RECEPTION NO. 43434; THENCE WEST 566.33 FEET MORE OR LESS TO THE EAST LINE OF STH STREET IN THE TOWN OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON, EXTENDED; THENCE SOUTH ON AND ALONG SAID EAST LINE, 64.792 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF STH STREET, 52.0 FEET; THENCE EAST 150 FEET; THENCE NORTH APPROXIMATELY 52.0 FEET TO THE POINT DIRECTLY EAST OF THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE WEST 150.0 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, IN LANE COUNTY, OREGON. NOTE: This legal description was created prior to January 01, 2008. Page 3 of 3 Attachment 4c After Recording Return tD First American'title 2892 crescent Ave. Eugene,Oregon THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE Lane County Clerk 2016-047711 Lane County Deeds & Records 09/28/2016 11:05:48 AM RPR-DEED Cnt=1 Stn=4 CASHIER 01 3pages After recording return to: $15.00$11.00$10.00$21.00 $57.00 CMC Development, LLC P.O. Box 117 Walterville, OR 97489 Until a change is requested all tax statements shall be sent to the following address: CMC Development, LLC P.O. Box 117 Walterville, OR 97489 File No.: 7191-2711349 (TS) Date: September 26, 2016 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED Barbara Jo Cargill, Surviving Trustee of the Barbara J. Cargill Revocable Trust dated January 4, 1991, Grantor, conveys and warrants to CMC Development, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company , Grantee, the following described real property free of liens and encumbrances, except as specifically set forth herein: See Legal Description attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference incorporated herein. Subject to: 1. The 2016-2017 Taxes, a lien not yet payable. 2. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements, if any, affecting title, which may appear in the public record, including those shown on any recorded plat or survey. The true consideration for this conveyance is $100,000.00. (Here comply with requirements of ORS 93.030) Page 1 of 3 APN:0219160 Statutory Warranty Deed File No.:7191-2711349(TS) continued BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY THAT THE UNIT OF LAND BEING TRANSFERRED IS A LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED LOT OR PARCEL, AS DEFINED IN ORS 92.010 OR 215.010, TO VERIFY THE APPROVED USES OF THE LOT OR PARCEL, TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES, AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930, AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. Dated this day of 20 Barbara J. Cargill Revocable Trust Barbara J. Car6A,, Trust STATE OF Oregon ) )SS. County of Lane ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on this day of V' 2,0!kby Barbara J. Cargill as Trustee of Barbara J. Cargill Revocable TrusAon, half of the trust. OFFICIAL STAMP TERA BETH SCHMELING NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON Notary Public for Oregon COMMISSION NO.938070 My commission expires: MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 09,2019 Page 2 of 3 APN:0219160 Statutory Warranty Deed File No.:7191-2711349(TS) continued EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Real property in the County of Lane, State of Oregon, described as follows: Commencing at a point 835.68 feet due North and 390 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26,Township 17 South, Range 3 West, Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 176.65 feet to the East line of Fifth Street in the town of Springfield, Oregon, extended; thence South on and along the said East line of 153.70 feet; and thence East 176.81 feet; more or less,to the place of beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. EXCEPT that portion conveyed and dedicated to the City of Springfield by instrument recorded July 6, 1978, Recorder's Reception No. 78-46741, Lane County Oregon Official Records. NOTE: This legal description was created prior to January 1, 2008. Page 3 of 3 Attachment 4d After Recording Return to First American Title 2892 crescent Ave. Eugene,Oregon 97408 THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE Lane County Clerk 2016-047709 Lane County Deeds & Records 09/28/2016 11:04:00 AM RPR-DEED Cnt=1 Stn=4 CASHIER 01 3pages After recording return to: $15.00$11.00$10.00$21.00 $57.00 CMC Development, LLC P.O. Box 117 Walterville, OR 97489 Until a change is requested all tax statements shall be sent to the following address: CMC Development, LLC P.O. Box 117 Walterville, OR 97489 File No.: 7191-2711353 (TS) Date: September 26, 2016 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED Barbara Jo Cargill, Surviving Trustee of the Barbara J. Cargill Revocable Trust dated January 4, 1991, Grantor, conveys and warrants to CMC Development, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company , Grantee, the following described real property free of liens and encumbrances, except as specifically set forth herein: See Legal Description attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference incorporated herein. Subject to: 1. The 2016-2017 Taxes, a lien not yet payable. 2. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements, if any, affecting title, which may appear in the public record, including those shown on any recorded plat or survey. The true consideration for this conveyance is $90,000.00. (Here comply with requirements of ORS 93.030) Page 1 of 3 APN:0219178 Statutory Warranty Deed File No.: 7191-2711353(TS) continued BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY THAT THE UNIT OF LAND BEING TRANSFERRED IS A LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED LOT OR PARCEL, AS DEFINED IN ORS 92.010 OR 215.010, TO VERIFY THE APPROVED USES OF THE LOT OR PARCEL, TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES, AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930, AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. Dated this day of�� , 20� Barbara J. Cargill Revocable Trust Barbara J. Cargi , Trust STATE OF Oregon ) )ss. County of Lane ) This instrument was acknowledged before me on thiakipday of 20vttt by Barbara J. Cargill as Trustee of Barbara r ill Revocable Trust, on e f the trust. JM/ OFFICIAL STAMP Notary Public for Oregon TERA BETH SCHMELING. My commission expires: / NOTARY PUBUC-OREGON COMMISSION NO.038070 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 09,2019 - Page 2 of 3 1 APN:0219178 Statutory Warranty Deed File No.: 7191-2711353(TS) -continued EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Real property in the County of Lane, State of Oregon, described as follows: BEGINNING AT A POINT 835.68 FEET DUE NORTH AND 260 FEET WEST OF THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE JACOB HALSTEAD AND WIFE DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 47 IN SECTION 26,TOWNSHIP 17 SOUTH, RANGE 3 WEST OF THE WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN LANE COUNTY, OREGON; THENCE NORTH 153.70 FEET; THENCE WEST 130 FEET;THENCE SOUTH PARALLEL WITH THE EAST LINE OF FIFTH STREET IN THE TOWN OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON, EXTENDED, 153.70 FEET; THENCE EAST 130 FEET TO THE PLACE OF BEGINNING, ALL LYING IN AND BEING IN WHAT IS KNOWN AS THE SEAVEY TRACTS LYING NORTH OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE NORTHERLY 20 FEET AS CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF SPRINGFIELD FOR A PUBLIC ROAD, BY DOCUMENT RECORDED APRIL 8, 1989, RECEPTION NO. 88 13697, LANE COUNTY OREGON RECORDS. NOTE: This Legal Description was created prior to January 01, 2008. Page 3 of 3 Attachment 4e Ager Recording Return to First American Title 289?. 'we. Eugenv, ''403 THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE Lane County Clerk 2016-054513 Lane County Deeds & Records 11/02/2016 10:29:59 AM RPR-DEED Cnt=1 Stn=O CASHIER 02 4pages After recording return to: $11.00$20.00$10.00$21.00 $62.00 CMC Development, LLC PO Box 117 Walterville, OR 97487 Until a change is requested all tax statements shall be sent to the following address: CMC Development, LLC PO Box 117 Walterville, OR 97489. File No.: 7191-2758926 (TS) Date: October 17, 2016 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED Eugene P. Gluesen and Debra M. Lamb as qualified by the following language contained in the Deed to the vestees herein: "as joint tenants with the right of survivorship", Grantor, conveys and warrants to CMC Development, LLC, an Oregon limited liability company , Grantee, the following described real property free of liens and encumbrances, except as specifically set forth herein: LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Real property in the County of Lane, State of Oregon, described as follows: Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North and 130 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife D.L.C. No. 47 in Section 26,Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the W.M. in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended, 153.70 feet; thence East 130 feet to the place of beginning all lying in and being in what is known as the Seavey tracts lying North of Springfield, Oregon. NOTE: This legal description was created prior to January 1, 2008. Subject to: 1. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements, if any, affecting title, which may appear in the public record, including those shown on any recorded plat or survey. The true consideration for this conveyance is $81,000.00. (Here comply with requirements of ORS 93.030) Page 1 of 3 APN:0219186 Statutory warranty Deed File No.:7191.2758926(T5} -continued BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE, PERSON'S RIGHTS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 85.5, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT,THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY,THAT THE UNIT OF LAND BEING TRANSFERRED IS A LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED LOT OR PARCEL, AS DEFINED IN ORS 92.010 OR 215.010, TO VERIFY THE APPROVED USES OF THE LOT OR PARCEL, TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES,AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930, AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS,. IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS.2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON:LAWS 2010. Dated this L3 day of ZO�L_. Debra M. Lamb EuWe P. Gluesen r STATE OF ) )ss. See Attached County of ) Notary Cert'if'icate This instrument was.acknowledged before me on this day of 20 by Debra M. Lamb. Notary Public for My commission expires: Page 2 of 3 APN:0219186 Statutory Warranty Deed File No.:7191-2758926(TS) -continued STATE OF Oregon ) )ss. County of Lane ) This instrument was acknowledged befo meon t is day of VV c�' 20W by Eugene P. Gfuesen. / OFFICIAL STAMP Notary Public for Ore n TERA BETH SCHMELING My commission expires: NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON COMMISSION NO.938070 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 09,2019 Page 3 of 3 California Acknowled ernent A notary public or other officer completing this certificate-verifies only,the.identity of the individual _who signed the document to which this certificate:is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy,or validity of that document. State of California County of Orange On201. before beforeme, Erik Lawson-Hoffman, Notary Public (insert name and We of the officer) personally appeared r-5 R 1 L who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(*)whose name($)Wave subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that io/shellMy executed the same in Wa/horttWr authorized capacityO,and that by Ther/ signature(#)on the instrument the person(*), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(®)acted;executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. ,� F ERIK LAWSON,NOFFM0.N COMM.#2146233 to $ NOTARYFUBLIC•CALIFORNIA u1 ORANCE COUNTY • Mr Comm.EXP.MAN.14,2020'` Signature (Seal) Attachment 4f After Recording Rr-F't n to First Arr-Pr 2892 Cre_.' Eugene,Oregon 97408 THIS SPACE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE Lane County Clerk 2016-047700 Lane County Deeds & Records 09/28/2016 10:53:21 AM RPR-DEED Cnt=1 Stn=4 CASHIER 01 3pages After recording return to: $15.00$11.00$10.00$21.00 $57.00 CMC Development, LLC P.O. Box 117 Walterville, OR 97489 Until a change is requested all tax statements shall be sent to the following address: CMC Development, LLC P.O. Box 117 Walterville, OR 97489 File No.: 7191-2711365 (TS) Date: September 26, 2016 STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED Barbara Jo Cargill, Surviving Trustee of the Barbara I Cargill Revocable Trust dated January 4, 1991, Grantor, conveys and warrants to CMC Development, LLC,an Oregon limited liability company , Grantee, the following described real property free of liens and encumbrances, except as specifically set forth herein: See Legal Description attached hereto as Exhibit A and by this reference incorporated herein. Subject to: 1. The 2016-2017 Taxes, a lien not yet payable. 2. Covenants, conditions, restrictions and/or easements, if any, affecting title, which may appear in the public record, including those shown on any recorded plat or survey. The true consideration for this conveyance is $90,000.00. (Here comply with requirements of ORS 93.030) Page 1 of 3 APN: 0219194 Statutory Warranty Deed File No.: 7191-2711365(TS) -continued BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON TRANSFERRING FEE TITLE SHOULD INQUIRE ABOUT THE PERSON'S RIGHTS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. THIS INSTRUMENT DOES NOT ALLOW USE OF THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN THIS INSTRUMENT IN VIOLATION OF APPLICABLE LAND USE LAWS AND REGULATIONS. BEFORE SIGNING OR ACCEPTING THIS INSTRUMENT, THE PERSON ACQUIRING FEE TITLE TO THE PROPERTY SHOULD CHECK WITH THE APPROPRIATE CITY OR COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO VERIFY THAT THE UNIT OF LAND BEING TRANSFERRED IS A LAWFULLY ESTABLISHED LOT OR PARCEL, AS DEFINED IN ORS 92.010 OR 215.010, TO VERIFY THE APPROVED USES OF THE LOT OR PARCEL, TO DETERMINE ANY LIMITS ON LAWSUITS AGAINST FARMING OR FOREST PRACTICES, AS DEFINED IN ORS 30.930, AND TO INQUIRE ABOUT THE RIGHTS OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY OWNERS, IF ANY, UNDER ORS 195.300, 195.301 AND 195.305 TO 195.336 AND SECTIONS 5 TO 11, CHAPTER 424, OREGON LAWS 2007, SECTIONS 2 TO 9 AND 17, CHAPTER 855, OREGON LAWS 2009, AND SECTIONS 2 TO 7, CHAPTER 8, OREGON LAWS 2010. Dated this��day of ��� , 20AI. Barbara J. Cargill Revocable Trust toc Barbara J. Cargill, Tr tee STATE OF Oregon ) )ss. County of Lane ) �^ This instrument was acknowledged before me o thin day of 20V by Barbara 1. Cargill as Trustee of Bar ar J. r ''1 v ble Trus , n b of the trust. OFFICIAL STAMP TERA BETH NG Notary Public for Oregon 1 SC ( (1rAf Q 1 NOTARY PUBLIC-OREGON E My commission expires: l lldd"( 11 1 COMMISSION NO.938070 NIYCOMMISSION EXPIRES APRIL 09,2019 Page 2 of 3 APN:0219194 Statutory Warranty Deed File No.: 7191-2711365(TS) continued r EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Real property in the County of Lane, State of Oregon, described as follows: Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26,Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, extended 153.70 feet; thence East 130 feet to the place of beginning; all in Springfield, Lane County, Oregon. NOTE: This Legal Description was created prior to January 01, 2008. Page 3 of 3 BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SPRINGFIELD,OREGON ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION FOR: TYPE I AMENDMENT TO THE EUGENE-SPRINGFIELD METROPOLITAN AREA GENERAL PLAN ]TYP417-00002 (METRO PLAN) DIAGRAM AND THE Q STREET REFINEMENT PLAN DIAGRAM TO REDESIGNATE ] APPROXIMATELY 1.96 ACRES IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR'S MAP 17-03-26-24,TAX LOTS 4600, ] 4601,AND 5000 FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(LDR)TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ] (MDR);AND TO REDESIGNATE APPROXIMATELY 1.39 ACRES OF LAND IDENTIFIED AS ] ASSESSOR'S MAP 17-03-26-24,TAX LOTS 4700,4800 AND 4900 FROM LOW DENSITY ] RESIDENTIAL(LDR)TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(HDR) ] NATURE OF THE PROPOSAL Staff is requesting that the Springfield Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Springfield City Council regarding the following proposed Type I amendment to the Metro Plan Diagram: ■ Redesignate approximately 1.96 acres of residential property on 5th Street(Map 17-03-26-24,Tax Lots 4600,4601 and 5000)from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential. The subject property is generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit A to this Order. ■ Redesignate approximately 1.39 acres of residential property on 5th Street (Map 17-03-26-34,Tax Lots 4700,4800 and 4900)from Low Density Residential to High Density,Residential. The subject property is generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit B to this Order. ■ Concurrently amend the Q.Street Refinement Plan diagram to redesignate Tax Lots 4600,4601 and 5000 from LDR to MDR; and to redesignate Tax Lots 4700, 4800 and 4900 from LDR to HDR as generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibits A and B to this Order. 1'. Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing has been provided, pursuant to SDC 5.2-115. On April'4, 2017,the Springfield Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Metro Plan Diagram amendment. The staff report,written comments, and testimony of those who spoke at the public hearing were entered into the record. CONCLUSION On the basis of this record,the proposed Type I Metro-Plan Diagram amendment is consistent with the criteria of SDC 5.14-135. This general finding is supported by the specific findings of fact and conclusion in the Staff Report and Findings and the additional information submitted for the April 4, 2017 public hearing. ORDER/RECOMMENDATION It is ORDERED by the Springfield Planning Commission that approval of Case Number TYP417-00002 be GRANTED and a RECOMMENDATION for approval be forwarded to the Springfield City Council for their consideration at an upcoming public hearing meeting. . Planning ommission hairperson Date ATTEST AYES:.`7 NOES:01 ABSENT: , ABSTAIFYK CCCCCC Attachment 1, Page 112 of 121 PROPERTIES REDESIGNATED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 4 l T:Street Lil � 1 ai r 41 i _ 1 v N _ r .. _ J 1 Attachment 1, Page 113 of 121 .LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel 1 (Tax Lot 4600): Beginning at a point 989.418 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; running thence North 116.792 feet to the Southeast corner of the tract described in Deed No. 43434; thence West 566.33 feet, more or less, to the East line of Fifth Street, in the town of Springfield; thence South along said East line of Fifth Street, 64.792 feet; thence East 150 feet; thence South 52 feet; thence East 416.33 feet to the point of beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. Parcel 2 (Tax Lot 50001: Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, extended 153.70 feet;thence East 130 feet to the place of beginning; all in Springfield, Lane County, Oregon. Parcel 3 (Tax Lot 4601): Beginning at a point 989.418 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; running thence North 116.792 feet to the Southeast corner of the tract described in Deed, Reception No. 43434; thence West 566.33 feet more or less to the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended; thence South on (' and along said East line, 64.792 feet to the True Point of Beginning;thence South along said East line of Fifth Street, 52.0 feet; thence East 150 feet; thence North approximately 52.0 feet to the point directly East of the True Point of Beginning; thence West 150.0 feet to-the True Point of Beginning, in Lane County,-Oregon. Attachment 1, Page 114 of 121 PROPERTIES REDESIGNATED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL l } Li T Street =w I ==________ ____________=______-_-==__=_= j _-__-_--__-_--___-- __-------------- -------_-_--_-- _ - ---------- --------- ---_--------__- --------- _ ------ --- ---------- ( I. Y N N', j i Attachment 1, Page 115 of 121 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel-4 (Tax Lot 4700): Commencing at a point 835.68 feet due North and 390 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West, Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 176.65 feet to the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended; thence South'on and along the said East line of Fifth Street 153.70 feet; and thence East 176.81 feet; more or less,to the place of beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. EXCEPT that portion conveyed and dedicated to the City of Springfield by instrument recorded July 6, 1978, Recorder's Reception No. 78-46741, Lane County Oregon Official Records. Parcel 5 (Tax Lot 4800): Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North and 260 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47 in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended, 153.70 ,feet; thence East 130 feet to the Place of Beginning, all lying in and being in what is known as the Seavey tracts lying.North of Springfield, Oregon. i EXCEPTING THEREFROM the northerly 20 feet as conveyed to the City of Springfield for a public road,'by document recorded April 8, 1989, Reception No. 88-13697, Lane County Oregon Records. Parcel 6 (Tax Lot 4900): Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North and 130 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47 in'Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon;thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended, 153.70-feet; thence East 130 feet to the place of beginning all lying in and being in what is known as the Seavey tracts lying North of Springfield, Oregon. i Attachment 1 , Page 116 of 121 BEFORTHE PLANNING COMMISSION OF SPRINGFIELD, OREGON -ORDER AND RECOMMENDATION FOR: AMENDMENT TO THE SPRINGFIELD ZONING MAP TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 1.96 ACRES ]TYP317-00004 OF LAND IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR'S MAP 17-03-26-24,TAX LOTS 4600,4601 AND 5000 FROM ] LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(LDR)TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(MDR); AND TO REZONE ] APPROXIMATELY 1.39 ACRES OF LAND IDENTIFIED AS ASSESSOR'S MAP 17-03-26-24,TAX LOTS ] 4700,4800 AND 4900 FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL(LDR)TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ] (HDR) ] NATURE OF THE PROPOSAL Staff is requesting that the Springfield Planning Commission forward a recommendation of approval to the Springfield City Council regarding the following proposed amendment to the Springfield Zoning Map: ■ Rezone three parcels comprising approximately 1.96 acres that are municipally addressed as 1993 and 1995 Stn Street and a vacant, non-addressed parcel (Map 17-03-26-24, Tax Lots 4600,4601 and 5000)from Low Density _Residential (LDR)to Medium Density Residential (MDR). The subject properties are generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit A to this Order. ■- Rezone three parcels comprising approximately 1.39 acres that are municipally addressed as 1975, 1981 and 1987 5th Street (Map 17-03-26-24,Tax Lots 4700,4800 and 4900)from Low Density Residential (LDR)to High Density Residential (HDR). The subject properties are generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibit B to this Order. ■ The subject Zone Change request is being processed concurrently with a Metro Plan Diagram amendment initiated by Planning Case TYP417-00002. The subject property is generally depicted and more particularly described in Exhibits A and B to this Order. Timely and sufficient notice of the public hearing has been provided, pursuant to SDC 5.2-115. On April 4, 2017,the Springfield Planning Commission held a public hearing on the proposed Zoning Map amendment. The staff report; written comments, and testimony of those who spoke at the public hearing were entered into the record. CONCLUSION On the basis of this record,the proposed Zoning Map amendment is consistent with the criteria of SDC 5.22-115. This general finding is supported by the specific findings of fact and conclusion in the Staff Report and Findings and the additional information submitted for the April 4, 2017 public hearing. ORDER/RECOMMENDATION It is ORDERED by the Springfield Planning Commission that approval of Case Number TYP317-00004 be GRANTED and a RECOMMENDATION for approval be forwarded to the Springfield City Council for their consideration at an upcoming public hearing meeting. I r Z1 n 4PIang C mission airperson Dto ATTEST AYES: " NOES:Ar ABSENT: � ABSTAIN Attachment 1, Page 117 of 121 PROPERTIES REZONED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TStreet. Li ..................0..... ....... J I .......................... :••::::.:: :. ::::::::::::::::::•::::::::::::::. - - 1 . ........... - A ::::.....::. N $ Qj Ln L L I 1 I Attachment 1, Page 118 of 121 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel 1 (Tax Lot 4600): Beginning at a point 989.418 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; running thence North 116.792 feet to the Southeast corner of'the tract described in Deed No. 43434; thence West 566.33 feet, more or less, to the East line of Fifth Street, in the town of Springfield; thence South along said East line of Fifth Street, 64.792 feet; thence East 150 feet; thence South 52 feet; thence East 416.33 feet to the point'of beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. Parcel 2 (Tax Lot 5000): Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, extended 153.70 feet;thence East 130 feet to the place of beginning; all in Springfield, Lane.County, Oregon. Parcel 3 (Tax Lot 4601): Beginning at a point 989.418 feet North of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian; running thence North 116.792 feet to the Southeast corner of the tract described in Deed, Reception No.43434; thence West 566.33 feet more or less to the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended; thence South on and along said East line, 64.792 feet to the True Point of Beginning;thence South along said East line of Fifth Street, 52.0 feet; thence East 150 feet; thence North approximately 52.0 feet to the point directly East of the True Point of Beginning; thence West 150.0 feet to the True Point of Beginning, in Lane County, Oregon. i I Attachment 1, Page 119 of 121. PROPERTIES REZONED FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Ll 1 T Street I Ln 1 j i F F � 1 l 1 � I, I r j I l t i Attachment 1, Page 120 of 121 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel 4 (Tax Lot 4700): Commencing at a point 835:68 feet due North and 390 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47, in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West, Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 176.65 feet to the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended; thence South on and along the said East line of Fifth Street 153.70 feet; and thence East 176.81 feet; more or less,to the place of beginning, in Lane County,Oregon. EXCEPT that portion conveyed and dedicated to the City of Springfield by instrument recorded July 6, 1978, Recorder's Reception No. 78-46741, Lane County Oregon Official Records. Parcel 5 (Tax Lot 4800):' Beginning at a point 835.68 feet due North and 260 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47 in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended, 153.70 feet; thence East 130 feet to the Place of Beginning, all lying in and being in what is known as the Seavey tracts lying North of Springfield, Oregon. EXCEPTING THEREFROM the northerly 20 feet as conveyed to the City of Springfield for a public road, by document recorded April 8, 1989, Reception,No. 88-13697, Lane County Oregon Records. Parcel 6 (Tax Lot 4900): Beginning at a point 835:68 feet due North and 130 feet West of the Southeast corner of the Jacob Halstead and wife Donation Land Claim No. 47 in Section 26, Township 17 South, Range 3 West of the Willamette Meridian, in Lane County, Oregon; thence North 153.70 feet; thence West 130 feet; thence South parallel with the East line of Fifth Street in the Town of Springfield, Oregon, extended, 153.70 feet; thence East 130 feet to the place of beginning all lying in and being in what is known as the Seavey tracts lying North of Springfield, Oregon. I i I Attachment 1, Page 121 of 121