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